The policy pointers presented in this report are the result of a three-year (2015-18) research project led by Federico Caprotti at the University of Exeter. The project, Smart Eco-Cities for a Green Economy: A Comparative Analysis of Europe and China, was delivered by a research consortium comprising scholars and researchers in the UK, China, the Netherlands, France, and Germany. The aim of the project was to investigate the way in which smart city and eco-city strategies are used to enable a transition towards digital and green economies. While previous work has considered smart cities and eco-cities as separate urban development models, the project considers them together for the first time. We use the term ‘the smart eco-city’ to focus on how green targets are now included in smart city development policies and strategies. This report presents a summary of policy pointers, or ‘lessons’, learned through our work on the cities we studied in the UK, China, the Netherlands, France and Germany. Specifically, we studied, in depth, the cities of Manchester, Amsterdam, Hamburg, Bordeaux, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Ningbo and Wuhan. This work included interviews with policymakers, urban municipal authorities, tech firm executives, and grassroots and community representatives and stakeholders. Our work also included intensive and in-depth qualitative analysis of documentary sources including policy and corporate reports and other materials.The research undertaken to produce this report was
supported by funding from: the Economic and Social
Research Council (ESRC) through research grant ES/
L015978/1; the National Natural Science Foundation of
China, project number 71461137005; the Netherlands
Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) through
research grant 467-14-153 and the Dutch Academy of
Sciences (KNAW) through research grant 530-6CD108;
the French National Research Agency (ANR) through
research grant ANR-14-02; and the German Research
Foundation DFG through research grant SP 1545/1-1

