The Smart City is a multi-dimensional concept, composed of many components and dimensions. Meanwhile, smart governance has been regarded as a vital cornerstone of the smart city and one of its key dimensions and starting point. In this research, the dimensions and components of smart governance in Tehran are discussed. The research method in this study is descriptive-analytical. Research data collection is based on documentary and survey method. The data collection tool in this study consists of a researcher-made questionnaire with closed-ended questions (Likert's five-choice range). The sampling method is cluster random sampling. The statistical population of this study is all residents of Tehran based on population and housing census of 2016 which includes 8693706 population. The number of samples was estimated to be 384 according to Cochran formula. The number of samples based on four main clusters of the population between class was divided into five districts. To analyze the data from objective statistics as well as to analyze the citizens' views of the one-sample t-test to assess the status of the indicators, the Friedman test for ranking the indicators in different neighbourhoods, and then on the total constraints studied in Tehran and from Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare indices in different neighbourhoods. The results of this research on smart governance indicators (decision making, partnership, collaboration, internal and external coordination, innovation capacity, technology, e-government and public services) in Tehran show that two basic dimensions of governance (partnership)., Partnerships, and decision making systems) are below average, which indicates the weak role and status of citizens in the decision-making system. The situation of other smart governance indicators in Tehran is also moderate.
| Published in | International Journal of European Studies (Volume 5, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ijes.20210501.12 |
| Page(s) | 7-22 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Smart City, Smart Governance, Governance Dimensions, Tehran City
| [1] | Alawadhi, A. Aldama-Nalda, H. Chourabi, J. R. Gil-Garcia, S. Leung, S. Mellouli, T. Nam, T. A. Pardo, H. J. Scholl, S. (2012). Building Understanding of Smart City Initiatives,” Lecture Notes in Computer Science 7443. 40–53. |
| [2] | Albino, V. Beradi, U. Dangelico, R. M. (2015). Smart Cities: Definitions, Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology. 22 (1): 3-21. |
| [3] | Anastasia, S (2012). The concept of smart cities: Towards community development? Networks and Communication Studies, NETCOM, vol 26: 375-388. |
| [4] | Barrionuevo, J. M., Berrone, P., & Ricart, J. E. (2012). Smart cities, sustainable progress. IESE Insight, 14 (14), 50-57. |
| [5] | Bătăgan, L. (2011). Smart Cities and Sustainability Models. InformaticaEconomică, 15 (3), 80-87. |
| [6] | Batty, M., Axhausen, K. W., Giannotti, F., Pozdnoukhov, A., Bazzani, A., Wachowicz, M.,... & Portugali, Y. (2012). Smart cities of the future. The European Physical Journal Special Topics, 214 (1), 481-518. |
| [7] | Bolívar, M. P. R., & Meijer, A. J. (2016). Smart Governance: Using a Literature Review and Empirical Analysis to Build a Research Model. Social Science Computer Review, 34 (6), 673-692. |
| [8] | Capra, C. F. (2014). The Smart City and its Citizens: Governance and Citizen Participation in Amsterdam Smart City. Master thesis. Lund university. |
| [9] | Caraglhiu, A. (2009). Smart Cities in Europe. 3rd Central European Conference in Regional Science – CERS. A13, L90, O18, R12. |
| [10] | Caragliu, A., Del Bo, C. and Nijkamp, P. (2009). Smart Cities in Europe. Proceedings to the 3rd. |
| [11] | Castelnovo, W., Misuraca, G., Savoldelli, A. (2015). Smart Cities Governance: The Need for a Holistic Approach to Assessing Urban Participatory Policy Making. Social Science Computer Review: 1-16. |
| [12] | Chourabi, H. Taewoo, N. Shawn, W. J. Ramon, G. G. Sehl Mellouli, K. N. Theresa, A. P. & Hans J. S. (2012). Understanding smart Cities: An integrative framework. 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences: 2289-2297. |
