Smart Cities as Innovation Ecosystems sustained by the Future Internet - Landscape, Cases and PoliciesHans Schaffers
www.fireball4smartcities.eu Smart Ci)es as Innova)on Ecosystems Sustained by the Future Internet -‐ Landscape, cases, policies Mechelen, 22.05.2012 Hans Schaﬀers ESoCE Net & Aalto University School of Economics, CKIR ScienBﬁc Coordinator of FIREBALL
The “Smart City” concept q We oIen consider – based on rankings -‐ the Smart City as a reality q Smart City: not a reality but an urban development strategy, and a mostly technology driven future vision q Smart City is about how ciBzens are shaping the city, and how ciBzens are empowered to contribute to urban development q Smart City is an urban laboratory, an urban “innovaBon ecology”, an accelerator and agent of change q We are witnessing promising developments towards smarter ciBes q What is the DNA of the Smart City?
The FIREBALL Project q CiBes increasingly transform into what can be called “urban innovaBon ecosystems“ q CiBes start experimenBng the opportuniBes of the (Future) Internet through “living labs” approaches for engaging end-‐ users in the innovaBon process q FIREBALL aims to bring together CiBes, Living Labs and Future Internet stakeholders to explore models and pracBces of how open innovaBon and user parBcipaBon supports the experimentaBon and uptake of the Future Internet
FIREBALL Results q Smart city vision, landscape q Cases of “smart(er) ciBes” ® ®q Smart city Future Internet -‐ ® enabled “innovaBon ® ® ecosystems” ® ® ®q Smart CiBes roadmap and ciBes acBon plans q Community building , creaBon of a Connected Smart CiBes network q Portal and web 2.0 tools
Smarter Ci)es Cases Intel Industry i-‐Transport hubs Smart clusters and Housing Districts sectorsq Thessaloniki: Technology districts and Smart Port district Intel CBD broadband deployment, relaBvely i-‐University uncoordinated. Governance i-‐Science challenges of digital ciBes, combining Parks and Incubators bo^om-‐up and top-‐down planning; gaps in digital skills, creaBvity, entrepreneurship q Oulu: Careful ecosystem building and nurturing (triple helix) , supported by diverse ICT systems, may support urban development. q Amsterdam: Enabled by advanced infrastructure, partnerships and co-‐ funded programs lie at the basis of formulaBng joint smart city strategies and shared innovaBon agendas.
Smarter Ci)es Cases q Helsinki: innovaBon cluster policy, emphasis on open innovaBon and ciBzen parBcipaBon. Instruments: compeBBons for innovaBons, innovaBon within pre-‐commercial procurement, living labs pilots, Open Data, public-‐private partnerships. q Manchester: Neighborhood regeneraBon as starBng point; digital infrastructure, ciBzen engagement, creaBon of “virtuous cycles” q Barcelona: urban development policy, main components of the Smart City strategy include Smart districts, living labs iniBaBves, e-‐Services, Infrastructures and Open Data.
Barcelona smart city developmentLeading role of City Hall Smart city Strategy SC Management • Kiosks • 22@net • Barc activa • Internal gov • Tech park • Open data • Urban Lab • 3D projects SMART SMART • Strategic plan " Smart Districts: " CreaBon of networks of GOVERNA NCE ECONOMY 22@Barcelona; triple actors, organisaBons, helix collaboraBons departments SMART LIVING SMART PEOPLE " Living Lab ini)a)ves: " Broadband network and • Municipal Police • Cibernarium 22@Urban Lab, Live, sensor data management • New incidents tools• Intel environments • Citilab Cornella Bdigital, i2Cat, Fablab, " CreaBon of proof of Cornella concepts for systems and Smart city model: " Infrastructure applicaBons building: tradiBonal Three pillars and new. IntegraBon of Challenges " Ubiquitous ICT. From ﬁbre opBc to " Demand for human Wi-‐Fi. capital and skills infrastructures " New services to " VC funding for innovaBon " InformaBon from ci)zens: gov, quality of life, professional " Low global connecBvity sensors, open data, Open data: sensors, " Development of triple and ciBzens " helix alliances open standard, and city " Human capital, actors, plaeorm " CollaboraBon between communiBes government departments
