This diagram sets out SCRANs initial representation of the triple-helix partnership for Smart Cities. As can be seen, the three dimensions of SCRAN’s triple-helix DNA lie with the intellectual capital, learning and knowledge of Smart Cities. Set out as a matrix, it is intellectual capital, learning and knowledge that make up the rows and are attached to the work packages which make up the substantive components of Smart Cities. These in turn relate to those partners responsible for developing the intellectual capital, learning communities and knowledge-base in question (the universities, cities and regions respectively).
Smart cities benchmarking egov and codesign
Some benchmarking issues<br />
Benchmarking e-Gov<br />Source: Deakin, M. (2010) SCRAN’s Development of a Trans-National Comparator for the Standardisation of eGovernment Services”, in Reddick, C. ed., Comparative E-government: An Examination of E-Government Across Countries, Springer (Integrated Series in Information Systems) <br />2<br />
Benchmarking ofeGovernment services<br /><ul><li>Using the typology of administrative systems put forward by Torres et al (2005), it is evident the democracies of the North Sea roughly approximate to the Nordic (Norse, Danish, Swedish and Finish) nation-states and are a mix of Anglo-American (UK) and European Continental administrations (those of Netherlands, Germany and Belgium)
As such they are said to be: consumer-centred, client orientated, citizen-based, consultative and increasingly deliberative in their search for efficiency and effectiveness from the development of eGov services
Torres et al (2005) have gone on to use these characteristics as a means to review the e-readiness of each European member-state and assess levels of provision in terms of both the depth and breadth of the service available on city websites. The outcomes of this exercise have in turn been used to construct a “maturity index” of such developments</li></ul>4<br />
Benchmarking ofeGovernment services<br />Using this index of eGov service development, the exercise uncovers three “city groupings” These are the: <br /><ul><li>Innovative group: with a strong position in delivering services online (up to 60% of total) and good situation with respect to the stages of development i.e. informational, interactive and transactional.
Steady achiever: offering great potential for the development of the Internet, but with a limited range of online services (between 45-30%).
Platform builders: web sites offering the lowest level of services online and benefits to citizens (less than 30%, with little more than the power to offer information). </li></ul>Within this classification of city websites, all those within the North Sea fall into the “steady achiever‟ category with modest online presence, either at the informational, interactive, or transactional level of provision. <br />5<br />
EU i2010Benchmarking report<br />6<br />the North Sea now has an average score of .....<br />
Co-designTransforming the citizen<br />10<br />Active citizen<br />ICT Novice<br />ICT Expert<br />?<br />Passive citizen<br />“The value of Community Informatics to participatory urban planning and design: a case-study in Helsinki”<br />Joanna Saad-Sulonen and LiisaHorelli, 2010<br />Journal of Community Informatics<br />http://www.ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej/article/view/579/603<br />