How to Cite this Article:
Ülker, B., Kanoğlu, A., & Özçevik, Ö. (2021). SIMURG_CITIES: Meta-Analysis for KPI's of Layer-Based Approach in Sustainability Assessment. Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs, 5(1), 59-76. https://doi.org/10.25034/ijcua.2021.v5n2-5
Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs
2021, Volume 5, Number 1, pages 59– 76
SIMURG_CITIES: Meta-Analysis for KPI's of Layer-Based Approach in Sustainability Assessment
1 * PhD Candidate. Burcu Ülker , 2 Prof. Dr. Alaattin Kanoğlu , 3 Prof. Dr. Özlem Özçevik
1 Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Kırklareli University, Turkey
2 Department of Architecture, Faculty of Art, Design and Architecture, Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Turkey
3 Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey
E-mail 1: burcuulker@klu.edu.tr, E-mail 2: alaattin.kanoglu@alanya.edu.tr
E-mail 3: ozceviko@itu.edu.tr
ARTICLE INFO:
Article History:
Received 6 March 2020
Accepted 20 June 2020
Available online 5 July 2020
Keywords:
SIMURG_CITIES;
Performance-Based Design and Building;
Competitiveness;
Competition by Design;
Innovativeness;
Interoperability; KPIs;
Sustainability; Smart Cities;
Meta-Analysis.
“SIMURG_CITIES” is the research and development project that is developed under the main project named SIMURG: “A performance-based and Sustainability-oriented Integration Model Using Relational database architecture to increase Global competitiveness of Turkish construction industry in industry 5.0 era”, is a relational database model that is currently being developed in a dissertation for performance-based development and assessment of sustainable and sophisticated solutions for the built environment. This study aims to analyze the key performance indicators (KPIs) at «Cities Level» for the smart city concept that is referred to as «Layers» in the master project. KPIs for the concept of a smart city are determined by using the meta-analysis technique. Hence, the three most reputable urban journals issued from 2017 through 2020 are reviewed in this study. In addition to this, models of smart city frameworks/assessment tools/KPIs are reviewed within the context of this paper; environment, economy, and governance were found to have domain themes on urban sustainability according to the literature review. Consequently, efficient and integrated urban management, environmental monitoring and management, public and social services of urban development, and sustainability are found to be the most important dimensions in urban and regional planning. SIMURG_CITIES evaluation models for urban projects can use the findings of this paper.
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS (2021), 5(1), 59-76.
https://doi.org/10.25034/ijcua.2021.v5n1-5
Copyright © 2021 Burcu Ülker, Alaattin Kanoğlu, Özlem Özçevik.
With globalization, individuals living within the same community which has different demographics structures, and understanding of life have increased and also lifestyles and expectations of these individuals have changed. The characteristics of built environment-related value systems have differentiated utilizing individuals' age, culture, educational level, etc. Nevertheless, policymakers (individuals/companies/institutions/local authorities) have designed living spaces uniformly assuming there is a single type of individual according to their value systems. While policymakers are preparing urban policies, cities continue to grow depending on rent since there are no tools to help rational decision making and decision support systems that can be measured. At this point, performance-based design and building of built environments to evaluate alternatives in a comparative way seems to have increased attractiveness for individuals /companies /institutions / local authorities of policymakers. As a result of the examinations made, it has been concluded that the model which will be developed for the solution of the identified problem must include and reveal the components of the solution in the dimensions stated by Kanoğlu et al. (2018).
The United Nations (UN) assumed seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that are aimed to “stimulate action over the next 15 years in areas of critical importance for humanity and the planet” in the last publication of the global sustainable development agenda, “Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”. Features as part of the targets referred to 3rd goal on “good health and well-being”, 4th goal on “quality education”, 8th goal on “economic growth”, 9th goal on “innovation and infrastructure”, and 11th goal on “sustainable cities and human settlements” (United Nations, 2015). Sustainability is the main concept among those that can be achieved by the integrated use of the other key concepts which are innovation, competitiveness, competition by design, performance-based building production process, integration of building production processes and interoperability supported by BIM (Building Information Modelling) and information classification systems (Kanoğlu et al., 2018). These concepts seem to be the key factors to design an integrated model that increases the competitive advantage of the national construction industry in the global market. Additional concepts that are not of less importance compared with the first set are transparency, accountability, and consistency. What the individuals, institutions, companies, and society need in Turkey are the practical and accessible tools that provide these concepts at all levels of decision-making. The problem is the lack of these tools that allow the governments and municipalities to propose suitable identities defined by the concepts or “layers” such as historical/smart/green/slow/safe/resilience etc, that are presented by specific KPIs and associated weights, for their built environments at all levels and to develop consistent policies for this purpose that helps individuals in matching up their attributes with social, cultural, economic, educational, etc., characteristics of the built environment they are supposed to live. Many more sub-components such as management, planning, energy, transportation, infrastructure resources, etc. of cities are needed to make a sustainable performance-based assessment, as well as KPI’s set, should be determined from its parameters for the design to be aesthetic, compatible with user needs and functions.