Bailey, I

Caprotti, F

Cheshmehzangi, A

Cowley, R

Jolivet, E

Joss, S

Raven, R

Sengers, F

Späth, P

Tan-Mullins, M

Xie, L

English

Open Research Exeter

SMART ECO-CITY DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE AND CHINA:OPPORTUNITIES,  DRIVERS AND   CHALLENGESISBN: 978-0-9955574-6-8 SMART ECO-CITY DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE AND CHINA: OPPORTUNITIES, DRIVERS AND CHALLENGESISBN: 978-0-9955574-7-5 SMART ECO-CITY DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE AND CHINA: OPPORTUNITIES, DRIVERS AND CHALLENGES (CHINESE VERSION)The report should be referenced as follows:Caprotti, F., Cowley, R., Bailey, I., Joss, S., Sengers, F., Raven, R., Spaeth, P., Jolivet, E., Tan-Mullins, M., Cheshmehzangi, A. and Xie, L. (2017). Smart Eco-City Development in Europe and China: Policy Directions. Exeter: University of Exeter (SMART-ECO Project). Copyright © University of ExeterThis publication may be reproduced and disseminated in whole or in part for educational and non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made.No use of this report may be made for resale or any commercial purpose whatsoever without prior written permission from the University of Exeter.A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library.CREDITSThe report was translated into Chinese by Absolute Translations Ltd, London.  Design and layout by Stormpress Ltd, Exeter.The research undertaken to produce this report was supported by funding from: the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) through research grant ES/L015978/1; the National Natural Science Foundation of China, project number 71461137005; the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) through research grant 467-14-153 and the Dutch Academy of Sciences (KNAW) through research grant 530-6CD108; the French National Research Agency (ANR) through research grant ANR-14-02; and the German Research Foundation DFG through research grant SP 1545/1-1.SMART ECO-CITY DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE AND CHINAINTRODUCTIONA WORLD OF SMART CITIES, OR ECO-CITIES?The policy pointers presented in this report are the result of a three-year (2015-18) research project led by Federico Caprotti at the University of Exeter. The project, Smart Eco-Cities for a Green Economy: A Comparative Analysis of Europe and China, was delivered by a research consortium comprising scholars and researchers in the UK, China, the Netherlands, France, and Germany. The aim of the project was to investigate the way in which smart city and eco-city strategies are used to enable a transition towards digital and green economies. While previous work has considered smart cities and eco-cities as separate urban development models, the project considers them together for the first time. We use the term ‘the smart eco-city’ to focus on how green targets are now included in smart city development policies and strategies.This report presents a summary of policy pointers, or ‘lessons’, learned through our work on the cities we studied in the UK, China, the Netherlands, France and Germany. Specifically, we studied, in depth, the cities of Manchester, Amsterdam, Hamburg, Bordeaux, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Ningbo and Wuhan. This work included interviews with policymakers, urban municipal authorities, tech firm executives, and grassroots and community representatives and stakeholders. Our work also included intensive and in-depth qualitative analysis of documentary sources including policy and corporate reports and other materials.02FEDERICO CAPROTTIROBERT COWLEYIAN BAILEYSIMON JOSSFRANS SENGERSROB RAVENPHILIPP SPÄTHERIC JOLIVETMAY TAN-MULLINSALI CHESHMEHZANGILINJUN XIESEPTEMBER 2017SMART ECO-CITY DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE AND CHINACHINA TELECOM’S SMART CITY DEMONSTRATION CENTRE IN NINGBO04POLICY DIRECTIONS BUILDING THE SMART ECO-CITYPOINT 2: SMART CITY PROJECTS  ARE ONLY THE TIP OF  THE ICEBERGGovernments lack a comprehensive overview of ongoing smart city related activities business and citizens. Some local policymakers view their governmental programmes as the core of smart city development (we found this in Ningbo, and to a lesser extent in Hamburg). Others, however, realize that off-the-radar activities by businesses and citizens without (or with limited) city or government support are at the heart of smart city development. The cases of Bordeaux and Amsterdam show that city governments find it difficult to steer this type of development effectively.POINT 3: BUILDING A SMART ECO-CITY MEANS LEARNINGLearning – by policymakers, urban designers, technology corporations, and community groups – is crucial to the development of future cities. Some of the most active smart eco-cities researched in this project are those that have looked beyond their specific city and sought to learn from other cities, experiences, and ideas. This learning can take place in many ways, including (but not limited to) through:POINT 1: BUILDING A SMART CITY MEANS EXPERIMENTINGMany city governments have set up smart city policy programmes, but are also involved with other stakeholders in setting up experiments and pilot projects for testing ICT solution use in real-life scenarios. More so than policy programmes, this hands-on experimentation – and the multi-stakeholder governance that emerges is this context – is the main component of smart city development. THE MAIN HALL IN  BORDEAUX’S  DARWIN PROJECTA RE-PURPOSING OF A FORMER MILITARY SITE INTO A TECH START-UP INCUBATOR, COMMUNITY SPORTS & ECO FACILITIES SITEBPOINT 3: BUILDING A SMART ECO-CITY MEANS LEARNINGA lot of smart eco-city strategies and policies are quite diffuse and non-specific in terms of the actual location of smart city innovations and projects. Some cities, such as Amsterdam, have a strong focus on building networks and dynamic relationships between corporations and policymakers. However, the project has revealed that delimitating a specific space and place for developing experimental approaches to the city can be a great asset in developing successful projects. In China, the Sino-Singapore Tianjin Eco-City is an example of a city-scale eco-city project, while in the UK, Manchester’s smart city ambitions are expressed in the Manchester Corridor project. This is delimitated by the Oxford Road Corridor, and functions as an experimental space within which future-focused strategies can be trialed.POINT 4: URBAN MANAGEMENT OR INNOVATION ECO-SYSTEM?Two key logics currently exist in smart eco-urban development: urban management. In Ningbo, for example, the smart city is based on the provision of ICT tools for effective management. This is a more conventional management model with more central guidance. Experts at government agencies are seen as capable of steering smart city experimentation and of exercising direct