Dr Igor Calzada delivered a keynote conference at the InFocus Smart Cities International Conference in Yinchuan in China on 7th September 2016. The keynote revolved around governance of smart cities by pointing out a critical and constructive perspective of the so-called smart cities buzzword based on previous research work entitled Unplugging.

1. Defining Smart City Governance
Dr Igor Calzada, MBA
Senior Research Fellow, Future of CiBes & Urban TransformaBons, University of Oxford
Lecturer, InsBtute for Future CiBes, University of Strathclyde
Research Fellow, Brussels Centre for Urban Studies, Vrije Universiteit
@icalzada
www.igorcalzada.com/about
igor.calzada@compas.ox.ac.uk
Smart City InFocus 2016, Yinchuan (China)

2. Outline
1. Why new modes of governance are needed for smart ciFes
2. Defining your smart city vision & strategy
3. Developing a dedicated organizaFon – what new roles and skills are required?
4. IntegraBng processes for smart city projects
5. CreaBng a Smart City ecosystem through different types of private-public
partnership

3. Via @FT
If you experience
something
—record it.
If you record
something
—upload it.
If you upload
something
—share it.
#dataism

4. Bio: www.igorcalzada.com/about
1. 2015 <
1. University of Oxford, Urban TransformaFons (UK)
2. University of Strathclyde, InsFtute for Future CiFes (UK)
3. Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels Centre for Urban Studies (Belgium)
2. 2012 < University of Oxford, Future of CiFes, (UK)
3. 15 years: Policy Adviser for the European Commission
4. 10 years: Private sector, Director of InnovaFon at Mondragon Co-operaFve CorporaFon (Spain)
5. 4 years: Public sector, Director of InnovaFon at Basque Regional Government (Spain)
6. Background: M.B.A. & PhD in Business AdministraFon (USA)

5. 08/09/16WP 9: Oxford Page 5
Aim:
How can we prompt methodological advancements that promote
fruitful learning in and among cities?
2012 <
Future of CiBes Programme
www.futureofciFes.ox.ac.uk

6. 08/09/16WP 9: Oxford Page 6
Applied Research:
1) City-To-City Learning
2) Comparing/Benchmarking Smart Cities
www.futureofciFes.ox.ac.uk
2012 <
Future of CiBes Programme

7. 2015 <
Urban Transformations ESRC
Portfolio
www.urbantransformations.ox.ac.uk

8. Aims to address a wide range of stakeholders with a professional, public or
poliFcal interest in ciFes, including members of the general public wishing to
learn more about current academic debates on urban development worldwide:
• UK
• Europe
• InternaFonal (BRICS)
2015 <
Urban Transformations ESRC

9. Source: @oxmartinschool

10. 1960
Source: @UN

11. 2025
Source: @UN

14. Refugees and newcomers crisis

22. Key reading list:
• Brenner, N. & Keil, R. (2006) The Global Cities Reader, Routledge.
• Brenner, N.(2014) Implossions / Explosions: Toward a Study of Planetary Urbaniza=on, jovis Verlag GmbH: Berlin.
• Lee, T. (2015) Global cities and climate change: the translocal relations of environmental governance:
New York: Routledge.
• Acuto, M. (2013) Global cities, governance and diplomacy: the urban link. Abingdon. Oxon; New York,
NY: Routledge.
• Bouteligier, S. (2013) Cities, networks, and global environmental governance: spaces of innovation,
places of leadership. New York: Routledge.

23. 1. Ecosystem of CiBzens > System of Systems

24. 2. The contemporary smart city cannot be JUST reduced…
…to simulaBon and da$fica$on of the urban life

25. 3. Unplugging Smart CiBes

27. Beyond Hyper Connected SocieBes >
Need to Deconstruct the Smart City

28. TRANSITIONS

29. To get out from the
‘smart city-in-the-box’
approach

30. UNPLUGGING 2 noFons
① Being digitally connected/plugged in is no
guarantee of being smart (Evans 2002: 34)
② Technology is never neutral, and it has the
potenFal and capacity to be used socially
and poliFcally for quite different purpose
(Williams 1983: 128)

31. 1788 views
6th
Most
Read ArFcle

32. #UNPLUGGING
through
10 TRANSITIONS

33. Calzada, I. & Cobo, C. (2015), Unplugging: Deconstruc$ng the Smart City,
Journal of Urban Technology. DOI: 10.1080/10630732.2014.971535
hlp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10630732.2014.971535#abstract
Also in Open Access via @ResearchGate:
hlps://www.researchgate.net/publicaFon/289522452_AOM_Unplugging_DeconstrucFng_the_Smart_City