Thessaloniki smart city developmentICT transforming city activities and ecosystemsBroadband networks Apps and e-‐services: Planning for Smart by large companies BoQom-‐up ini)a)ves district " ADSL: 24/1 Mb " City representaBon " Development of wired " City sectors and wireless networks " Fibre opBc net: 2,5 Gb " City districts " Free Internet to users " 3G-‐HSDPA: 42 Mb " CiBzens. AggregaBon / and business. collecBve content " Wireless: free " City administraBon and " Smart environments (municipal nets) social services based on sensors " LocaBon-‐based services " e-‐services suitable for " City infrastructure and the community of each uBliBes district " City management " Training services for involvement of end-‐users Governance challenges: Three gaps to address (1) Digital skills gap -‐ TRAINING (2) CreaBvity gap – LIVING LABS (3) Entrepreneurship gap – BUSINESS MODELS
Manchester smart city developmentDigital strategies and smart environments for urban renewalUrban regenera)on Digital Strategy Toward Smart City Flagship ini)a)ves " Since mid-‐1980s the Started in 2008 and review " East Manchester: a City Council embarked in 2011 with respect to regeneraBon challenge EU Digital Agenda and " Eastserve: ﬁrst Living Lab on city regeneraBon consulBng with local " Corridor Living lab NGA Ø Drive economic change stakeholders. Main project through technology objecBves: " Next generaBon open Ø Focus on " Digital inclusion, access ﬁbre opBc generate skills and network neighborhood focused tackle the divides Principles for Smart Ci)es acBon, creaBve city, " Digital industries, " Neighbourhood and innovaBon new employment, regeneraBon as starBng point for a smart city " In 1990s Manchester cluster of digital and " Digital collaboraBons creaBve businesses through Living Labs telemaBcs Partnership " Digital innova)on: " Pulng people at the " Currently, e-‐services to working with the future heart of the agenda address inequaliBes Internet research " An inclusive and and digital democracy community to support sustainable approach to Manchester as Smart digital development " Balance of top-‐down City " Exemplar projects and bo^om-‐up acBons
Helsinki smart city developmentLiving Labs and new clusters for smart city strategy A Porterian cluster in mobile technology is emerging in Helsinki. " Clustering strengthens moBvaBon, incenBves, innovaBon, and enables externaliBes . " The mobile applicaBons cluster is sustaining Helsinki ‘s Smart City strategy Factor condi)ons: Demand condi)ons: Firm strategy: Suppor)ng industries: Broadband, telecoms, Government demand, Companies within Broadband infrastructure, NOKIA, skilled banking , SMOPEC, global 3G nets, specialized workforce, start-‐ups transportaBon, etc markets, intense local service providers compeBBon Compe))ons for Open Data apps as strategy for cluster development " The Helsinki Regions made available public transportaBon data " Apps4Finland makes data available related to environment and spaBal informaBon " CompeBBons and Living Labs as drivers for the M-‐cluster development
Empowerment Examples q Thessaloniki: emergence of developer communiBes: e-‐services and applicaBons e.g. mobility services q Oulu: PATIO (test user community tool): empower ordinary people to experiment new services q Manchester: Digital City Test-‐Bed (as a vision) q Barcelona: 22@Urban Lab: city as urban lab, pilot programs, use of public spaces, e.g. Open data q Helsinki: compeBBons for innovaBve applicaBons e.g. Apps4Finland; InnovaBve City program; Open Data business development iniBaBves
Smart ci)zens and Open Data – Helsinki examples Tell-on-the-Mapq Smart city – service – map-based organisaBon in an Commentary tool, enabling a innovaBve dialogue environment between citizens and cityq ExploiBng available informaBon Apps4Finland competition –q Idea incubators use city Helsinki Public data – Apps4Finland Transport compeBBon Visualisedq Open interfaces are an Service Map: important step in the open information channel about development of offices and the City’s systems services
Smart city strategies implementa)on prospects and boQlenecks: SWOT Strengths Opportuni)es • Cultural heritage, a^racBveness • CompeBBveness of local clusters • Development strategies, planning • ExploiBng service innovaBon • Broadband network deployment opportuniBes towards new business • Major development iniBaBves • OpportuniBes for local ICT sectors and entrepreneurship • Introducing parBcipatory city planning Weaknesses Threats • Top down orientaBon to planning • Economic crisis, lack of resources • Lacking a^enBon to concrete needs of • Vulnerable business models for ciBzens and SMEs sustainability of public sector iniBaBves • Digital gaps • Low level of private investment in R&D • Lacking orientaBon on entrepreneurship and innovaBon • Weak policy and funding instruments • Weak insBtuBonal environments for • Impact and beneﬁts measurement technology and innovaBon