| [13] | Coe, A., Paquet, G., & Roy, J. (2001). E-governance and smart communities: a social learning challenge. Social science computer review, 19 (1), 80-93. |
| [14] | Cohen, B. (2012). The top 10 smart cities on the planet, CoExist, 17 January. Available online at: http://www.fastcoexist.com/1679127/the-top- 10-smart-cities-on-the-planet ]Accessed 17 April 2013]. |
| [15] | Colldahi, C. Frey, S. &Kelemen, J. E. (2013). Smart Cities: Strategic Sustainable Development for an Urban World. (Master thesis). Karlskronauniversity. Sweden. |
| [16] | Copenhagen Cleantech Cluster. (2012). Danish Smart Cities: Sustainable Living in an Urban World. Copenhagen Cleantech Cluster: 2-41. |
| [17] | Damer, P. R and Benevolo, C (2015). Governing Smart Cities: An Empirical Analysis. Social Science Computer Review 1-15. |
| [18] | David, N., Justice, J., & McNutt, J (2015). Smart Cities Are Transparent Cities: The Role of Fiscal Transparency in Smart City Governance. Public Administration and Information Technology, Library of Congress Control Number: 2015944231: 69-86. |
| [19] | Dirks, S. Constantin, G., & Mary Keeling. (2010). Smarter cities for smarter growth. IBM GlobalBusinessservicesExecutiveReport. http://public.dhe.ibm.com/common/ssi/ecm/en/gbe03348usen/GBE03348USEN.PDF (accessed 17 April 2013). |
| [20] | Ferraro, S. (2013). Smart Cities, Analysis of a Strategic Plan. (Master thesis). |
| [21] | Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66 (s1), 66–75. |
| [22] | Giffinger, R. and Gudrun, H. (2010). Smart cities ranking: An effective instrument for the positioning of cities?. ACE: Architecture, City and Environment 4, 12, 7-25. |
| [23] | Giffinger, R., Fertner, C., Kramar, H., Meijers, E., & Pichler-Milanovic´, N. (2007). Smart cities: Ranking of European medium-sized cities. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from http://www.smart-cities.eu/download/smart_cities_final_report.pdf. |
| [24] | Giffinger, R., Kramar, H., & Haindl, G. (2008). The Role of Rankings in Growing City Competition. In Proceedings of the 11th European Urban Research Association (EURA) Conference. Milan, Italy, October 9-11, Available from http://public.Tuwien.ac.At/files/ pubdat_167218.Pdf. |
| [25] | Gil-Garcia R (2012) Enacting Electronic Government Success: An Integrative Study of Government-wide Websites, Organizational Capabilities, and Institutions. New York: Springer. |
| [26] | Gil-Garcia, J. Ramon, Theresa A. Pardo, and Taewoo Nam. "What makes a city smart? Identifying core components and proposing an integrative and comprehensive conceptualization." Information Polity 20.1 (2015): 61-87 |
| [27] | Gonçalves, S. (2014). The effects of participatory budgeting on municipal expenditures and infant mortality in Brazil. World Development, 53 (0), 94–110. |
| [28] | Hepburn, p (2015). Smart Cities: Just how clever does local government need to be? Lessons from a case study on co-creating digital applications for elderly people. the RC21 International Conference on “The Ideal City: between myth and reality. Representations, policies, contradictions and challenges for tomorrow's urban life” Urbino (Italy) 27-29 August 2015. |
| [29] | Kitthananan, A. (2006). Conceptualizing governance. A review. Journal of Societal. |
| [30] | Kourtit K, Nijkamp P and Arribas D (2012) Smart cities in perspective – a comparative European study by means of self-organizing maps. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 25 (2): 229–246. |
| [31] | Lindskog, H. (2004). Smart communities initiatives. In Proceedings of the 3rd ISOne World Conference (Las Vegas, |
| [32] | McKinsey Global Institute. 2011. Urban world: Mapping the economic power of cities. |
| [33] | Meijer (2013) Governing the Smart City: Scaling-Up the Search for Socio-Techno Synergy. Permanent Study group on E-Government, Utrecht University. |
| [34] | Meijer, A. J., & Rodríguez Bolívar, M. P. (2013). Governing the Smart City: Scaling-Up the Search for Socio-Techno Synergy. Paper presented at EGPA Conference 2013, Edinburgh, Scotland. |
| [35] | Mosannenzadeh, F. Vettoratob. D. (2014). Defining smart city: Aconcepttual frame work based on key word analaysis. Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment. ISSN 1970-9889, e- ISSN 1970-9870. |
