Assessing Urban and Environmental Sustainability through Smart Urban Growth Case Study: Julfa City

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Department of Architecture Urban Planning, Young Researchers & Elite Club, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran

Abstract

Due to the advancement of technology and facilities at the city level in recent years, large populations of people around the world have been moving towards urban life. It is estimated that by 2030, more than 60% of the world's population will have been living in an urban geographical location, so protecting the environment for sustainability in order to rapidly increase the world's urban population requires extensive knowledge of smart city initiatives. However, nowadays, city stakeholders, decision makers, planners and developers face insufficient information on the dimensions of a smart city to achieve a sustainable urban environment. The purpose of this study is to measure the acceptance of smart city as a solution to achieve urban and environmental sustainability in Julfa. The research method is descriptive-analytical and is applied in terms of purpose. The sample size is 25 IT specialists, city managers and professors of Julfa city. Cronbach's alpha and hybrid alpha were used for reliability of the questions. Structural equations were used to analyze the data using SPSS and Smart PLS software. Findings show that intelligent life has the strongest effect with a path coefficient of 0.659 (0.433), followed by intelligent environment 0.439 (0.193), intelligent mobility 0.346 (119/11). 0), smart government 0.273 (0.740), smart people 0.240 (0.058), and finally smart economy with a path coefficient of 0.189 (0.036). The results of the analyzed survey data also confirm that the identified dimensions of the smart city can be implemented to facilitate the acceptance of the smart city in Jolfa and can lead to improved urban and environmental sustainability in Jolfa.

Extended Abstract
1-Introduction
Achieving a Smart City in Julfa, there is a need for decision makers and planners (city developers) to make strategic decisions about how to implement the dimensions of a smart city. Therefore, there is a need to identify the dimensions of the smart city to be adopted by policy makers in the implementation of the smart city of Julfa to achieve urban and environmental sustainability. Due to the lack of a comprehensive definition of a smart city, the initiatives that exist to achieve this goal need to be explained by academics and stakeholders. By achieving the desired approach, a connection can be established between policy makers and urban planners. One of the obstacles to reach the smart city in Iran, as well as the city of Julfa, is the lack of sufficient budget. Urban intelligence is not a priority for government agencies; therefore, the work of contractors and builders is not monitored. In the relevant institutions, training on intelligence is not provided and at present most stakeholders do not have the necessary knowledge. It should be noted that some people still prefer traditional systems; Therefore, there are many obstacles to urban intelligence in Iran. Given the increasing urban population and environmental requirements, the need for urban intelligence is undeniable. This study seeks to answer the question of how urban and environmental sustainability can be achieved in Julfa by adopting smart city methods?

2-Materials and Methods
The present study is a descriptive-analytical one. The sampling method is based on non-probability sampling and purposive sampling. 25 experts with experience in smart city and sustainable urban planning and urban management (urban and information and communication technology specialists) were used to collect the data. It should be noted that for the expert-centered example, according to the researchers' findings, there are no restrictions and no specific formula and optimal limit has been set for it. designed; Therefore, survey tool questions are developed based on previous research studies on the smart city. Questions were used to confirm the dimensions of the smart city using the Likert scale with five categories of answers (1-5) in which "1" is strongly opposed and "5" is strongly agreed. Accordingly, data were collected from 45 respondents to validate the dimensions of the smart city, which were collected in the research literature. SPSS and modeling of structural least squares equations (PLS - SEM) were used to analyze. The PLS-SEM method is a variance-based method that uses path analysis of dimensions or variables in a model using Smart PLS software to analyze the data. In this study, PLS-SEM was used, because it is considered as a comprehensive statistical technology that supports simultaneous modification and evaluation of the research model that examines the correlation between dimensions. In addition, PLS-SEM is suitable for models that contain multiple hypotheses.

