Hype vs Reality in Smart City Development...

transcript

Hype vs Reality in Smart City Development Projects

Supraja Sudharsan

PhD Student

The Sam Nunn School of International Affairs

For Science Technology and Innovation Policy Program

June - Aug 2018

• Spending on technologies for smart cities estimated to go from an estimated $80 billion in 2018 to $135 billion in 2020 worldwide

• Regions with highest estimated spending are the United States and China

Source: International Data Corporation, 2018

Science Technology and Innovation Policy, June - Aug 2018

What is a “Smart” City?

In general, a city that uses data and technology to control and improve the living environment.

Smart City Projects

Data Layer

Data Collection Data StorageData Aggregation

and AnalysisData Use

Technology and Infrastructure Layer (Eg: Sensors, Connectivity, Data centers, Data platform)

Adapted from: Sudharsan et al. (2018); Heppelmann and Porter (2014); Mayangsari and Novani (2015, p.320).

City Services

Research Approach and Methodology

Approach• Comparative study of smart city

projects in Atlanta, GA, Austin, TX and Pittsburgh, PA.

Methodology • Collected over 200 smart cities

projects.

• Case studies of Atlanta, Austin, and Pittsburgh smart cities’ plans, projects and their management.

Findings

• Plans

• Projects and Partnerships

• Organizational process

City of Atlanta(2015)

• Input-oriented

• Utilize data for decision-making

• Wide focus on issue areas

City of Austin(2016)

• Process-oriented

• Efficiency of problem-solving

• Wide focus on issue areas

City of Pittsburgh (2014)

• Outcome-oriented

• Leader in transportation innovation

• Targeted issue area

Smart City Plans

Analysis: City of Atlanta Projects

Utilize data for decision-making

Mobility Public safety OperationalEfficiency

Publicengagement

Environmental

• Greater number of mobility projects.

• Began with IOT-oriented projects initially and later included projects that made use of existing data.

• Smart street lights, acoustic sensor in high crime areas.

Analysis: City of Atlanta Partnerships

Analysis: City of Atlanta Organizational Process

Originating department

Executive Governance Board

Information Management

Resources, funding, vendor selection and management

Analysis: City of Austin Projects

28 6 7

Mobility Internal Safety Public andbusiness

engagement

Energy Environment

• Greater range of projects across IOT deployment, development of infrastructure, and development of capabilities across data processes.

• First piloted projects on mobility.

• First prioritized projects included open data and traffic signal timing.

Improving efficiency in providing city services

Analysis: City of Austin Partnerships

Information Management

Office of Design and Delivery

Designers Developers City Departments

Analysis: City of Austin Organizational Process

Type of projects Transportation and Mobility (9)

Initiated Through $10.9 million DoT grant

Partnerships Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) + Consortium

Organizational support Data support offered through a grant from Richard King Mellon Foundation + support from Center for Urban and Social Research, University of Pittsburgh

Housed under Department of Innovation and Performance (City’s technology department)

• First piloted projects on mobility

• First prioritized projects included open data and pilot projects in collaboration with CMU, city departments and others.

Become a leader in transportation innovation

Analysis: City of Pittsburgh Projects

Innovation and Performance

PGH Lab

Mayor’s Office

City Departments Internal developers

Analysis: City of Pittsburgh Organizational Process

Conclusion

• City’s Smart City Plan influences the initiatives that the City pursues.

• Focus on mobility, open data as initial projects.

• Cities need to play a role in shaping the support network.

• Cities need to develop their capacity to advance smart city initiatives across departments.

Questions?ssudharsan3@gatech.edu

Hype vs Reality in Smart City Development...

Documents