effective control over the implementation of new technologies. These city managers select best practices, which are then to be rolled out throughout the city.the innovation eco-system. The eco-system metaphor refers to a broad and loose yet symbiotic coalition of actors initiating a large chaotic set of small experiments. It is not clear in advance which experiments will be successful, but it is clear that this approach promotes entrepreneurial development, and provides the potential for scaling up innovative solutions throughout the city and beyond. Amsterdam has proved to be a key city in the promotion of a smart city innovation eco-system.In the project, we have identified a large amount of different experiments in each of cities we studied. For example, in Amsterdam we found many small-scale experiments on a variety of topics, and in Ningbo we found relatively fewer but larger scale experiments on a more focused range of topics. However, a focus solely on experimentation brings with it its own issues – see the final section below, titled What are the challenges for smart eco-city development in China and Europe?A BFormal mechanisms:  such as city networks (e.g. the C40 Cities for Climate Change network), conferences, the hiring of consultants. This carries it with it great opportunities, as well as risks, such as that around the circulation of ‘one size fits all’ approaches to the development of smart eco-cities.Informal processes: these include ad-hoc and non-formalised visits by urban policymakers to other cities in the same country or internationally, and the establishment of informal networks of policymakers, corporate executives and community representatives in the same city.APOINT 1 :  CITIES ARE KEY PLAYERSOur work shows that cities themselves play a key role in rolling out smart city and eco-city policies at the local level. This is carried out through processes of:DRIVERS WHO DRIVES THE SMART ECO-CITY?06ABCompetition. Cities compete for award of smart city or eco-city projects and state and corporate funding. In so doing, city governments become important players in the development of urban futures. Examples of cities competing for funding include: Translation.Once funds are attracted and projects are developed, today’s emerging smart eco-cities are very active in shaping strategies so as to fit their local contexts. In Bordeaux, for example, the city’s urban development strategy focuses on digital technology firms and talent, while at the same time investing in high-speed rail infrastructure through inaugurating a new fast rail link to Paris: the station for this link is at the heart of Bordeaux’s new, Euratlantique eco and smart quarter. In China: cities are key players in competing in national urban development competitions and challenges, and are responsible for delivering on goals and aims set by the central government. At the same time, cities themselves have power and latitude to translate national aims into a local context, which makes Chinese cities dynamic stakeholders in national urban development.In France: cities like Bordeaux and Lyon, in France, have won central state funding through the development of smart city policies and projects that are not simply focused on the digital economy but on a raft of eco-city priorities, such as renewing declined industrial areas, or rejuvenating polluted or less attractive districts, rather than developing greenfield sites.In Germany: Berlin, Munich, and partly also Hamburg, are competing to host the headquarters and development departments of big international technology and service providers (IBM, Siemens, CISCO, Microsoft etc.). This is an example of competition not simply for economic development, but competition focused on attracting the technology corporations that will be key to developing the technical backbone to future urban systems.In the UK: the 2013 Future Cities Demonstrator competition, funded by the UK Government. Although only a few cities received government funding through this scheme, the competition stimulated city authorities to develop smart city strategies nationwide. POINT 2 :  NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS MATTERThe national framing of urban policy priorities remains a very important driver and barrier to shaping urban development priorities. This may seem more obviously to be the case in China, where multiple national policies and competitions mean that much local activity is directly relatable to strong incentives from Beijing, even if local authorities have some room for manoeuvre. But in Europe too, national competitions and strategies have been key to shaping urban development directions. The UK’s Future Cities competition, mentioned above, set the scene for the development of specific smart city strategies at the level of individual cities: the national government had a role in setting the boundaries and opportunities for future smart urban development. POINT 3 :  TECHNOLOGY IS AN ENABLER, NOT AN OBJECTIVEThe most vibrant smart eco-cities are the ones that successfully use technology, but don’t focus exclusively on technological development as a single aim of policy. An example of this is the city of Bordeaux, where the city’s urban development strategy included discussions with citizens and with neighbouring suburbs to establish a negotiated, joint agreement on urban development directions for the next 20-30 years.BRISTOL’S DATA DOMEA BIG DATA VISUALISATION CENTRE HOUSED IN THE CITY’S PLANETARIUMSMART ECO-CITY DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE AND CHINACHALLENGESCHALLENGE 1 :  SCALE AND INTEGRATIONIn Europe, it is clear from on-the-ground research that there are many smart city and eco-city initiatives and projects in existence. However, the majority of European initiatives remain relatively small-scale. It is more difficult to detect signs of major investment or other actions directed at the larger-scale roll-out of technologies.SMART ECO-CITY DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE AND CHINA08WHAT ARE THE CHALLENGES FOR SMART ECO-CITY DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE AND CHINA?BRISTOL’S ENERGY TREEA SOLAR-POWERED SMART CITIES CHARGING POINT AND WORK OF ARTCHALLENGE 8 :  RISK MANAGEMENTChanging cities’ infrastructures and governance and management systems carries with it a significant element of risk. The risks involve may be technical, resource-based, political, or security-based (as in the case of digital security). Developing a risk management and mitigation approach to the risks of developing cities’ digital and ecological capabilities is key. CHALLENGE 7 :  THE NEED FOR GREATER VISIBILITYRealising the potential social, economic, and environmental benefits of smart city technology in future may depend fundamentally on public support and involvement. Currently, however, a straightforward lack of awareness