An analysis framework and a taxonomy of smart cities developments. This presentation includes also the application of this framework in and metrics for Greek municipalities.

1. A Taxonomy for Analysing Smart
Cities Developments in Greece
Charalampos Alexopoulos, Yannis Charalabidis, Nikolaos Vogiatzis,
Dimitrios E. Kolokotronis
Dr. Charalampos Alexopoulos
Postdoc Researcher
University of the Aegean
E-mail: alexop@aegean.gr
Twitter: @xalexopoulos

2. Introduction
 OECD, cities generate 80% of global GDP a share that is continually
increasing and approximately 70% of the world's population will be urbanised
in the next years
 smart city projects are supported by integrated, forward-looking strategic
plans, useful in defining a vision and a methodology for the future
development of a city, as seen through the prism of digital technologies and
knowledge ecosystems
 smart city initiatives are designed to develop information technology
capacities and establish an agenda for change by industry actions and
business development
 it is very difficult for the municipal authorities to identify, evaluate and
implement the proper developments
 the policy aspect of a smart city is a major challenge in order to create a
collaborative approach to innovation ecosystems based on sustainable
partnerships among the main stakeholders from business, research, policy and
citizen groups

3. Greek landscape
 A 7-year plan has been formed in Greece including the
actions needed for the implementation of the digital
strategy 2014-2020 including RIS3 directions
 DESI reports Greece in the 26th place in EU28
 Kallikratis administrative reform of 2010, the Greek
administrative organisation comprises of 7 decentralised
administrations, 13 peripheries, and 325 municipalities.
The peripheries and municipalities are fully self-governed

4. Objective
 The objective of this inquiry is to develop an analysis
framework to better understand smart city practices in
Greece and to identify the barriers where adaptation and
improvement may be needed
 identify homogeneous and heterogeneous characteristics
in the process of planning and developing a smart city

5. Smart Cities Categories
1. ICT Infrastructure
2. Environment
3. Transportation - Mobility
4. Health
5. Waste Management & Water
Resources
6. Energy – Sustainable development
7. Tourism - Culture
8. Economy - Development
9. Security
10. E-Government services
3 Transportation
3.1
Actions for traffic management improvement in
real time, within/inter municipal areas using
specialized applications
3.2
Use of intelligent systems at pedestrian crossings
for safe movement
3.3
Smart stops (e.g. online bus arrival marking) for
public transportation
3.4
Installation of sensors to means of transportation or
roads for traffic flow monitoring
3.5 Smart information signs for traffic condition
3.6
Car parking spaces sensors providing information
and guidance to drivers for parking availability

6. Methodology
Taxonomy
creation
• identification of
the possible
smart cities
development
• 59 possible
developments
and initiatives
Analysis
Framework
Development
• Dimensions and
values
Data
Collection
• structured
questionnaire
• 144/325
Municipalities
responded
• correspondents’
characteristics of
ICT knowledge
and involvement
in smart city
projects
Data
Processing
• calculation of descriptive
statistics (frequencies
and relative frequencies)
of all values for each of
the indicators
• identify differences in
terms of significance in
municipalities with
different populations and
expertise
• detect the extent of
overlapping projects to
be implemented in the
future proposed by
municipalities

7. Analysis Framework
# Analysis Dimension Controlled Lists of Answers
1 City Identity
1.1 Name Names of 325 Greek Municipalities
1.2 Region Names of 13 regions
1.3 Population group < 10000, 10000-20000, 20001 -50000, 50001-100000, > 100001
1.4 Special Area Characteristics mountain, lowland, urban, island, rural, touristic, other (please specify)
2 Correspondent Identity
2.1 Department Free text
2.2 Position in the Organisation
Secretary General, Director, Head of division/department, Employee,
Scientific Associate
3
Report on implemented SC actions (Did your
municipality implement the following actions?)
YES/NO based on the Smart Cities Developments Taxonomy
4 Sources of funding of SC actions European, Territorial Collaboration, National
5 Collaboration with other stakeholders Industry, SME, CSO, Citizens, Research/Academia
6 Barriers and Obstacles for implementation
Lack of experienced personnel, financial reasons, Lack of
acknowledgement from the side of citizens, Immature object, other
(please specify)
7
Planned SC actions for future implementation
(Does your municipality intend to implement
the following actions in the near future?)
YES/NO based on the Smart Cities Developments Taxonomy