Comparing the smart(er) city cases Helsinki Thessaloniki Manchester Oulu Barcelona Concept Smart City Intelligent CiBes Urban City of Social and cluster, Mobile regeneraBon InnovaBon urban growth Strategies Knowledge Building smart Tackling skills Technology Smart intensive districts and divides Ubiquitous districts, cluster building AgglomeraBon of Pro-‐acBve Oulu Urban Living Apps approach Lab Drivers Strengthen the ICT and Economic Policy and Policies of city region infrastructure development strategies of hall; triple deployment Oulu helix Challenges Human capital Digital skills gaps Common Adapt policy Enhancing base CreaBvity gap digital agenda instruments to collaboraBon; Entrepreneurship create human gap business capital / skills, funding Innova)on Public private InnovaBon Living labs and Strong PPP City hall ecosystem partnerships clusters local acBon programmes, leadership; CompeBBon for Technology triple helix, Triple Helix innovaBon districts urban lab models
Smart Ci)es cases -‐ lessons learned q Smart city is more an urban strategy than an urban reality. Smart ciBes will appear through numerous bo^om-‐up iniBaBves besides some strategic planning, and infrastructure development. q Top-‐down planning and bo^om-‐up iniBaBves should complement each other. City hall is someBmes dominant. Dilemmas of ciBzen engagement. q Widespread use of pilots is preparing ciBes for iniBaBve, experiment and learning q Districts, neighborhoods, and clusters are fundamental elements of smart city strategy, because the city is a system of systems, and ciBes co-‐exist within ciBes. q A smart city strategy involves all actors, organizaBons, communiBes, R&D, NGOs, clusters, and authoriBes. The partnership strategy should achieve a common vision, ﬂagship projects, collaboraBon and synergy. q Major challenges for successful smart city strategies deal with skills, creaBviBes, user-‐driven innovaBon, entrepreneurship, VC funding, and management of intra-‐government rivalries. q Lack of evidence on impact and eﬀecBveness of smart city strategies.
Smart city innova)on ecologies enabled by “common assets” q Future Internet testbeds as technology plaeorms q Smart ciBes: policies, applicaBon pull, public data, ciBzens iniBaBves q Living lab: User-‐driven playground for co-‐ creaBng and validaBng innovaBve scenarios and services
Examples of evolving smart city “innova)on ecologies” q Bretagne: ImaginLab testbed explores advanced applicaBons in living lab selng, oﬀering wide range of services, enabled by advanced infrastructure, based on partnership business model q Oulu: Octopus network, InnovaBon Kitchen, Open Web Lab, LearnLab, ImaginLab Ubiquitous Oulu and many more q Barcelona: a diverse set of network infrastructures, faciliBes, iniBaBves (22@UrbanLab), living labs, projects, planning acBviBes, partnerships q Manchester: advanced infrastructure of open access ﬁbre to premises; support creaBon of ; co-‐ownership approaches Manchester
Simple models for concurrent use of testbed and living labs facili)es
Developing into a smart city requires “systemic change” q An innovaBon roadmap is a tool for creaBng consensus and understanding about potenBal futures and about the pathways towards these futures Present Short term Mid term Long term Urban development Policies and strategies ICT-‐based solu)ons Technology development q Understanding smart city dynamic development as “systemic change” requires understanding of interplays and co-‐evoluBon regarding technology developments, human behaviours, policies and strategies q Living Labs, policy experiments may act as “niches” where opportuniBes are provided for limited scale innova)on and learning (introducBon, use, evaluaBon, modiﬁcaBon -‐> wider scale adopBon)
