Smart regions: insights from hybridization and peripheralization research

Abstract

In recent years, discourse on urban development and planning has shifted its emphasis to smartness. Latest studies might offer ideas about planning objectives regarding territorial cohesion and how to meet the demand for information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure. However, so far there is barely any literature on smart regions as relational and hybrid phenomena looking at urban and rural areas as being spatially interlinked. The article aims to generate a deeper theoretical understanding of smart regions by discussing hybridization and peripheralization processes and applying them to debates on smart regions. By merging these perspectives, these authors advocate a diversification of meaning and scope which underscores the involvement of actors in the social (re-)construction of regions. A new analytical perspective on smart regions will be suggested that distinguishes between the three dimensions of discourse, implementation and regulation and refers to concomitant spatial effects as well as to implications for planning practices and procedures. Therewith, the paper encourages critical reflection on normative concepts of smart regions as well as on the usability of ICT for solving local problems.

Contemporary regionalism and The Scandinavian 8 Million City: spatial logics in contemporary region-building processes

“…In conclusion, the main spatial logic in contemporary regionalism is the logic for territorial competitiveness, which as shown here is supported by other spatial logics and regional imaginaries regarding the best and most competitive 'territorial fixes', especially focusing on large-scale urban areas as drivers of economic growth and development. This also contributes to a possible polarization between centralization and peripheralization processes, especially in the construction of metropolitan regions, privileging urban regions over more 'peripheral' ones (Kühn, 2015), also leading to increasing regional disparities (Matern et al, 2019). As such, the logic for economic and territorial competitiveness must be seen as a prolongation of new regionalism and Regionalism 2.0, but these explanations of regionalism might still be to narrow and to better understand the various forms of today's regionalization processes and region-building initiatives, their affects must be studied in relation to the specific geographical contexts in which they are embedded.…”

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Fused Twins: A Review of Access to Digital Twins In Situ in Smart Cities

“…As objects increase in size and become places, the terminology adapts to Smart Environment [321], Smart Home [371,372], Smart Office [372], Smart Museum [373], Smart City [4,10,48,199,200,254,324,371,[374][375][376], and even Smart Regions [377] and Smart Communities [248,378]. Conceptually, these Smart Places [379] do not differ from Smart Objects [7] but only generalise them to sets of Things.…”

A Generic Framework for the Definition of Key Performance Indicators for Smart Energy Systems at Different Scales

“…The collaboration of local authorities for the development of plans, which cover a wider range of people, places, and issues, can contribute on the conceptual transition from a city to a regional level. Hence, a focus on regions can seek solutions that benefit not only major cities, but also their surrounding towns, villages and rural areas, moving towards broader economic, social, and environmental objectives of planning [35]. According to [33], smart regions require the innovation of sustainable planning approach at the regional level in the context of national development strategies.…”