| [36] | Nam, T. &Pardo, T. A. (2011). Conceptualizing Smart City with Dimensions of Technology, People, and Institutions, in Proceedings of the 12th Annual Digital Government Research Conference, College Park, Maryland, June 12-15. |
| [37] | Nam, T. (2012). Modeling municipal service integration: A comparative case study of New York and Philadelphia 311 systems. State University of New York at Albany. |
| [38] | Nam, T., Pardo, T. A. (2011). Smart City as Urban Innovation: Focusing on Management, Policy, and Context. ICEGOV Tallin, Estonia. |
| [39] | Nam, Taewoo, and Theresa A. Pardo. 2011. Conceptualizing Smart City with Dimensions of Need for a Holistic Approach to Assessing Urban Participatory Policy Making. Social Science Computer Review 1-16. |
| [40] | Odendaal, N. (2003). Information and communication technology and local governance: Understanding the difference between cities in developed and emerging economies. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 27 (6), 585-607. |
| [41] | Pinnegar, S., Marceau, J., and Randolph, B. (2008). Innovation for a carbon-constrained city: Challenges for the built environment industry. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice 10, 2-3, 303-315. |
| [42] | Schaffers, H. Komninos, N. Pallot, M. Trousse, B. Nilsson, M. Oliveira, A (2011). Smart Cities and the Future Internet: Towards Cooperation Frameworks for Open Innovation. Future Internet Assembly, LNCS 6656, pp. 431–446. |
| [43] | Schuurman D, Baccarne B, De Marez L and Mechant P (2012) Smart ideas for smart cities: Investigating crowdsourcing for generating and selecting ideas for ICT innovation in a city context. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research 7 (3): 49–62. |
| [44] | Shapiro, J. M. (2006). Smart cities: quality of life, productivity, and the growth effects of human capital. The review of economics and statistics, 88 (2), 324-335. |
| [45] | Stratigea, A. (2012). The concept of ‘smart cities’. Towards community development? Networks and Communication Studies, Netcom, 26-3/4. |
| [46] | Tapscott D and Agnew D (1999) Governance in the digital economy: The importance of human development. Finance & Development 36 (4): 34–37. |
| [47] | Theodore, N., & Peck, J. (2012). Framing neoliberal urbanism: Translating ‘commonsense’urban policy across the OECD zone. European Urban and Regional Studies, 19 (1), 20-41. |
| [48] | Walravens, N. (2012). Mobile Business and the Smart City: Developing a Business Model. |
| [49] | Walravens, N. (2012). Mobile business and the smart city: Developing a business model framework to include public design parameters for mobile city services. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research, 7 (3), 121-135. |
| [50] | Willke, H. (2007). Smart governance: Governing the global knowledge society. New York, NY: Campus Verlag. |
| [51] | Winters, J. V. (2011). Why are Smart Cities Growing? Who Moves and Who Stays. Journal of Regional Science. 51 (2). 253–270. |
APA Style
Shahram Parsa, Ahmad Pourahmad, Mikael Parsa, Esmail Piri. (2021). Explaining the Dimensions and Components of Smart Governance in Tehran. International Journal of European Studies, 5(1), 7-22. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijes.20210501.12
ACS Style
Shahram Parsa; Ahmad Pourahmad; Mikael Parsa; Esmail Piri. Explaining the Dimensions and Components of Smart Governance in Tehran. Int. J. Eur. Stud. 2021, 5(1), 7-22. doi: 10.11648/j.ijes.20210501.12
AMA Style
Shahram Parsa, Ahmad Pourahmad, Mikael Parsa, Esmail Piri. Explaining the Dimensions and Components of Smart Governance in Tehran. Int J Eur Stud. 2021;5(1):7-22. doi: 10.11648/j.ijes.20210501.12
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ijes.20210501.12,
author = {Shahram Parsa and Ahmad Pourahmad and Mikael Parsa and Esmail Piri},
title = {Explaining the Dimensions and Components of Smart Governance in Tehran},
journal = {International Journal of European Studies},
volume = {5},
number = {1},
pages = {7-22},
doi = {10.11648/j.ijes.20210501.12},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijes.20210501.12},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijes.20210501.12},
