Comparison of Smart City Standards, Implementation and Cluster Models of Cities in North America and Europe

Abstract

Sustainability in Smart Cities is a current and trendy topic in a global sense. The primary impetus for writing this article was to create a general implementation model for the smart governance of European Smart Cities based on the American best practice. The ambition is to be able to modify the generally created model to meet the local conditions of all countries. The aim of the article is to point out the essential elements and differences between the implementation standards, models and clusters in the cities of North America and Europe, including their benefits and limitations. This article compared standards, implementation and cluster models for Smart Cities in North America and Europe through a secondary analysis from Arcadis and IDC consultants, standards agencies, and relevant sources. In addition, comparisons and summaries of the results were used. The results of this article point out the fundamental differences between the American and European approaches to building Smart Cities. American models are more centrist-oriented to people and complex in their simplicity, thus achieving a higher degree of reputation. Europeans are less consistent and top-down oriented. The new model will make European Smart Cities more focused on the needs and expectations of all stakeholders. The main results of this article are the answers to the research questions and the general implementation model, the verification of which will take place in practice in the future.

Innovation Trajectories for a Society 5.0

“…Finally, a key role is played by stakeholders and governance. Stakeholder theory can be applied in the public and private fields [42,46,53,[81][82][83]. A first category consists of functional agencies (Chambers of Commerce, health companies, universities, etc.…”

Modeling and Key Technologies of a Data-Driven Smart City System

“…All layers and all elements of the system should be considered from an overall perspective, with concept consistency, function coordination, structure unification, resource sharing and component standardization. In the worldwide practice of smart cities, Chinese cities [35] and European cities [23] are typically top-down oriented.…”

“…The current implementation model for the integration of a smart city has several shortcomings [23] , such as focusing on the provision of various city services, rather than hard infrastructure. Smart services are driven without any integrated system thus smart city initiatives can hardly be sustained [24] .…”

Framework for Developing an Information Technology Maturity Model for Smart City Services in Emerging Economies: (FSCE2)

“…Many of the criteria proposed for governance and management of smart cities only remain in the definition of dimensions and indicators, for this it is valid to bring up what is proposed in [23]. With the comparison of smart city standards, implementation and cluster models of Cities in North America and Europe, they say that the city managers need indicators for target setting, performance assessment, monitoring, management, and decision-making purposes.…”