000			01740nam a22001577a 4500
999			_c528118 _d528118
008			241113b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aZwick, Austin and Spicer, Zachary _959499
245			_aExamining the smart city generational model: Conceptualizations, implementations, and infrastructure Canada’s smart city challenge
260			_aUrban Affairs Review
300			_a60(4), Jul, 2024: p.1229-1253
520			_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
650			_aSmart cities, Municipal government, Generational modal , Urban technology, Engagement. _948675
773			_aUrban Affairs Review
906			_aURBAN DEVELOPMENT
942			_cAR