3- Results and Discussion
 The present study has six hypotheses. The results show the coefficients of different paths of hypotheses prioritized as Hypothesis 6 with the strongest effect of 0.659 (0.433), Hypothesis 5 with 0.439 (0.193), Hypothesis 4 with 0.346 (0.119), Hypothesis 3 with 0.273 (0.740), Hypothesis 2 with 0.40 (0.058), and finally Hypothesis 1 with / 189 0 (0.036), respectively; Therefore, the relationship of the assumed path (Hypothesis 1 - Hypothesis 6) is statistically significant, since the value of R2 is greater than 0.1 and the p - value is less than 0.05. Findings from this study show that smart economy indicators positively determine smart city acceptance. This may be argued for by the fact that the smart economy is a city driven by entrepreneurship, innovation, labor market flexibility, and the degree to which financial competition improves. This is in line with the findings of a previous study in which researchers noted that smart economies bring about competitiveness that is not only attractive to investors, but also important for attracting citizens to maintain a key global position. Smart environment indicators positively predict smart city acceptance. This is because the smart environment includes the attractiveness of the city's natural conditions in relation to pollution reduction, sustainable use and natural resource management. In addition, it includes critical aspects of sustainability, such as increasing environmental protection, reducing the need for natural resources, and energy efficiency.

4- Conclusion
According to the main research question, “To what extent do the main dimensions of the smart city (economy, citizen, environment, life, mobility, government and people) positively affect the adoption of the smart city?”, the results show that smart life has a positive effect on smart city acceptance. This is in line with the findings of the theoretical foundations of the research confirming that smart life is done to improve the quality of the life of citizens by transforming residential areas, offices, transportation infrastructure and energy into smart environments. In addition, the results of the present study show that smart life increases citizens' understanding of how people use technology to create a sustainable environment. Apparently, smart life requires the integration of all elements that contribute to the happy and comfortable life of citizens by providing smart facilities and services activated by the latest technology.

Keywords

References

Alderete, M.V. (2021), Determinants of Smart City Commitment among Citizens from a Middle City in Argentina. Smart Cities, 4, 1113–1129. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities4030059.
Aletà, N. B., Alonso, C. M., & Ruiz, R. M. A. (2017). Smart Mobility and Smart Environment in the Spanish cities. Transportation Research Procedia, 24, 163-170. doi:10.1016/j.trpro. 2017.05.084.
Althunibat, A., Binsawad, M., Almaiah, M.A., Almomani, O.,Alsaaidah, A., Al-Rahmi,W. Seliaman, M.E. (2021), Sustainable Applications of Smart-Government Services: A Model to Understand Smart-Government Adoption. Sustainability, 13, 3028. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su13063028.
Anthopoulos, L., Janssen, M., & Weerakkody, V. (2019). A Unified Smart City Model (USCM) for smart city conceptualization and benchmarking. In Smart Cities and Smart Spaces: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 247-264). IGI Global.
Appio, F.P., Lima, M., & Paroutis, S. (2019). Understanding Smart Cities: Innovation ecosystems, technological advancements, and societal challenges. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang, 142, 1-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.12.018.
Batchelor, D., & Schnabel, M. A. (2020). Interdisciplinary Relationships, Influence, and Aspirations for Smart Heritage in Local Government. Heritage, 3 (4), 1402-1415. doi:10.3390/ heritage3040078.
Bhosale, V., Raverkar, D., & Lingayat, G. (2021), Need of smart city. Contemp. Res. India, 234-239. Available online: https: //www.researchgate.net/publication/352477932_Need_of_Smart_ City (accessed on 1 July 2021).
Bulkeley, H., & Stripple, J. (2020). Climate Smart City: New Cultural Political Economies in the Making in Malmö, Sweden. New Political Economy, 39, 1-14. doi:10.1080/13563467. 2020.1810219.
Burns, R., Fast, V., Levenda, A., & Miller, B. (2021). Smart cities: Between worlding and provincialising. Urban Studies, 58 (3), 461-470. doi:10.1177/0042098020975982.
Caird, S. P., & Hallett, S. H. (2018). Towards evaluation design for smart city development. Journal of Urban Design, 1-22. doi:10.1080/13574809.2018.1469402.
Cardullo, P., Kitchin, R. (2019). Being a citizen in the smart city. Geojournal., 81 (1), 1-13.
 Carvallo, S., Lynch, J., & Saul, P. (2014). The digital divide in citizen-initiated governmentcontacts. J. Urban Technol. 21 (4), 24-35.
Chang I.C, Jou S.C., & Chung M.K. (2021). Provincialising smart urbanism in Taipei: The smart city as a strategy for urban regime transition. Urban Studies, 58 (3): 559-580. https://doi.org/ 10.1177%2F0042098020947908.
Csukás, M. S., & Szabó, R. Z. (2021). The many faces of the smart city: Differing value propositions in the activity portfolios of nine cities. Cities, 112, 1-12, 103116. doi:10.1016/j.cities. 2021.103116.
Dooley, K. (2021), Direct Passive Participation: Aiming for Accuracy and Citizen Safety in the Era of Big Data and the Smart City. Smart Cities, 4 (1), 336-348. https://doi.org/10.3390/ smartcities4010020.
Fang, Z., Shaw, S. L., Yang, B., Santi, P., & Tu, W. (2021). Integrated environmental and human observations for smart cities. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 48 (6), 13751379. doi:10.1177/23998083211023296.
Fialová, J., Bamwesigye, D., Łukaszkiewicz, J., & Fortuna-Antoszkiewicz, B. (2021). Smart Cities Landscape and Urban Planning for Sustainability in Brno City. Land, 10, 1-17, https://doi.org/10.3390/land10080870.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservables variables and measurement error. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 11 (1), 137-153.
Georgiadis, A., Christodoulou, P., Zinonos, Z. (2021). Citizens’ Perception of Smart Cities: A Case Study. Appl. Sci, 11 (6), 1-20, 2517. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11062517.
Glaeser, E., Kourtit, K., & Nijkamp, P. (2021). New urban challenges: Shared spaces in smart places-Overview and positioning. Land Use Policy, 98, 1-10 105672. doi:10.1016/ j.landusepol.2021.105672.
Grandhi, L.S., Grandhi, S., & Wibowo, S. (2021). A security-UTAUT framework for evaluating key security determinants in smart city adoption by the Australian city councils. In Proceedings of the 21st ACIS International Winter Conference on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking and Parallel/Distributed Computing, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, 28-30 January; 17-22.
Grossi, G., Meijer, A., & Sargiacomo, M. (2020). A public management perspective on smart cities: “Urban auditing” for management, governance and accountability. Public Management Review, 22 (5), 633-647. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1733056.
Haarstad, H., & Wathne. M. W. (2019). Are Smart City Projects Catalyzing Urban Energy Sustainability?”. Energy Policy, 129, 918-925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.03.001.