is a significant barrier. Looking forwards, it seems unlikely that most citizens will engage with policies or glossy promotional materials; dedicated engagement activities, including supposedly ‘grass roots’-driven ones, may only touch certain groups; there is no guarantee that ‘city dashboards’ will be consulted by more than a few; infrastructural upgrades may remain hidden from view. Encouraging more collective forms of deliberation and broader involvement may require particular tactics to give smart technology a higher profile in broader everyday civic life. One useful approach may be to prioritise making the smart city more visible in key public spaces, and in particular to mobilise its more ‘playful’ aspects. A useful example of this was Bristol’s ‘playable city’ projects, which enabled citizens to playfully engage with smart technologies and data on Bristol’s streets.CHALLENGE 6 : PUBLIC ENGAGEMENTThere is little evidence of a coherent model of engagement with the public in developing smart eco-city projects in Europe and China. Many smart city projects, in particular, remain largely invisible to the public, and what information is made available is highly technical. While China is often criticised for a lack of public engagement in urban development, it is clear that European cities can do a lot more to develop public engagement and more participatory approaches to urban economic and technological development. At the same time, it must be recognised that the ambition of engaging the public more clearly may be hampered by the fact that many smart city activities are not coordinated and are very piecemeal. In the UK, for example, local promotional materials may lend apparent coherence to programmes of activities in individual UK cities. However, the projects which they describe are in fact often fragmented, short term, and reliant on short-term budgets. Bringing smart city projects more into municipalities’ core set of activities may help provide a channel for engaging more closely with citizens.CHALLENGE 5 :  FINANCE AND AMBITION Many smart eco-city projects are currently exclusively state-funded and state-designed. There are some examples of dynamic corporations that develop and roll out innovative technologies in the city with little direct state support: see, for example, Uber or, in China, the rapidly expanding bike-sharing services in several cities. However, these are the exceptions. There still seems to be a lack of confidence, vision and perhaps ambition in developing plans for the urban future. Many cities seem content with creating business incubators and innovation spaces (such as the Amsterdam ‘Makerversity’ and Waag Centre) while not committing significant amounts of financial or human capital to smart eco-city projects. There is a need, therefore, to link up finance with ambitions to transform the city. This will require innovative financing arrangements, as well as innovative ways of working out strategies for the urban future.CHALLENGE 4 :  THE IMPLEMENTATION GAP While national governments can set the scene and direction of national urban development priorities, a key challenge remains: how to make sure that local authorities invest in national strategies while also translating these strategies into the local context. This challenge is perhaps best seen in China, where local urban authorities often act in highly entrepreneurial ways in translating the strategies developed by Beijing. Striking a balance between national aims and local context is key.CHALLENGE 3 :  QUESTIONING CURRENT SMART CITY BUSINESS MODELSA lot of current smart eco-city development plans are based on economic development strategies that try to promote a ‘survival of the fittest’ model of economic development. These approaches, often found in the context of the promotion of high-tech start-up firms, accept and welcome high rates of business failure as the price to pay for the eventual emergence of a successful innovation or product. While this approach is very dynamic, it is only one type of model: city governments would do well to ask whether this model can be changed to suit their own needs and aims. CHALLENGE 2 :  DEFINING AIMSMany cities, especially in Europe, heavily rely on the promotion of innovation and ‘innovation ecosystems’, and on support for start-ups, as ways of claiming that they are smart cities. This, however, means that there is often little sense of a clear strategy, goal or ambition with regards to smart and eco aims in a specific city. While recognising that future development is necessarily uncertain and indeterminate, it is key to develop clear visions of where a city is headed.FURTHER INFORMATION : Please see the SMART-ECO project website at: www.smart-eco-cities.orgREFERENCES : The results of our work on smart eco-cities in Europe and China over the past few years are being published in books, reports and research articles. Below, please find some of the project publications that are most relevant to this policy report.REFERENCES : REPORTSSeveral reports on smart eco-cities in the UK, the Netherlands, France, Germany and China can be found on the SMART-ECO project website at: www.smart-eco-cities.orgREFERENCES : BOOKSCaprotti, F. (2015) Eco-Cities and the Transition to Low Carbon Economies. London, Palgrave.Joss, S. (2015) Sustainable Cities: Governing for Urban Innovation. London, Palgrave.REFERENCES : RESEARCH PAPERSCaprotti, F. & Cowley, R. (2016). Interrogating Urban Experiments. Urban Geography. Advance online version: DOI:10.1080/02723638.2016.1265870Caprotti, F., Cowley, R., Datta, A. Castán Broto, V., Gao, E., Georgeson, L., Herrick, C., Odendaal, N. & Joss, S. (2017). The New Urban Agenda: Key Opportunities and Challenges for Policy and Practice. Urban Research & Practice, 10(3): 367-378. Online version: DOI: 10.1080/17535069.2016.1275618Cowley, R., Joss, S. & Dayot, Y. (2017). The Smart City and its Publics: Insights from Across Six UK Cities. Urban Research & Practice. Advance online version. DOI: 10.1080/17535069.2017.1293150Joss, S., Cook, M. & Dayot, Y. (2017). Smart Cities: Towards a New Citizenship Regime? A Discourse Analysis of the British Smart City Standard. Journal of Urban Technology. Advance online version. DOI: 10.1080/10630732.2017.1336027 THE SMART-ECO PROJECT: RESOURCESSMART ECO-CITY DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE AND CHINA10OUR PROJECT PARTNERS : OUR FUNDERS : www.smart-eco-cities.orgSmart Eco Cities@smartecocitiesproject@SmartEcoCities

Smart Eco-CityDevelopment in Europe and China: Opportunities, Drivers and Challenges

https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/10871/29876/1/Smart%20Eco%20Cities%2012pp%20A4%20Europe%20%26%20China%20Brochure.pdf

Smart Eco-CityDevelopment in Europe and China: Opportunities, Drivers and Challenges

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Open Research Exeter