SIMURG: “A performance-based and Sustainability-oriented Integration Model Using Relational database architecture to increase Global competitiveness of the Turkish construction industry in industry 5.0 era” is integrated with the subprojects conducted by Kanoğlu et al. (2018) within the SIMURG_ALKU&ITU Virtual Laboratory, established on the Research Gate Scientific Communication Platform (https://www.researchgate.net/ profile/Alaattin_Kanoglu). Kanoğlu et al. (2018) designed the open-ended project that improvement for concerned models at all hierarchical levels of “performance-based design and construction” of the built environment manner in various sub-projects in two supplementary fields, i.e., “product” and “process” dimensions. “Building components”, “building elements”, “building premises”, “buildings”, “projects”, “lands”, “quarters”, “settlements”, “counties” and “cities” levels on “product side” and “operations”, “projects”, “departments”, “firms”, “groups of firms”, “sectors”, “national economies” and “global economy” levels on “process side” are the hierarchical levels of these dimensions. All the levels are required, specific KPIs and weights are determined together with organisational, computational, and computer models are designed. SIMURG_CITIES, the relational database model that is currently being conducted by Ülker under the supervision of Kanoğlu et al. (2018) in her dissertation entitled SIMURG_CITIES: “A Performance-Based Integrated Model for Design and Evaluation of Sustainable and Sophisticated Solutions at Cities Level: Determination of Key Performance Indicators and Principles of Model at Conceptual Dimension”. The main goal of the project is to determine the KPIs of performance of built environments at the city level in terms of the combinations of level-specific and layer/concept specific KPIs in both expert and user point of views and integrate the findings with SIMURG_INTEGRATED, the final output of the master project. This paper aims to analyse and determine the KPIs at “Cities Level” for the smart concept that is referred to as “Layers” in the master project. Also, the other aim of the paper is to review Models of smart city frameworks/assessment tools/KPIs on urban development and sustainability owing to the literature review.
The conceptual framework of this research is based upon an analysis of KPIs for the smart city concept. Meta-analysis is used to make a classification of the literature in the study. It also purposes to allow for a better understanding of the smartness of an urban framework acquired with the augmented use of sustainable thinking, particularly regarding urban studies. Hence, at first, this research demonstrates the descriptions of concepts and hypothetical basics of smart cities. Literature review link to the papers and researches is submitted, with the keywords “smart cities” or "smart city” and its integration with terms regarding urban planning and city assessment/framework/performance indicator/KPI. The literature review on the background of the sustainability approach indicated that research referring in related to the urban framework is based on the headings of “smart cities" or "digital cities". The research was carried out through a search of libraries and scientific databases, particularly Taylor & Francis Online, Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science and the most respected urban journals, Cities, Journal of Urban Technology, Sustainable Cities and Society for the period of 2017-2020 to gather information and systematically review the hypothetical literature. As a result, fifty relevant papers were selected from these journals to analyse, determine, and categorize the concept of smart cities and their KPIs. The writers, subjects and methodologies of the reviewed fifty papers are presented in the Table 1 and 2. The purpose is to allow for better practical and accessible tools/performance-based assessment that provides this concept in all levels of decision-making in the future.
