01858nam a22001697a 4500999001900000008004100019100004600060245013700106260002500243300003400268520112400302650009901426773002501525906002201550942000701572952010901579  c528118d528118241113b           ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d  aZwick, Austin and Spicer, Zachary 959499  aExamining the smart city generational model: Conceptualizations, implementations, and infrastructure Canada’s smart city challenge  aUrban Affairs Review  a60(4), Jul, 2024: p.1229-1253  aCohen's Smart City Generational model has been the basis of understanding for the evolution of the Smart Cities movement. However, how does this model align with practitioners’ conceptualization of the term? Our research focuses on Infrastructure Canada's Smart City Challenge (SCC). Through 14 primary interviews and 20 finalist applications, this research reveals that practitioners overwhelmingly understand Smart City building as a government-driven, data-centric endeavor (Smart City 2.0), as opposed to being about vendor transactions (Smart City 1.0), resident engagement (Smart City 3.0), or community co-creation (Smart City 4.0), where the specific technology is of secondary importance to project objectives. We conclude that, rather than moving through distinct generations, the smart cities movement should be understood as a gradual process of municipal public administration modernization as local governments are becoming increasingly savvy and experienced about contracting with technology firms to address urban problems.-Reproduced 

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/10780874231222243
  aSmart cities, Municipal government, Generational modal , Urban technology, Engagement. 948675  aUrban Affairs Review  aURBAN DEVELOPMENT  cAR  00102ddc40709403197aIIPAbIIPAd2024-11-13h60(4), Jul, 2024: p.1229-1253pAR133545r2024-11-13yAR