Changes and developments q Increasing deployment of broadband infrastructure and creaBon of open networks and open data repositories q Many ciBes are developing Smart City strategies, in the context of urban development, sustainable growth, revitalisaBon, and innovaBon districts q Increasing parBcipaBon and empowerment of ciBzens in societal issues, using social media and open data on a wider scale q Increasing interest for wider scale tesBng of services and soluBons e.g. energy eﬃciency, healthcare, environment monitoring, mobility q Diversity of technologies for smart city applicaBons is becoming rapidly available (mobile broadband, cloud compuBng, open data, smart devices, content management, Web 2.0) q User driven open innovaBon in ciBes (e.g. Crowd sourcing services based on sensor data) is gaining more a^enBon q All kinds of city managed data could become publicly available to promote crowdsourced services and bo^om-‐up innovaBon (may also be misused)
Technologies for smart(er) ci)es Technology area Main developments in rela)on to smart ci)es Cloud compuBng q Urban clouds reducing IT costs and providing plaeorms for small business applicaBons and e-‐services q VirtualizaBon of physical spaces q StandardisaBon of plaeorms and applicaBons for smart ciBes Real-‐world user q IoT sensor networks in combinaBon with Web 2.0, social media, interfaces, RFID crowdsourcing providing opportuniBes for collecBve intelligence q Urban IoT plaeorms oﬀering common framework for ambient sensor networks SemanBc web, q Open Data from various sources oﬀer opportuniBes for advanced Linked data, intelligence e.g. Detect pa^erns, generate alerts, visualize Ontologies informaBon, predict trends q SemanBc Web enhances opportunity to merge diﬀerent categories of data q Enables content and context fusion, immersove mulB-‐sensory environments, locaBon based context aware content q Enhanced opportuniBes for user involvement and user generate content
Innova)on roadmap for smart ci)es REGIME & Future Internet Short term (2014) Medium term (2017) Long term (2022)Technological change -CLOUD: Virtualisation -CLOUD: Web platform -CLOUD: PaaS for smart cities(Dominant designs, emerging -CLOUD: IaaS for smart cities -CLOUD: SaaS for smart cities -CLOUD: Service integrationtechnologies, interoperability) - Content-context fusion -IoT: RFID -IoT: Multimodal sensors -IoT: Urban IoT platforms -IoT: Speech recognition -IoT: Location aware apps, -IoT: Cloud based ontologies -IoT: Open data apps -Content-centric networksIndustrial change -CLOUD: Large companies clouds, -CLOUD: Large cities clouds -CLOUD: Standardisation of smart city(Networks of technology developers, Google, MS, Amazon global clouds applications / serviceslobbying, standardisation) -IoT: Sensors into utilities and energy -IoT: Alliances of large companies and -IoT: Large scale applications networks major cities companiesSocial change -CLOUD: Reduction of IT costs -CLOUD: Security issues raised -CLOUD: Continuity of service(Behaviour, routines, values, -CLOUD: Disaster management -CLOUD: Learning curvepreferences, demand, end-users) addressed - IoT: Experimental facilities -IoT: Multiple city pilots -IoT: Large scale demand for sensor- -IoT: A few city pilots based city infrastructurePolicy change -CLOUD: Transition white papers -CLOUD: Pilots at city levels -CLOUD: Whole smart cities on the(Regulations, economic instruments, -CLOUD: Preparing to the cloud -CLOUD: Legal and regulatory reform Cloudgovernance, agreements)NICHES of Short term (2014) Medium term (2017) Long term (2022)radical noveltiesTechnological change -CLOUD: SaaS -CLOUD: PaaS -CLOUD: IaaS -IoT: Experimental facilities -IoT: M2M in city environments -IoT: Open / linked dataIndustrial change -CLOUD: Private and hybrid clouds -CLOUD: SaaS and PaaS in the main -CLOUD: Hosting of G city services domains of cities -IoT: IPv6 and HTML5 -IoT: Smart gird / smart meters in citiesSocial change -CLOUD: Pilot city applications in city -CLOUD: Large scale demand of smart utilities, districts, and gov city applications and services -IoT: Sensors for city environment alert -IoT: Embedded city intelligence proof of -IoT: Extended demand for sensor over concept city networksPolicy change -CLOUD: Government roadmaps to G -CLOUD: Standards development and services adoption -CLOUD: US reform of IT management -IoT: China encouraging technologies -IoT: FP8 IoT PPP for IoT -IoT: Harmonisation of frequency bands