Writers |
Year |
Journal |
Subject |
Research Methodology |
Cities |
PPP for SC projects |
Multi-attribute utility analysis |
||
Cities |
Measuring soft assets in SCs development |
Co-value creation evaluation |
||
Cities |
Measurement of SC communication via SM |
Digital content analysis |
||
Cities |
Measurement of the cultural vitality of ECs |
An empirical approach |
||
Cities |
Standardized indicators for sustainable SCs |
Comparative analysis |
||
Cities |
Identifying potential pitfalls in SCs development |
An exploratory study |
||
Cities |
Infrastructure assets in SC framework |
A conceptual framework |
||
Cities |
Multidimensional sustainability assessment for SC |
Performance benchmarking |
||
Cities |
Multidimensional sustainability assessment for SC |
A systematic literature review |
||
Cities |
Governance of SCs |
A systematic literature review |
||
Cities |
Performance analysis of international SC cases |
A multi-methods approach |
||
Cities |
ICT use and capability on SCs |
Component analysis |
||
Cities |
Assessment framework for sustainable SCs |
Performance benchmarking |
||
Journal of Urban Technology |
Assessment framework for environmental in SC |
Multiple case study research |
||
Journal of Urban Technology |
E-Capital and economic growth in urban areas |
An empirical approach |
||
Journal of Urban Technology |
Digital Technology in Smart Tourism |
A case study research |
||
Journal of Urban Technology |
“Infostructure” approach to urban mobility |
A case study research |
||
Journal of Urban Technology |
SCs and Mobility |
Multiple regression analysis |
||
Journal of Urban Technology |
Assessment framework of SC projects |
Multiple case study research |
||
Journal of Urban Technology |
Urban resilience and planning support systems |
A systematic literature review |
||
Journal of Urban Technology |
Knowledge structures of City ISs |
Multiple case study research |
||
Journal of Urban Technology |
Socio-Demographic inequality in CP |
A descriptive analysis |
||
Journal of Urban Technology |
Smart Citizen |
A discourse analysis |
||
PPP: Public-Private Partnerships, SC: Smart City, SM: Social Media, ECs: European cities, Iss: Innovation Systems, CP: Civic participation. |
||||
Table 2. Papers associated with KPIs of Smart City that has been published in Urban Literature from 2017 to 2020 (continued).
Writers |
Year |
Journal |
Subject |
Research Methodology |
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Transportation |
A coupled simulation method |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Energy |
Performance measurement |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Transportation |
Machine learning methods |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Assessment framework of SC projects |
Interval Agreement Method |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Sustainbale City performance |
Performance benchmarking |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
SC assessment tools and indicator sets |
Performance measurement |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart and sustainable cities |
A systematic literature review |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Assessment of Social Sustainability Indicators |
A case study research |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart building |
Neural Networks approach |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Sustainbale City performance |
Component analysis |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Citizen |
A case study research |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Environment |
A literature review |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Energy |
Multi-attribute decisionmaking |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Energy |
Performance measurement |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Energy |
Machine learning methods |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Environment |
A discourse analysis |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Performance Evaluation for Smart Transportation |
TOPSIS, A case study |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Urban renewal under SCs mission |
Multi-criteria decision making |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Energy |
Machine learning methods |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Sustainable SCs |
A literature review |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Environment |
The energy evaluation method |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Performance Evaluation for Smart Energy |
The energy evaluation method |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
SC assessment tools and indicator sets |
Performance measurement |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Sustainable SC assessment tools/indicator sets |
A systematic literature review |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Smart Energy |
Holistic energy analysis |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Performance Evaluation for Smart Energy |
A case study research |
||
Sustainable Cities and Society |
Performance Evaluation for Smart Energy |
A case study research |
||
PPP: Public-Private Partnerships, SC: Smart City, SM: Social Media, ECs: European cities, Iss: Innovation Systems, CP: Civic participation. |
||||
This section elaborates on the reviewed fifty papers in the literature and seven key themes and forty-four sub-themes/dimensions which are referred to in the last studies by Sharifi (2019, 2020) for the smart city assessment. The “typology of smart city evaluation tools and indicator sets” of Sharifi (2019, 2020) is used as a base for the meta-analysis table. Specific KPIs determined for each paper were marked in the meta-analysis table according to relevant themes or sub-themes/dimensions which were conducted topics in the papers. The findings of the meta-analysis are indicated in Tables 3, 4, and 5 that show the ratings of themes and sub-themes/dimensions related KPIs of a smart city in urban literature. The rating of seven themes for related KPIs of the smart city in the literature (Table 6), the major result of this research is that; environment, economy, governance-institutional, and data management is found to be the most important themes in urban and regional planning. Besides, the themes which are people, living and mobility (transport & ICT) need to become as important as the other themes.
Table 3. Themes and Sub-themes of the reviewed papers on Urban Literature.
