Action COST TU1204 - WG2 meeting, Madrid, 2013-12-16

1. Action COST “People friendly
cities in a data rich world”
WG 2 “Knowledge platform”
New urban environments:
an enterpreneurial perspective
Francesco Rizzi
f.rizzi@sssup.it
Madrid, 2013-12-16

2. Predominantly
urban 50 - 74%
division). (Figure drawn by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development
in WBCSD, 2012, based on data from the UN Population Division UN, 2010)
Urban 0 - 49%
Big cities: a valuable business environment
RUSSIA
103.6
UK 73%
SWEDEN
7.6
ERLANDS
13.3
81%
54
90%
POLAND
23.9
62%
GERMANY
62
75%
ROMANIA
11.6
54
NEW YORK
21.8 ITALY
39.6
68%
ROCCO
19.4
60%
TUNISIA
ALGERIA
22.0
LAGOS
10.0
NIGERIA
HANA
11.3
68.6
49%VENEZUELA
26
50%
94%
CAMEROON
9.5
BRAZIL
162.6
85%
BUENOS
AIRES
13.5
pag. 2!
GERMANY
62
75%
KENYA
7.6
TANZANIA
9.9
25%
RIO DE
JANEIRO
S AFRICA 12.2
28.6
60% PAULO
SÃO
MOZAMBIQUE
CZECH
REPUBLIC
7.4
GHANA
11.3
49%
IRAN
48.4
68%
39.6
68%
10.0
ROMANIA
11.6
54
AFGHANISTAN
7.8
CAIRO
PAKISTAN
15.9
TUNISIA
59.3
36% EGYPT
NIGERIA
68.6
50%
NEW DELHI
21.1 CAMEROON
9.5
MUMBAI
21.3
BEIJING
12.7
SYRIA
10.2
51%
33.1
43%
INDIA
329.3
29%
SUDAN
16.3
43%
CONGO, DR OF
20.2
33%
ANGOLA
9.3
S AFRICA
28.6
60%
ETHIOPIA
13
16%
KENYA
7.6
TANZANIA
9.9
25%
MOZAMBIQUE
SHANGHAI
17.3
KAZAKHSTAN
8.6
TEHERAN
12.1
N KOREA
14.1
62%
UZBEKISTAN
10.1
37%
AFGHANISTAN
7.8
PAKISTAN
59.3 VIETNAM
36% 23.3
IRAQ
20.3
67%
SAUDI ARABIA
20.9
81%
BEIJING
12.7
GUANDONG
7.3
CHINA
TURKEY 559.2
IRAN
51.1
48.4
68%
42%
68%
ISTANBUL
11.7
10.1
37%
ALGERIA
22.0
KARACHI
LAGOS
14.8
MOSCOW
13.4
UKRAINE
30.9
68%
TEHERAN ITALY
UZBEKISTAN
12.1
IRAQ
20.3
67%
MOROCCO
19.4
60%
SAUDI ARABIA
ETHIOPIA IVORY
COAST
13
8.6
16%
POLAND
23.9
62%
KAZAKHSTAN
8.6
20.9
81%
SUDAN
16.3
43%
ANGOLA
9.3
FRANCE
ISTANBUL46.9
11.7
77%
SYRIA
10.2
51%
EGYPT
33.1
43%
CONGO, DR OF
20.2
33%
BELGIUM
10.2
97%
TURKEY
SPAIN
51.1
33.6
68%
77%
CAIRO
15.9
20.4
ARGENTINA
35.6
90%
NETHERLANDS
13.3
81%
UKRAINE
30.9
LONDON
68%
12
CZECH
REPUBLIC
7.4
RUSSIA
103.6
73%
MOSCOW
SWEDEN
13.4 7.6
MYANMAR
KARACHI
14.8 16.5
BANGLADESH
38.2
26%
DHAKA
NEW DELHI13.8
21.1
KOLKATA
15.5
32%
SEOUL
23.2
OSAKA
16.6
INDIA
329.3
INDONESIA
29%
MALAYSIA
18.1
69%
114.1
50%
N KOREA
14.1
62%
VIETNAM
23.3
27%
MYANMAR
DHAKA
13.8
KOLKATA
15.5
AUSTRALIA
18.3
89%
16.5
32%
OSAKA
16.6
PHILIPPINES
55
64%
THAILAND
21.5
33%
MALAYSIA
18.1
69%
JAPAN
84.7
66%
S KOREA
39.0
81%
SEOUL
23.2
TOKYO
33.4
PHILIPPINES MANILA
55 BANGLADESH
15.4
38.2
64%
26%
THAILAND
21.5
33%
JAKARTA
14.9
GUANDONG
7.3
CHINA
JAPAN
S KOREA 559.2
39.0
84.7
81%
42% 66%
27%
MUMBAI
21.3
SHANGHAI
17.3
TOKYO
33.4
MANILA
15.4
INDONESIA
114.1
50%
JAKARTA
14.9
AUSTRALIA
18.3
89%
Number of people that live in cities and percentage of inhabitants in big cities (2010). Source: WWF, 2012 !