34. Defining your smart city
vision + strategy
IntegraBng processes for
Smart City Projects

35. EU Projects:
Smart City-Regional ComparaFve InternaFonal Research
EU Project
Cities involved
Timeframe & Title
Funding Institution
EU-H2020-SCC-
1st
Lighthouse:
REPLICATE
• Bristol (UK)
• St Sebastian (ES)
• Florence (IT)
• Laussane (CH)
• Essen (DE)
• Nilüfer (TR)
• Bogotá (CO)
• Guangzhou (CN)
< 2016-2021 >
REinassance of PLaces with Innovative
Citizenship And TEchnology
EU-H2020-SCC-Lighthouse
www.replicate-project.eu
EU-Marie Curie Actions-
Cofund-Regional
Programmes:
SMART CITY-REGIONS
• Bristol (UK)
• Glasgow (UK)
• Bilbao (ES)
• Barcelona (ES)
< 2015-2016 >
Comparing Smart City-Regional
Governance Strategies:
Bilbao, Barcelona, Bristol & Glasgow
EU-FP7
Marie Curie Actions- Cofund
BilbaoMetropoli-30/Bizkaia
Province Council
www.smartcityregions.org
EU-FP7-314679
STEP UP
Smart City Plan
• Glasgow (UK)
• Riga (LT)
• Gothenburg (SE)
• Ghent (BE)
< 2014-2015 >
Energy Planning for Cities
*MSc Master in Global Sustainable Cities
EU-FP7
www.stepupsmartcities.eu
EU-FP7-314277-
STEEP
Smart City Plan
• Bristol (UK)
• St Sebastian (ES)
• Florence (IT)
< 2014-2015 >
Systems Thinking for comprehensive city
Efficient Energy Planning
EU-FP7
http://www.smartsteep.eu/

36. STEEP EU-FP7-314277
Systems Thinking for comprehensive city Efficient Energy Planning
Smart City Master Plan for three EU CiBes:
St SebasBan (Spain) + Bristol (UK) + Florence (Italy)

37. STEP UP
EU-FP7-314679
Energy Planning for Ci$es
Smart City Master Plan for four EU CiBes:
Glasgow (UK) + Riga (Latvia) + Gothenburg (Sweden) + Ghent (Belgium)
hlp://www.stepupsmartciFes.eu/

38. www.replicate-project.eu

39. By @icalzada

40. By @bilbaometropoli
By @CitiesOxford
By @ifuturecities By @bristolisopen
//Bilbao//
CORPORATE
-in-transition
//Barcelona//
ANTI-CORPORATE
-uncertain
By @SmartCityExpo
//Bristol//
OPEN INNOVATION
-alternative
//Glasgow//
URBAN
GOVERNANCE
-transformative

41. Despite what the glossy websites and videos might suggest…
There is less a sense of clear vision around smart:
Instead,
there is a sense of ‘smart mamers’
but without any real clarity about
why and how, or any certainty about how and why
to get different groups working together,
from government departments to civil society groups,
private companies and ordinary residents Marvin et al. 2016: 187

42. DECALOGUE
Smart City leaders should:
1. Create a city vision
2. Transform the city’s operaFng model
3. Establish and give priority to a stakeholder engagement programme
4. Take an integrated view of the city’s procurement requirements
5. Mapping the city’s interoperability needs
6. Empower stakeholder-led service transformaFon via open plaqorms
7. Deliver city-led service transformaFon
8. Embed an approach to privacy management based on ciFzen-centric trust model
9. Make sure digital and social divide are overcomed
10. Establish an economic and social benefit realisaFon strategy
BSI, 2016

43. What new roles and
skills are required?

44. Horizontal authority is considered beler than the tradiFonal verFcal hierarchy
InteracFon of public managers with society is essenFal
Michelucci et al. 2016: 15
A.
CITY PLANNING CAPABILITIES
B.
LEGAL COMPETENCIES
C.
SOFT SKILLS
D.
FINANCIAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
E.
BASIC CAPACITIES
F.
POLITICALLY INDEPENDENT
& HONEST

45. CreaBng Smart City
Ecosystem through
different types of PPP?

46. Social
Entrepreneurs
By @icalzada
Multi-Stakeholders
Calzada, I. (2013), CriFcal Social InnovaFon in the Smart City era for a City-Regional European Horizon 2020. Journal of Public
Policies & Territory P3T. Vol 2, Nº 6 (2013): Social InnovaFon & Territory. Winter. pp. 1-20.
1. PENTA HELIX

47. 2.
URBAN
DATA
TO
DECIDE
Via @FT

48. www.cityregions.org
3. SCALABILITY:
METROPOLITAN
&
CITY-REGIONAL SCALES

49. Calzada, I. (2015), Benchmarking Future City-Regions beyond NaFon-States, RSRS
Regional Studies Regional Science, 2:1, 350-361, DOI:
10.1080/21681376.2015.1046908.
4. BENCHMARKING:
COMPARING SMARTNESS
&
CITY-TO-CITY CO-CREATION

50. 5. DATA VISUALISATION:
RANKINGS & CITY-DASHBOARDS
Via @RobKitchin

51. Final Remarks
1. Enable interdependencies among stakeholders via Penta Helix
2. The need for democraFc mechanisms to manage data
3. The requirement to scale up urban soluFons to metropolitan and city-regional
levels
4. The intent to provide comparaFve evidence-based data
5. The tendency to establish not only quanFtaFve but also qualitaFve rankings and
city dashboards that enable adaptaFon rather than replicaFon

52. 1. MulFstakeholders’
interdependencies
2. Urban Data
to Decide
3. Scalability:
Metropolitan & Regional Scales 4. Benchmarking:
Comparing Smartness
&
City-to-City Co-CreaFon
5. VisualisaFon:
Rankings
&
City-Dashboards.
CreaBng
Smart City
Ecosystem
Glad to discuss on these topics

53. 1. What prospects are there for alternaFve funding and business models for smart ciFes?
2.
What
are
the
pracFcal/poliFcal
intervenFons
needed
(within business,
local government,
communiFes,…)?
3. Is another Smart City possible? A third-way between State and Market (PPP)?

56. Dr Igor Calzada, MBA
Urban TransformaBons & Future of CiBes
University of Oxford
@icalzada
www.igorcalzada.com
igor.calzada@compas.ox.ac.uk
Skype: icalzada
+44 (0) 1865 274687
谢谢
Thank you