Sharifi (2019) Assessment Tools & KPIs for Smart Cities |
Relevant Studies for KPIs in Literature (2017-2020) |
|||||||||||||||||
Theme |
Dimension |
|||||||||||||||||
Economy |
Innovation/innovation culture |
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
Knowledge economy |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
Entrepreneurship |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
|
Finance |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
|
Tourism |
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
Employment |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
Local & Global Interconnectedness |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
|
Productivity and efficiency |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
|
Flexibility of the labor market |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
|
Impacts |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
People |
Education/ lifelong learning |
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
Level of qualification/ ICT skills |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
Cosmopolitanism/ open mindedness |
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
|
Governance-institutional |
Visioning and leadership |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
Legal and regulatory frameworks |
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
Participation |
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
Transparency |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
Public and social services |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
Efficient & integrated urban management |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
Environment |
Environmental monitoring & management |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
General infrastructure |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
Built environment/planning and design |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
Materials |
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
Energy resources |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
Water resources |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
Waste (solid waste, waste water, sewage) |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
Environmental quality/pollution |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
Living |
Social cohesion/inclusion |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
Equity and justice |
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
Cultural development |
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
|
Housing/livelihood quality |
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
Healthcare |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
Safety and security |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
Convenience and satisfaction/ well-being |
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
Mobility (Transport & ICT) |
Transport infrastructure |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
Transportation management |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
ICT infrastructure |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
ICT management |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
ICT accessibility |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
Data management |
Data openness |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
Sensing and collecting |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
Judging (analytics) |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
Reacting |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
Learning |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
Table 4. Themes and Sub-themes of the reviewed papers in Urban Literature (continued).
Sharifi (2019) Assessment Tools & KPIs for Smart Cities |
Relevant Studies for KPIs in Literature (2017-2020) |
|||||||||||||||||
Theme |
Dimension |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Economy |
Innovation/innovation culture |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
Knowledge economy |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
Entrepreneurship |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
Finance |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
Tourism |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
Employment |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
Local & Global Interconnectedness |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
Productivity and efficiency |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
Flexibility of the labor market |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
Impacts |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
People |
Education/ lifelong learning |
|
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
Level of qualification/ ICT skills |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
Cosmopolitanism/ open mindedness |
|
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
Governance-institutional |
Visioning and leadership |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
Legal and regulatory frameworks |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
Participation |
|
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
Transparency |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
Public and social services |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
Efficient & integrated urban management |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
Environment |
Environmental monitoring & management |
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
General infrastructure |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Built environment/planning and design |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Materials |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Energy resources |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Water resources |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Waste (solid waste, waste water, sewage) |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Environmental quality/pollution |
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Living |
Social cohesion/inclusion |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
Equity and justice |
|
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
Cultural development |
|
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
Housing/livelihood quality |
|
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
Healthcare |
|
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
Safety and security |
|
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
Convenience and satisfaction/ well-being |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
Mobility (Transport & ICT) |
Transport infrastructure |
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
Transportation management |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
ICT infrastructure |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
ICT management |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
ICT accessibility |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Data management |
Data openness |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
Sensing and collecting |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Judging (analytics) |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
|
Reacting |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
Learning |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
|
√ |
|
|
Table 5. Themes and Sub-themes of the reviewed papers in Urban Literature (continued).
Sharifi (2019) Assessment Tools & KPIs for Smart Cities |
Relevant Studies for KPIs in Literature (2017-2020) |
|||||||||||||||||||
Total for dimensions |
Total for themes |
|||||||||||||||||||
Theme |
Dimension |
|||||||||||||||||||
Economy |
Innovation/innovation culture |
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
22 |
219 |
|
Knowledge economy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
19 |
|||
Entrepreneurship |
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
18 |
|||
Finance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
19 |
|||
Tourism |
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
18 |
|||
Employment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
20 |
|||
Local & Global Interconnectedness |
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
17 |
|||
Productivity and efficiency |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
40 |
|||
Flexibility of the labor market |
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
16 |
|||
Impacts |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
32 |
|||
People |
Education/ lifelong learning |
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
21 |
68 |
|
Level of qualification/ ICT skills |
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
27 |
|||
Cosmopolitanism/ open mindedness |
√ |
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
20 |
|||
Governance-institutional |
Visioning and leadership |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
36 |
184 |
|
Legal and regulatory frameworks |
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
18 |
|||
Participation |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
27 |
|||
Transparency |
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
19 |
|||
Public and social services |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
40 |
|||
Efficient & integrated urban management |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
44 |
|||
Environment |
Environmental monitoring & management |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
41 |
264 |
|
General infrastructure |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
34 |
|||
Built environment/planning and design |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
32 |
|||
Materials |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
31 |
|||
Energy resources |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
32 |
|||
Water resources |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
31 |
|||
Waste (solid waste, waste water, sewage) |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
31 |
|||
Environmental quality/pollution |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
|
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
√ |
32 |
|||
Living |
Social cohesion/inclusion |
|
|
|
|
|
|
√ |
|
|
|
|
√ |
√ |
|
|
|
22 |
148 |
|
Equity and justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|