Multidimensional sorting framework of cities regarding the concept of sustainable and smart cities with an application to Brazilian capitals

Oliveira, Jovenilson Rocha De; Silva, Maísa Mendonça; Santos, Simone Machado; Costa, Ana Paula Cabral Seixas; Clemente, Thárcylla Rebecca Negreiros

doi:10.1016/j.scs.2021.103193

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, regarding this criterion, the data should be quantitative and objective (Angelakoglou et al, 2019; Garau & Pavan, 2018). Availability is concerned with whether the data is easily attainable considering time, effort, and sources (Angelakoglou et al, 2019; de Oliveira et al, 2021). On the other hand, relevance and representativeness criteria focus on the indicators that are significant for the study and that reflect the state of the city (Garau & Pavan, 2018; Scipioni et al, 2008).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Availability Accessibility Scipioni et al, 2008;Ding et al, 2016;Chowdhury & Dhawan, 2017;Tan et al, 2018;Gonzalez-Garcia et al, 2018;Akande et al, 2019;Angelakoglou et al, 2019;Buzási & Jäger, 2020;de Oliveira et al, 2021;Quijano et al, 2022 The indicator data should be easily attainable through available resources and databases.…”

Section: Criterion Study Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Validity Integrity Scipioni et al, 2008;Ding et al, 2015;Garau & Pavan, 2018;Angelakoglou et al, 2019;de Oliveira et al, 2021 The indicator data should be trustworthy regarding source and content, able to be verified, and methodologically sound.…”

Section: Reliability Reputationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recency Timeliness de Oliveira et al, 2021;Ferreira est al., 2021 The indicator data should be up to date and collected regularly.…”

Section: Currencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Strategies and perspectives Lazaroiu & Roscia, 2012;Concilio et al, 2013;Miloševi c et al, 2019;Koca et al, 2021 Public and social services Lazaroiu & Roscia, 2012;Concilio et al, 2013;Ozkaya & Erdin, 2020;Koca et al, 2021 E-government service Lombardi et al, 2012;Lopes & Oliveira, 2017;Shi et al, 2018;Miloševi c et al, 2019;Mohsin et al, 2020;Wang et al, 2020; Government data availability Lopes & Oliveira, 2017;Miloševi c et al, 2019;de Oliveira et al, 2021;Sotirelis et al, 2022Transparency Shen et al, 2011Lazaroiu & Roscia, 2012;Concilio et al, 2013;Miloševi c et al, 2019;Ozkaya & Erdin, 2020;Koca et al, 2021;Wey & Peng, 2021;Sotirelis et al, 2022 Citizen participation in decision-making Shen et al, 2011;Lazaroiu & Roscia, 2012;Concilio et al, 2013;Musa et al, 2016;Lopes & Oliveira, 2017;Miloševi c et al, 2019;Ozkaya & Erdin, 2020;Steiniger et al, 2020;Ur Rehman Tariq et al, 2020;Wang et al, 2020;Wey & Peng, 2021;de Oliveira et al, 2021;Koca et al, 2021;…”

Section: Dimension Topic Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A systematic literature review: Setting a basis for smart and sustainable city performance measurement

Karal

Soyer

2023

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growing amount of data and the inventive solutions that arise from it create opportunities to construct and manage smart sustainable cities. Before attempting to establish appropriate solutions in this regard, it is crucial to clearly grasp what smart and sustainable cities are and the aspects around which they are built. The purpose of this study is to critically analyze and evaluate the studies that have been conducted on smart and/or sustainable cities and to provide a basis for the measurement of smartness and sustainability of cities. In this context, using Systematic Literature Review (SLR) methodology, the smart city, sustainable city, and smart sustainable city concepts are firstly defined. After that, the indicators for the assessment of the smartness and sustainability of cities and the selection processes of these indicators are analyzed. According to the analysis, the studies were grouped based on the use of (i) selection criteria, (ii) selection methods/tools, and (iii) models used and 14 criteria were deduced from the literature for the evaluation of performance assessment indicators: measurability, availability, completeness, relevance, independence, reliability, currency, responsiveness, simplicity, representativeness, cost‐effectiveness, consistency, comparability, and consensus. This study aims to support other studies and applications of authorities on creating and assessing a smart and sustainable city (i.e., the indicators) that want to join the 2030 Agenda but face problems regarding their cities' specific conditions. The first step towards creating a smart sustainable city can be taken by determining the most suitable indicators for the city.

show abstract