abstract = {The Smart City is a multi-dimensional concept, composed of many components and dimensions. Meanwhile, smart governance has been regarded as a vital cornerstone of the smart city and one of its key dimensions and starting point. In this research, the dimensions and components of smart governance in Tehran are discussed. The research method in this study is descriptive-analytical. Research data collection is based on documentary and survey method. The data collection tool in this study consists of a researcher-made questionnaire with closed-ended questions (Likert's five-choice range). The sampling method is cluster random sampling. The statistical population of this study is all residents of Tehran based on population and housing census of 2016 which includes 8693706 population. The number of samples was estimated to be 384 according to Cochran formula. The number of samples based on four main clusters of the population between class was divided into five districts. To analyze the data from objective statistics as well as to analyze the citizens' views of the one-sample t-test to assess the status of the indicators, the Friedman test for ranking the indicators in different neighbourhoods, and then on the total constraints studied in Tehran and from Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare indices in different neighbourhoods. The results of this research on smart governance indicators (decision making, partnership, collaboration, internal and external coordination, innovation capacity, technology, e-government and public services) in Tehran show that two basic dimensions of governance (partnership)., Partnerships, and decision making systems) are below average, which indicates the weak role and status of citizens in the decision-making system. The situation of other smart governance indicators in Tehran is also moderate.},
year = {2021}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Explaining the Dimensions and Components of Smart Governance in Tehran AU - Shahram Parsa AU - Ahmad Pourahmad AU - Mikael Parsa AU - Esmail Piri Y1 - 2021/04/29 PY - 2021 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijes.20210501.12 DO - 10.11648/j.ijes.20210501.12 T2 - International Journal of European Studies JF - International Journal of European Studies JO - International Journal of European Studies SP - 7 EP - 22 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2578-9562 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijes.20210501.12 AB - The Smart City is a multi-dimensional concept, composed of many components and dimensions. Meanwhile, smart governance has been regarded as a vital cornerstone of the smart city and one of its key dimensions and starting point. In this research, the dimensions and components of smart governance in Tehran are discussed. The research method in this study is descriptive-analytical. Research data collection is based on documentary and survey method. The data collection tool in this study consists of a researcher-made questionnaire with closed-ended questions (Likert's five-choice range). The sampling method is cluster random sampling. The statistical population of this study is all residents of Tehran based on population and housing census of 2016 which includes 8693706 population. The number of samples was estimated to be 384 according to Cochran formula. The number of samples based on four main clusters of the population between class was divided into five districts. To analyze the data from objective statistics as well as to analyze the citizens' views of the one-sample t-test to assess the status of the indicators, the Friedman test for ranking the indicators in different neighbourhoods, and then on the total constraints studied in Tehran and from Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare indices in different neighbourhoods. The results of this research on smart governance indicators (decision making, partnership, collaboration, internal and external coordination, innovation capacity, technology, e-government and public services) in Tehran show that two basic dimensions of governance (partnership)., Partnerships, and decision making systems) are below average, which indicates the weak role and status of citizens in the decision-making system. The situation of other smart governance indicators in Tehran is also moderate. VL - 5 IS - 1 ER -
Information
Email: