Succeeding with Smart People Initiatives: Difficulties and Preconditions for Smart City Initiatives that Target Citizens

Smart City is a paradigm for the development of urban spaces through the implementation of state-of-the-art ICT. There are two main approaches when developing Smart Cities: top-down and bottom-up. Based on the bottom-up approach, the concepts of Smart People and Smart Communities have emerged as dimensions of the Smart City, advocating for the engagement of citizens in Smart People initiatives. The aim of this research is both to find the types of Smart People initiatives and to identify their difficulties and preconditions for success. However, such initiatives that aim to (1) leverage the citizens intellectually and (2) use citizens as a source of input for ideas and innovation, are understudied. Therefore, this research proposes a concentrated framework of Smart People initiatives from an extensive literature review. On one hand, this framework contributes with a common ground and vocabulary that facilitates the dialogue within and between practitioners and academia. On the other hand, the identification of difficulties and preconditions guides the academia and practitioners in how to successfully account for citizens in the Smart City. From the literature review and the conduct of case studies of five European cities, participation came out as the key difficulty across both types of Smart People initiatives and cases, closely followed by awareness, motivation and complexity

Anticipated Guilt for not Helping and Anticipated Warm Glow for Helping are Differently Impacted by Personal Responsibility to Help

One important motivation for people behaving prosocially is that they want to avoid negative and obtain positive emotions. In the prosocial behavior literature however, the motivations to avoid negative emotions (e.g. guilt) and to approach positive emotions (e.g. warm glow) are rarely separated, and sometimes even aggregated into a single mood-management construct. The aim of this study was to investigate whether anticipated guilt if not helping and anticipated warm glow if helping are influenced similarly or differently when varying situational factors related to personal responsibility to help. Helping scenarios were created and pilot tests established that each helping scenario could be formulated both in a high-responsibility version and in a low-responsibility version. In Study 1 participants read high-responsibility and low-responsibility helping scenarios, and rated either their anticipated guilt if not helping or their anticipated warm glow if helping (i.e. separate evaluation). Study 2 was similar but here participants rated both their anticipated guilt if not helping and their anticipated warm glow if helping (i.e. joint evaluation). Anticipated guilt was clearly higher in the high-responsibility versions, but anticipated warm glow was unaffected (in Studies 1a and 1b), or even higher in the low-responsibility versions (Study 2). In Studies 3 (where anticipated guilt and warm glow were evaluated separately) and 4 (where they were evaluated jointly), personal responsibility to help was manipulated within-subjects. Anticipated guilt was again constantly higher in the high-responsibility versions but for many types of responsibility-manipulations, anticipated warm glow was higher in the low-responsibility versions. The results suggest that we anticipate guilt if not fulfilling our responsibility but that we anticipate warm glow primarily when doing over and beyond our responsibility. We argue that future studies investigating motivations for helping should measure both anticipated negative consequences for oneself if not helping, and anticipated positive consequences for oneself if helping