Ivaldi, E., Penco, L., Isola, G., & Musso, E. (2020). Smart Sustainable Cities and the Urban Knowledge-Based Economy: A NUTS3 Level Analysis. Social Indicators Research, 150 (1), 45-72. doi:10.1007/s11205-020-02292-0.
Ivus M., & Taillon, P. (2021). Smart Mobility in the Smart City: ICTC Smart Cities Roundtable on Smart Mobility in Canada”, Information and Communications Technology Council. (ICTC), 1-19. www.ictc-ctic.ca.
j.cities.2018.11.014.
Jabarzadeh, Y, Shukri, S., Karami, A. (2020). Identification and analysis of institutional barriers of smart city (Case study: Tabriz city). Economics and Urban Management, 8 (31): 91-108 (In Persian)
Jiang, H. (2020). Smart urban governance in the “smart” era: Why is it urgently needed?, Cities, 69, 1-6.103004. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2020.103004,
Jiang, H., Geertman, S., & Witte, P. (2020a). A sociotechnical framework for smart urban governance: Urban technological innovation and urban governance in the realm of smart cities. International., Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), 9 (1), 1-19. https://doi.org/ 10.4018/IJEP R.2020010101.
Jnr, B. A., Majid, M. A., & Romli, A. (2019). Green information technology adoption towards a sustainability policy agenda for government-based institutions. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 10 (2), 274-300.
Junior, B. A., Majid, M. A., & Romli, A. (2018). Green information technology for sustainability elicitation in government-based organisations: an exploratory case study. International Journal of Sustainable Society, 10 (1), 20-41.
Kavusi, E, & Mohammadi, J. (2021), Intelligent mobility and social stability: Evaluation of mutual relations (Case study: Shiraz). Applied research in geographical sciences, 21 (61): 279-294 (In Persian)
Khelladi, I., Castellano, S., & Kalisz, D. (2020). The smartization of metropolitan cities: the case of Paris. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. 85, 1-25, doi:10.1007/ s11365-020-00691-w
Kunzmann, K. R. (2021). Smart City. Dis P-The Planning Review, 56 (4), 148–148. doi:10.1080/ 02513625.2020.1906070.
Kunzmann, K.R. (2020), Smart Cities After Covid-19: Ten Narratives. Plan. Rev, 56 (2), 20-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2020.1794120.
Lam, P.T. I., & Ma, R. (2019). Potential pitfalls in the development of smart cities and mitigationmeasures: An exploratory study. Cities, 91, 146-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/
León, L. F. A., & Rosen, J. (2020). Technology as ideology in urban governance. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 110 (2), 497-506. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452. 2019.1660139.
Li, C., Dai, Z., Liu, X., Sun, W. (2020), Evaluation system: Evaluation of smart city shareable framework and its applications in china. Sustainability, 12, 1-16. 2957. doi:10.3390/ su12072957.
Li, Y., Shang, H. (2020). Service quality, perceived value, and citizens’ continuous use intention regarding e-government: Empirical evidence from China. Inf. Manag. 57, 103197.
Liu, L., & Zhang., Y. (2021). Smart environment design planning for smart city based on deep learning. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 47, 1-12. 101425. doi:10.1016/ j.seta.2021.101425.
Lockwood, F. (2020). Bristol’s smart city agenda: Vision, strategy, challenges and implementation. IET Smart Cities, 2, 208-214. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-smc.2020.0063.
Lytras, M.D., Serban, A.C. (2020). E-Government Insights to Smart Cities Research: European Union (EU) Study and the Role of Regulations. IEEE Access, 8, 65313-65326.
Ma, C. (2021). Smart city and cyber-security; technologies used, leading challenges and future recommendations. Energy Reports. 241, 1-14. doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2021.08.124.
Macke, J., Casagrande, R.M., Sarate, J.A.R., Silva, K. (2018). Smart city and quality of life: Citizens’ perception in a Brazilian case study. J. Clean. Prod. 182, 717-726. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.078.
McGuirk, P., Dowling, R., & Chatterjee, P. (2021). Municipal Statecraft For The Smart City: Retooling The Smart Entrepreneurial City?, Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 0308518X2110279. doi:10.1177/0308518x211027905.
Meza, J., Vaca-Cardenas, L., Vaca-Cardenas, M. E., Teran, L., & Portmann, E. (2021). A Human-Machine Collaboration Model for Urban Planning in Smart Cities. Computer, 54 (6), 24-35. doi:10.1109/mc.2021.3050664.
Molaei, A., (2021). Explaining the principles and strategies of smart city with a sustainability approach in the field of crisis management (case study; Tehran metropolis). Knowledge of crisis prevention and management, 11 (3), 255-273 (In Persian).