8. Results
Different analyses on gathered data

9. Current state analysis (1/4)
 first 10 most implemented actions
 1.1 “Implementation of free wi-fi in public areas and municipal buildings” (89 municipalities),
 1.4 “Hardware and software upgrading to the municipal departments for a highly efficient
backoffice” (74 municipalities),
 10.5 “Developing applications for citizens for their problems and requests reporting” (61
municipalities),
 6.4 “Energy saving of municipal street lighting and public spaces (e.g. by replacing existent
lamps with led type ones, with remote control system). Smart lighting” (51 municipalities),
 1.2 “Implementation of optical fiber network (MAN)” (47 municipalities),
 2.1 “Installation of electromagnetic radiation measurement sensors” (44 municipalities),
 10.2 “Application of Electronic Consultation on important decisions and plans (business plan,
technical project, etc.)” (44 municipalities),
 7.2 “Developing electronic local tourist guide” (43 municipalities),
 1.5 “Electronic document work flow management systems for municipal offices - departments”
(41 municipalities) and
 10.8 “GIS applications for urban building construction, (suitable building sites, land use,
objective property values etc.)” (41 municipalities).

10. Current state analysis (2/4)
 The categories with the less
implemented actions
 Environment
 Economy & Development
 Health, 83,3% of the
municipalities have
implemented no action
 Transportation with 76,4%
 Security with 71,5%
8. Economy -
Development
8.1
Actions promoting entrepreneurship on municipal
website
8.2
Actions for reinforcement, promotion, sale of local
products via municipal website
8.3 Employment actions via municipal website
8.4
Innovative actions to support high tech farming (e.g.
precision farming in municipal fields)
8.5
Emergence - promotion of innovative technological
activities via municipal website
8.6
Consulting interactive services to young
entrepreneurs on municipal web platform

11. Current state analysis (3/4)
 Funding
 85,47% have used own funding for the
implementation
 79,49% of the municipalities used European
funding
 21,37% used the Local Administration Funds
Programme
 17,95% of them were funded by research
programmes led by research institutions
 health, 83,3% of the municipalities have
implemented no action
 4,27% of the municipalities used funds
through public-private partnerships
 Participation
 15,38% of the municipalities
created an ecosystem of the
triple helix
 8,55% of the quadruple helix
 42% of the municipalities
collaborated with research
institutions for the
implementation of smart
cities actions

12. Current state analysis (4/4)
 Barriers and
obstacles

13. Planned future actions
Code Action
Number of
Municipalities
6.4
Energy saving of municipal street lighting and public spaces (e.g. by
replacing existent lamps with led type ones, with remote control
system). Smart lighting
84
1.4
Hardware and software upgrading to the municipal departments for
a highly efficient backoffice
73
1.1 Implementation of free wi-fi in public areas and municipal buildings 69
1.5
Electronic document work flow management systems for municipal
offices - departments
63
6.3
Energy savings in municipal buildings by upgrading exterior wall
with insulation claddings and integrated intervention in cooling -
heating systems. Energy management system
62
10.5
Developing applications for citizens for their problems and requests
reporting
55
10.4
Converting the provision of municipal services to online in order to
be accessible to all citizens via municipal website
52
6.1 Photovoltaic installation in municipal buildings 51
7.3 Developing tourism content applications for mobiles 51
7.2 Developing electronic local tourist guide 49

14. Correlation between smart city main category and
population group for implemented actions

15. Implemented and Future Actions
 Comparison of implemented and
future actions per main category
 Categories of actions with no
implementations in past and future

16. Conclusions
 Great and constantly attention is given in the ICT Infrastructure category
since it possesses the highest mean of implemented and the highest mean of
intended developments
 The domains of Energy and Tourism gain more attention since the planning of
future developments indicate a great increase
 The categories presenting least attention by the Greek cities in the past and
future implementations are the domains of “Transportation and Mobility”
and “Environment” which is strange given the great jurisdiction
municipalities possess in these domains
 Health seems to amass more attention for the future implementations of
some Greek cities, but it remains the domain with no intention to implement
smart city actions by most of the Greek cities
 None of the cities in Greece implemented the action 5.6 “End to end
irrigation management system with dam operation control, pumping stations
control, water flow control in tube-like channels”
 Having in mind the Greek reality, this action is of great importance and should
have higher percentages of implementation especially in the rural areas, since this
primary sector needs the support of ICT & IoT towards its efficiency increase

17. Thank you all for your attention!
 Please visit Gov 3.0 www.gov30.eu for further distance
collaboration
 We are waiting you at the Samos 2018 Summit in order to
discuss Government 3.0 perspectives.
Dr Harris Alexopoulos
University of the Aegean
@xalexopoulos