Because of different processes like economic restructuring, socio-demographic processes and technological progress cities are facing new challenges in the run of their recent trends of urbanization and metropolisation. These processes are assumed to have specific impacts on the cohesive territorial development in economic, social and spatial terms. As a consequence new strategic governance approaches became necessary steering development in different fields. In this context rankings have experienced a remarkable boom. In front of this development, this paper concentrates first on the question how to define a ‘smart’ city which is able to cope with such challenges. Based on this understanding the own ranking approach („European Smart Cities“) is described systematically. Based on a hierarchical approach with a sample of relevant factors the paper describes in short how cities cope with the results and what are typical reactions of local governments and stakeholders. In this context two specific urban strategies for steering development and processes of learning in general, but especially with respect to urban governance, are discussed within this paper. Finally, the paper elaborates that here the buzz-word ‘smart’ is not used in an explicit technology perspective but in a clear place based understanding similar to the EU-Territorial Agenda 2020. Accordingly an outlook describes how ‘smart’ will be used and understood in a place based and territorial perspective including technological impacts.

1. European Smart Cities:
the need for a place related Understanding
Rudolf Giffinger Creating Smart Cities
Department of Spatial Development, Edinburgh Napier University
Infrastructure and Environmental Planning June 30 / July 1, 2011
Centre of Regional Science
Operngasse 11, 6. Stock
1040 Wien
+43 1 58801 26621
http://www.srf.tuwien.ac.at/

2. Focus in this contribution
Need for positioning
• Urbanisation and technological innovations
• territorial perspective on smart city
Place based Smart City Ranking (SCR) approach
• Ranking based on urban characteristics
• Basic features and results for medium sized cities
• Identifying a city’s specific profile
– drawing lesson / Evidence based
Outlook: Smart metropolitan development
• Enhanced concept in territorial perspective
• metropolisation and polycentricity
• 2 hypotheses on smart metropolitan development
2

3. introduction
technology based urban development
• Urbanisation and industrialization
• Metropolisation and competitiveness
differentiation of urban development
• cities and metropolises show different standards
• only 10% of all European regions show corresponding standards of a knowledge
society according to different indicators
What should we understand under ‚smart city‘?
Why a place based approach regarding territorial development?
Which challenges for research and for governance ?
3

4. Smart City Ranking
Need for positioning
• Urbanisation and technological innovations
• territorial perspective on smart city
Place based Smart City Ranking (SCR) approach
• Ranking based on urban characteristics
• Basic features and results for medium sized cities
• Identifying a city’s specific profile
– drawing lesson / Evidence based
Outlook: Smart metropolitan development
• Enhanced concept in territorial perspective
• metropolisation and polycentricity
• 2 hypothesis on smart metropolitan development
4

5. Why medium sized cities?
Medium sized cities
• Usually forgotten in discussion about
• Challenges of globalisation and Trends of metropolisation
An important group of cities in Europe 27+NO+CH
Source of data:
Nordregio (2004),
Espon project 1.1.1
5

6. Medium sized cities: EU27+NO+CH
Importance in Europe:
• 270 million Europeans live in city regions > 100,000 residents
• 120 million live in city regions with 100,000 ‐ 500,000 residents
Selection of the city sample Cities
1 Functional Urban Area in Europe (EU27+NO+CH) 1,595
2 100,000 – 500,000 inhabitants 584
3 At least 1 University 364
4 Catchment area less than 1.500,000 persons 256
5 Covered by the Urban Audit database 94
6 Consolidation and adaptation by the project team 70
Smart City Ranking Approach
 for 70 medium sized cities in Europe
• to identify the position in a comparable way
• to elaborate the profile of cities on different levels
• to discuss future challenges
6

7. Definition of Smart City: www.smart‐cities.eu
„A Smart City is a city
Smart City well performing in these
6 characteristics, built on the
Characteristics: ‘smart’ combination of endowments and
activities of self-decisive, independent
Smart Economy and aware citizens.”
Smart People up-to-now: drawing a picture of the
Smart Governance current state of a city.
Smart Mobility perspective: a relaunch based on more
Smart Environment recent data is planned
Smart Living
 stimulating discussion through
showing profiles and changes over time
Endowments Activities
(Local conditions) (Application)
7

8. Description of Smart City: www.smart‐cities.eu
Smart Economy Smart‐City rank:
Smart City
result of 6
characteristics
Smart People
6 characteristics: Characteristics
Smart Governance result of group of
factors Factors
Smart Mobility 31 factors:
result of group of Indicators
indicators
Smart Environment
data base:
Smart Living 75 indicators
8

9. Characteristics & bundles of factors
Smart City:
6 characteristics are defined
through bundles of factors
in a comprehensive way
31 factors are
operationalised through
bundles of indicators (in
total 75 ind.)
9

10. Ranking based on data 2001/2004
Ranking: best performing cities Ranked groups of
smart cities
‐ Luxembourg, Denmark, Finland
‐ poor in transition countries
‐ Ljubljana already on 17th place
Cities show different performance in
its characteristics
10

11. Smart City Ranking Results: www.smart‐cities.eu
11

12. Smart City Ranking: drawing lesson
Good to have a look
‐ at ‚smart living‘ in Linz
‐ Cultural facilities, individual safety or
Touristic attractivity
‐ …or at any other city perfoming better ..…
… an effective way how a city may learn good practice
in a specific field from another city …
12

13. Smart City Ranking: evidence based strategy
Characteristics at a first glance
‐Some strenghts in
‐ Smart economy, people and governance
‐Clear weaknesses in
‐ Smart environment and living
Factor values indicating low
performance facilitate more evidence
‐ International accessibility
‐ Sustainable innovative and safe
transportation system
‐ Attractivity of nat. conditions
‐ Pollution
‐ some factors of smart living
Are there specific issues which are clearly interlinked factors?
Are there specific topics which indicate strengths or weaknesses?
Which strategic projects may meet specific challenges?
13

14. Outlook
Need for positioning
• Urbanisation and technological innovations
• territorial perspective on smart city
Place based Smart City Ranking (SCR) approach
• Ranking based on urban characteristics
• Basic features and results for medium sized cities
• Identifying a city’s specific profile
– Lesson drawing / Evidence based
Smart metropolitan development
• Enhanced concept in territorial perspective
• metropolisation and polycentricity
• 2 hypothesis on smart metropolitan development
14

15. Smart City Ranking approach for metropolises
metropolisation
• a process of attracting
• high ranked functions
• in particular knowledge intensive new activities
• jobs and residents
polycentricity
• a process of allocation of specific metropolitan functions
• based on a cities specific assets and potentials regarded as specific area
based advantages
• often far beyond city borders in a larger metropolitan region
SCR approach in a territorial perspective will describe the characteristics of its
territorial capital in these two dimensions
• recently done in ESPON project POLYCE
15

16. policy relevance of a place based approach
economic
technological restructuring sociodemographic
innovations processes
Inclusion Policy advice
‐ identifying and
assessing impacts of
Metropolisation smart
Polycentricity three macro‐trends
metropolitan
development
‐ Assessing the
meaning of techno‐
logical innovations
Competitiveness regarding competiti‐
veness and inclusion
governance
Research
• regarding economic restructuring & sociodemographic issues already
sufficient?
• but scarce knowledge on innovation processes
• dependent on spatial diffusion and local adaption processes
16

17. Conclusions: from evidence to governance of
smart city development
enhanced smart metropolitan approach
‘Smart metropolis’ indicates the capability of a city with its metropolitan
region to cope with the challenges of competitiveness and inclusive
development steered by the attraction of metropolitan functions and through
polycentric development which is enforcing its territorial cohesion.
Besides, this capability is not related to local facilities of endowment as
potentials only, but it also considers covering the activities of self‐decisive
and independent citizens in terms of awareness and participation of a city’s
inhabitants in addressing and activating new potentials and supporting and
strengthening existing assets.
17

18. 2 hypotheses
(1) Even in next decades on the global level the process of urbanization and
metropolisation is driven by and dependent on technological innovations. But
only those cities will show ‘smart development’ in form of a balance between
competitiveness and inclusion which are capable to introduce, adapt and
diffuse technological innovations according to territorial conditions and needs.
(2) In particular, a place based Smart City Ranking approach which considers
metropolisation and polycentricity in a territorial perspective will foster ‘smart
metropolitan development’. This is in particular realized through governance
initiatives based on …
• drawing lesson
• not reasonable to follow best‐practice strategies at random
• relevant evidence
• in form of comparative benchmarking or of differentiated profile assessment, and
• activating potentials and enhancing existing assets
18

19. Thank you for your attention
www.smart‐cities.eu
www.polyce.eu
rudolf.giffinger@tuwien.ac.at
19