Mora, L., Deakin, M., & Reid, A. (2019). Strategic principles for smart city development: A multiple case study analysis of European best practices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142, 70-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.035.
Mora, L., Deakin, M., Zhang, X., Batty, M., de Jong, M., Santi, P., & Appio, F. P. (2020). Assembling Sustainable Smart City Transitions: An Interdisciplinary Theoretical Perspective. Journal of Urban Technology, 28 (1-2), 1-27. doi:10.1080/10630732.2020.1834831.
Myat, S. S. (2021). Citizens in the “smart city”: participation, co-production, governance. Urban Geography, New York, Routledge, 1-2. doi:10.1080/02723638.2021.1950983.
Myeong, S., Kim, Y., & Ahn, M. J. (2021). Smart City Strategies—Technology Push or Culture Pull? A Case Study Exploration of Gimpo and Namyangju, South Korea. Smart Cities, 4 (1), 41-53. doi:10.3390/smartcities4010003
Nasution, A.A, NasutionF. N, Risanty. N. (2020). Smart city development strategy and it’s challenges for city, Spatial Planning in The Digital Age To Achieve Sustainable Development IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 562, 1-6 (2020) 012012 IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/562/1/012012
Neupane, C., Wibowo, S., Grandhi, S., Deng, H. A. (2021). Trust-Based Model for the Adoption of Smart City Technologies in Australian Regional Cities. Sustainability, 13, 9316. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169316.
Nikitas, A., Michalakopoulou, K., Njoya, E.T., Karampatzakis, D. (2020). Artificial intelligence, transport and the smart city: Definitions and dimensions of a new mobility Era. Sustainability, 12, 1-19, 2789. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072789.
Nikki Han, M. J., & Kim, M. J. (2021). A critical review of the smart city in relation to citizen adoption towards sustainable smart living. Habitat International., 108, 1-13. 102312. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2021.102312
Paiva, S., Ahad, M.A., Tripathi, G., Feroz, N., Casalino, G. (2021). Enabling Technologies for Urban Smart Mobility: Recent Trends, Opportunities and Challenges. Sensors, 21, 2143. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21062143.
Qian, Y., Liu, J., Cheng, Z., & Forrest, J. Y.-L. (2021). Does the smart city policy promote the green growth of the urban economy? Evidence from China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 85, 1-15. doi:10.1007/s11356-021-15120-w.
Ramirez Lopez, L.J., Grijalba Castro, A.I. (2021). Sustainability and Resilience in Smart City Planning: A Review. Sustainability, 13, 181. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13010181.
Rodrigo-Salazar, L., González-Carrasco, I., & Garcia-Ramirez, A. R. (2021). An IoT-based contribution to improve mobility of the visually impaired in Smart Cities. Computing, 103 (6), 1233-1254. doi:10.1007/s00607-021-00947-5.
 Roustai. Sh., Pour Mohammadi M., Ghanbari, H. (2018). Smart city theory and evaluation of its infrastructure components in urban management Case study: Tabriz Municipality. Geography and Urban-Regional Planning, 8 (26), 197-216 (In Persian).
Tcholtchev, N., & Schieferdecker, I. (2021). Sustainable and Reliable Information and Communication Technology for Resilient Smart Cities. Smart Cities, 4 (1), 156-176. doi:10.3390/smartcities4010009.
Valencia-Arias, A., Urrego-Marín, M.L., Bran-Piedrahita, L. A. (2021). Methodological Model to Evaluate Smart City Sustainability. Sustainability, 13, 1-17, 11214. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su132011214.
Venkatachalam, S. (2020), Re-Thinking the Role of Citizens in Evaluating Quality of Life in the Smart City. Master’s Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherland.
Venkatesh, J., Aksanli, B., Chan, C. S., Akyurek, A. S., & Rosing, T. S. (2018). Modular and Personalized Smart Health Application Design in a Smart City Environment. IEEE Internet of Things Journal., 5 (2), 614–623. doi:10.1109/jiot.2017.2712558.
Verrest, H., & Pfeffer, K. (2019). Elaborating the urbanism in smart urbanism: Distilling relevant dimensions for a comprehensive analysis of Smart City approaches. Information, Communication & Society, 22 (9), 1328-1342. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X. 2018.1424921.
Yang, W., & Lam, P. T. I. (2021). An evaluation of ICT benefits enhancing walkability in a smart city. Landscape and Urban Planning, 215, 1-14. 104227. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan. 2021.104227.
Zhao, F., Fashola, O. I., Olarewaju, T. I., & Onwumere, I. (2021). Smart city research: A holistic and state-of-the-art literature review. Cities, 119, 1-14. 103406. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2021.103406.
Zhao, Z., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Impact of Smart City Planning and Construction on Economic and Social Benefits Based on Big Data Analysis. Complexity, 26, 1-11. doi:10.1155/2020/ 8879132.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics