Accelerating the Internet of Things in the UK: Using policy to support practice

Gunashekar, Salil; Spisak, Anton; Dean, Kevin W.; Ryan, Nathan; Lepetit, Louise; Cornish, Paul

doi:10.7249/rr1492

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These technologies are a way of boosting productivity, of keeping us healthier, making transport more efficient, reducing energy needs and making our homes more comfortable". However, Gunashekar et al (2016) argues that to maintain the anticipated evolution and development of IoT ecosystems in the UK, citizens will need to be at the core of these development in order to deliver the required socio-economic benefits. While there is very little empirical evidence to conceptualise self-sustained, intelligent and interconnected cities as defined by Harrison et al (2010), to our knowledge no studies exist which have examined the influence IoT has on citizens' engagement with public services that are enabled through IoT based technologies and/or applications within a smart city context.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining citizens' perceived value of internet of things technologies in facilitating public sector services engagement

El‐Haddadeh

Weerakkody

Osmani

et al. 2019

Government Information Quarterly

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the advancement of disruptive new technologies, there has been a considerable focus on personalisation as an important component in nurturing users' engagement. In the context of smart cities, Internet of Things (IoT) offer a unique opportunity to help empower citizens and improve societies' engagement with their governments at both micro and macro levels. This study aims to examine the role of perceived value of IoT in improving citizens' engagement with public services. A survey of 313 citizens in the UK, engaging in various public services, enabled through IoT, found that the perceived value of IoT is strongly influenced by empowerment, perceived usefulness and privacy related issues resulting in significantly affecting their continuous use intentions. The study offers valuable insights into the importance of perceived value of IoT-enabled services, while at the same time, providing an intersectional perspective of UK citizens towards the use of disruptive new technologies in the public sector.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining citizens' perceived value of internet of things technologies in facilitating public sector services engagement

El‐Haddadeh

Weerakkody

Osmani

et al. 2019

Government Information Quarterly

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The analysed data is frequently interpreted as personalising propositions or personalising value, which might be considered, social, economic, or cultural value [31]. Thus, it could be argued that the value for IoT products and services is created by data [31,32] and it can only be recognised when different applications, devices and stakeholders work together seamlessly across within different sectors, creating system-wide effects whilst enabling new capabilities and processes [65].…”

Section: New Approaches Towards Value Creation For Iotmentioning

confidence: 99%

[Re]-imagining vision and values: design as a driver for value creation in the Internet of Things

Lee

Cooper

Hands

et al. 2018

Living in the Internet of Things: Cybersecurity of the IoT - 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In digital age in which a myriad of products is becoming connected through the Internet of Things (IoT), new business opportunities and challenges arise for organisations regardless of size and product/service offerings. The traits of digital technology and digital economy results in not only profound changes in the ways organisations create value and develop their IoT products and services, but also emergent and dynamic business models. It also opens new opportunities in terms of how organisations increase turnover, thus conventional theories and practices of how value is created in the design and development process is constantly being challenged. Although, academics and practitioners often critically debate these emergent opportunities and challenges to the adoption of the 'Internet of Things', there is a paucity of established academic theories and industry practices to support and re-think traditional processes of product design and development to meet current needs and potential commercial opportunities in the era of IoT. This paper will offer a critical examination on how design processes have evolved with regard to the differences in value creation between goods-dominant logic and the service-dominant logic in order to identify an emergent design process feasible for IoT product and service development. In addition, factors that affect value creation, and design and development process in the IoT are reviewed. It concludes by offering key insights and observations as to where design can contribute to value creation in the internet of things.

show abstract

“…M2M communications refers to 'technology that allows for the automatic exchange of data or information from one device to another through wired and wireless communications links… [and] could be considered to be an integral part of the IoT' (Gunashekar et al, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the landscape of Distributed Ledger Technologies/Blockchain: Challenges, opportunities, and the prospects for standards

Deshpande¹,

Stewart²,

Lepetit³

et al. 2017

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We would also like to thank the many individuals who kindly agreed to be interviewed as part of this study. We would like to acknowledge the guidance and support provided throughout the project by Dr Jon Freeman (RAND Europe) and Dr Catriona Manville (RAND Europe). In addition, we thank Rebecca Ioppolo (RAND Europe) for her research support and Jessica Plumridge (RAND Europe) for designing the visualisations in the report. Finally, we very much appreciate the helpful and timely comments of our RAND Europe quality assurance reviewers, Dr Molly Morgan Jones and Dr Elta Smith. x Understanding the landscape of Distributed Ledger Technologies/Blockchain xii Understanding the landscape of Distributed Ledger Technologies/Blockchain Lack of clarity regarding smart contracts and how to implement them through DLT/Blockchain Uncertainty around regulation Maintaining security and privacy of data Energy-intensive nature of the technology 6 Bitcoin is an open source, decentralised, peer-to-peer payment network maintained by users, with no central authority. Bitcoin provides completely digital money for transactions on the Internet/web (i.e. it has no offline equivalent). For more details, see Bitcoin (2017) and Glance (2015). 7 The term 'fiat currency' refers to 'currency that a government has declared to be legal tender but it is not backed by a physical commodity.… Most modern paper currencies are fiat currencies; they have no intrinsic value and are used solely as a means of payment' (Investopedia, 2017). 8 Cryptocurrency refers to a digital or virtual currency which uses cryptographic measures for security purposes. See http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cryptocurrency.asp (as of 13 March 2017). 9 A smart contract is 'a set of promises, specified in digital form, including protocols within which the parties perform on these promises' Szabo (1996), as quoted in Murphy & Cooper (2016). 10 See, for example, the Blockcerts project, which encourages the recording of academic certificates on a Blockchain for efficient verification by employers (Blockcerts, 2017). Permissioned and permissionless ledgersPermissionless, or public, ledgers are seen by some as the 'purest' form of Blockchains (Brennan & Lunn, 2016). A typical example of a permissionless, or public, Blockchain is the one that underlies the Bitcoin network. In this type of configuration, the participation is 'permissionless' and anyone can take part in the ledger and validate transactions, with fully devolved authority (Bogart & Rice, 2016). Participants are identified through pseudonyms or are kept anonymous, and transactions are validated by 'miners' through an incentivisation system (Biondi et al., 2016). This form of distributed ledger enables high security but also incurs high transaction costs due to the resource-intensive consensus mechanism 11 (Brennan & Lunn, 2016).Permissioned, or private, ledgers have attracted attention from businesses (Bogart & Rice, 2016). This type of ledger restricts transparency by disclosing the identity of participants in the netw...

show abstract

Accelerating the Internet of Things in the UK: Using policy to support practice

Cited by 5 publications

References 5 publications

Examining citizens' perceived value of internet of things technologies in facilitating public sector services engagement

Examining citizens' perceived value of internet of things technologies in facilitating public sector services engagement

[Re]-imagining vision and values: design as a driver for value creation in the Internet of Things

Understanding the landscape of Distributed Ledger Technologies/Blockchain: Challenges, opportunities, and the prospects for standards

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About