3. Public debt (%GDP)
Source: Wikipedia on data from Eurostat (2012) and US.CIA (2013)
pag. 3!
The problem

4. The challenge
How to do
better things
Without
increasing costs?
pag. 4!

5. The opportunity
City = platform
For an efficient
use of
resources
pag. 5!

6. The value of data
pag. 6!

7. pag. 7!

8. Smart meters: lessons learnt
pag. 8!

9. DK
22.0%
to note that although the foundation of the smart grid is built must d
RO 0.6%
on a lateral integration of these basic ingredients, true smart pursue
SI
grid 3.1%
capabilities will be built on vertical integration of the on the
AT
6.1%
upper-layer applications. As an example, a critical capability
As
SK 0.7%
such as demand response may not be feasible without tight develo
BE
4.2%
integration of smart meters and home area networks. learnt
i
parts
Smart meters: lessons
DE
As such, one may argue that given the size and the value issues
11.1%
of utility assets, the emergence of the smart grid will be more withou
Figure 2. Distribution of projects between EU15 and EU12 Countries likely to follow an evolutionary trajectory than to involve a ing sys
Existing Grid
Intelligent Grid
Electromechanical
Digital
One-Way Communication
Two-Way Communication
Centralized Generation
Distributed Generation
Hierarchical
Network
Few Sensors
Sensors Throughout
Blind
Self-Monitoring
Manual Restoration
Self-Healing
Failures and Blackouts
Adaptive and Islanding
Manual Check/Test
Remote Check/Test
Limited Control
Pervasive Control
Few Customer Choices
Many Customer Choices
figure 1. The smart grid compared with the existing grid.
20
IEEE power & energy magazine
Figure 3 - Geographical distribution of investments and project categories
pag. 9!
EU12 Member States: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland,
Who can do that?
Source: EC-JRC USA-DOE
figure

10. Successes and failures
pag. 10!

11. Successes and failures
pag. 11!

12. The theoretical perspective
pag. 12!

13. Isomorphism threats & the opportunities for smart communities
Last 20 years of inventions in the field of
RESs
Bold: Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany,
Greece, Italy, Netherland, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, United Kingdom
Italic: World regions with the exclusion of
Europe, North America, West Asia
pag. 13!

14. Crowdsourcing: the alternative way
Pervasiveness of the information platform
pag. 14!
Nature of the solution
Nuber of evaluators
Motivations of potential solvers
Pervasiveness of know-how in the crowd
Reliability of the crowd as problem solver
Effective distance of knowledge
Tacitness and complexity of the solution
Focal agent’s need for distant search
Evaluability of the solutions
Modularizability of the problem
Ease of delineation and transmission
Characteristics of the problem
Afuah, A., & Tucci, C. L. (2012). Crowdsourcing as a
solution to distant search. Academy of Management
Review, 37(3), 355-375.!

15. Crowdsourcing and urban sustainability governance
pag. 15!

16. Crowdsourcing and urban sustainability governance
pag. 16!

17. Francesco Rizzi
Istituto di Management
Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna
f.rizzi@sssup.it
pag. 17!