Many smart city promotions assume that the municipalities will take a proactive approach, on the downside, the first technology for urban development. To date, these initiatives are looking for some forward-looking city officials (or very pocketed private investors) to write large purchase orders for many hardware and software.
But most of the city does not work like a company. They tend to be siloed (so the department does not work on settlement together, let alone work together with a sponsor of the pilot project) and tie the cash (so there is no budget for the experiment). This constraint means that city leaders often can not lead in fully exploring, designing, and monitoring new technology and business models. The result: Innovative and aggressive vendors have the space to step into the violation and implement their own concepts and ideas, with decisions that often favor the elite (or down to ineffectiveness) on good public policy.
Here is the initiative to follow the order of situation, settlement, and sovereignty of analysis.
First, cities are not the same and it is not possible to approach either decision-making or smart city technology (or investing) without this consideration. Mayors, Investors, and Companies should examine at least four combinations of wealth, growth, and density.
Secondly, technological projects are quite different not only in their programming aspirations, but also in terms of capital requirements, which pay for what, and who benefits. “Wi-Fi everywhere” is much cheaper to install from the latest storm water management and flood-resistant programs. This is a solution-how and why. Consideration of “how expensive” and “why this is good for citizens” is very different and can not be embedded in some of the dreams of smart city technology industry.
Third, and least remembered, is the question of sovereignty. In any given location, who decides what to do? Which decision will be made by private sector innovators, by visionaries in entrepreneurship, applications, by public praise, or “others”?
Some technologies seem to sink into their shared economic ideas like Uber, Grab and alike. No government is planning this, but it’s hard to argue that ridesharing is not part of the transport infrastructure in many cities. Other technologies require investment and central control-for example, the price of traffic congestion and coordination. Such an integrated solution is difficult for upstart firms to achieve their own.
Feel free to contact E-SPIN for assist you adapt the trend for smart city technology, from infrastructure and system monitoring, security testing to protection.