Implemen)ng the development process towards local digital PhasesMajor issues agendas eﬁni)on 1. Incep)on: 2. D 3. Opera)on 4. SustainabilityInfrastructure IdenBfy availability User requirements ImplementaBon plan Plan for future and resources: and access deﬁned and agreed; agreed and operaBon agreed with access and requirements infrastructure operaBonal; user infrastructure and availability accessible and groups established and resource owners agreements in place workingCollaboraBon IdenBfy partners Analyse beneﬁts vs CollaboraBon EvaluaBon of beneﬁts, and business and condiBons for costs and agree processes monitored costs and risks together models collaboraBon jusBﬁcaBon and and supported during with lessons learned arrangements for the experimentaBon and plans for future collaboraBon operaBon based on thisInnovaBon and Agree aims, InnovaBon should be Management plan IdenBfy results and project deﬁniBon objecBves, beneﬁts clearly deﬁned, agreed with beneﬁts for partners of innovaBon prepared and monitoring and and stakeholders planned planned resultsInvolvement and IdenBfy partners Roles of partners and Co-‐creaBon evolving in Commitment for future support and stakeholders stakeholders agreed pracBce parBcipaBonStakeholder Agree process for Matching of needs User groups Co-‐producBon potenBal engagement engagement together with established linked to idenBﬁed and agreed experience and/or partners and between users, experBse stakeholders partners and stakeholders
Summary roadmap towards a smarter city, example Manchester Developments and changes Future vision Challenges and gaps F u t u r e s o l u ) o n s a n d innova)on needsDigital infrastructure: Connected ciBes: Sustainable business cases: U b i q u i t o u s s m a r t c i t y Corridor digiBsaBon ﬁbre • Extending ﬁbre and wireless • ImplemenBng new mutuals infrastructures:project across the city region & social enterprises • Inﬁnite bandwidth, zero Low Carbon Open Data • Developing new mutual • Co-‐producBon of services latency (IBZL)(LoDaNet) project and business models • Everyone, everything, wireless roll-‐out everywhereSmart City strategy: CollecBve intelligence: InnovaBon economy: InnovaBon culture:• InnovaBon legacy from • Capacity building • Investment in digital • InspiraBon & aspiraBonKnowledge Capital InnovaBon • Access to skills infrastructure • Convergence of digital, Boardroom • Matching skills to jobs • Internet Hub creaBve and technical• Digital inclusion iniBaBves • Open data networks • IncubaBon of new start-‐ups • Mutual aid• Green & DigitalCiBzens engagement: Co-‐producBon: Digital inclusion: O p e n a n d p a r B c i p a B v e • Smart CiBzens in Smart • Test-‐beds for new services • Barriers to access innovaBon systems:CiBes – SMARTiP project • Developing new delivery • Trust & privacy issues • Co-‐creaBng and sharing of • Peoples Voice Media & models • IncenBves for engagement new assetscommunity reporters • Support for new skills & • Sustaining commitment • People as sources of training interacBve data and servicesInnovaBon test-‐bed: Common assets: Technology push: New partnerships:• Manchester Living Lab • Open data and services • Dangers of “smart city in a • Four P’s: public, private, • Corridor projects • Accessible and aﬀordable box” people partnerships• Manchester Digital connecBvity • Corporate resistance to • Smart open systems• Sharp project change • Co-‐producBon • Legacy systems
Challenges for next years q Networks of Future Internet testbed faciliBes and living labs within and across smart ciBes and regions may become the backbone of European innovaBon ecologies and value networks – Horizon 2020 q CapabiliBes and resources, including experiment faciliBes , user oriented methodologies, service oﬀerings and collaboraBon models enabling access and use of faciliBes and services should evolve q Smart CiBes are environments to experiment technologies and applicaBons, however the potenBal for business creaBon and entrepreneurship should be sBmulated (e.g. DAIR, Canada) q Open innovaBon and ciBzen empowerment requires ﬁnding new balances between top-‐down steering and bo^om-‐up iniBaBve q Assessment of the impact and beneﬁts of “smarter ciBes” in terms of value created for ciBzens. There is a lack of evidence showing impact, how can we achieve and measure the impact and value added of smart city iniBaBves?
Here you ﬁnd more Download from www.ﬁreball4smartci)es.eu
Call for Papers: Smart Applica)ons for Smart Ci)es: New Approaches to Innova)on Special issue of the Journal of Theore3cal and Applied Electronic Commerce Research Guest Editors: Hans Schaﬀers, Carlo Ral and Nicos Komninos Full paper submission: May 2012 Publishing: December 2012 InformaBon: www.jtaer.com
Thank you ! Discussion Contact: hschaﬀers@esoce.net