White paper

citiesabc
openbusinesscouncil
cities and business
indexdna

Indexdna Report
2021
www.citiesabc.com
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 2

Indexdna Report
2021

indexdna
Acknowledgment
This white paper is the result of a joint pilot project under the co-
lead of citiesabc and openbusinesscouncil, with the participation
of the Durham University Business School. citiesabc and
openbusinesscouncil funded the research of this project.

This white paper presents a dynamic smart cities index – called

IndexDNA – which captures the complex relationship between
citizens, industry, policymaking and society.
White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 3

Indexdna Report
Index
Summary 4

Globally Connected Cities - The Need 5

IndexDNA Framework - The Need 11

IndexDNA - Our Framework 14

Example of using the IndexDNA Framework... 21

Practical Use of the IndexDNA Framework 27

Acknowledgement 30

Contributions 31

Highlights of the IndexDNA 32

Bibliography 33
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 4

Summary
The rate and pace of change in global economic to bring about social, economic, political and
activity and its societies are likely to accelerate environmental changes. This definition chimes
further, and this will have profound implications with the concept of Society 5.0, which aims to
for life, work, travel, and the growth of our integrate cyberspace and physical space using
communities. Most importantly, these changes smart technologies. We view cities as complex
will have a significant impact on the urban adaptive systems that are evolving and adaptive
population, which is expected to be around 7 to changes from different stakeholders and
Billion by 2050. Living in such highly dense cities the environment. However, to fully integrate
is a new phenomenon for humankind and brings citizens and their generated data into effective
about several opportunities, but also some smart systems, it is critical to develop a dynamic
tensions: the individual against the collective; index that fully represents the holistic nature of
the regional against the global; privacy against these smart cities.
open systems; economic growth against zero
carbon emissions. This white paper presents a dynamic smart
cities index – called IndexDNA – which captures
Governments and organizations are placing a the complex relationship between citizens,
much greater emphasis on resource use and industry, policymaking and society. This
social responsibility. This trend in urbanisation IndexDNA quadruple model framework is data-
is still growing and will increase pressure on driven and gives a holistic view of a smart city on
the world’s resources, necessitating major several dimensions like the economy, mobility,
configurational changes in how we live, work, education, living, environment and governance.
travel and build our communities. IndexDNA serves several purposes, from
benchmarking cities to developing effective
Smart emerging technologies can help cities policies for the transition to Society 5.0.
meet some of these challenges. At the heart
of such ‘smart cities’ is the notion that ‘data’ There are several unique aspects of the
generated by citizens and systems can be IndexDNA: as an open system, this dynamic
used to develop a citizen-centred society that index collects data on each city continuously
is sustainable, inclusive and fit for the future. and updates rankings and performance ratings
We take a holistic citizen centric approach to accordingly. The developed citiesabc platform
smart cities, where we define a smart city as will also track the evolution of the worldwide
an human-centric ecosystem where physical urban landscape in real-time and thus be a
and cyberspace systems are interconnected more reliable source of evaluation.
White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 5

01.
Background

Globally Connected
Cities - The Need
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 6

Background Globally Connected

Cities - The Need
Cities are estimated to generate 80% of all economic growth and
produce approximately 72% of all greenhouse gas emissions, despite
covering only 3% of the land (UN). Urban city regions account for more
than 50% of the total global population and is expected to be around
70% by 2050 (United Nations). This unplanned drive to urbanisation is
growing at an exponential rate and is projected to be as high as 90% in
some countries - notably in Asia and Africa - by 2050 (UN).

Governments have been reactive to this migration trend and are

experimenting with emerging and established technologies to provide
services and solutions to this unprecedented urbanisation. Many cities
are taking proactive steps to make their cities ‘digitised’ or ‘smarter’. Such
initiatives are called ‘smart city’ initiatives and are primarily focused
on using a collection of technologies to provide timely and effective
services to citizens.

The term ‘smart city’ has several predecessors like intelligent city
(N. Komninos, 2007), digital city (N. Leach, 2009) or ubiquitous city (L.
Anthopoulos and P. Fitsilis, 2010). While there are differences in these
terms the fundamental proposition in all these definitions is the use of
information and communications technology (ICT) to provide services
and support to citizens. The three positions adopted in the literature
range in focus from technology to citizens to governance. This focus has
resulted in terms like ‘smart’ being used synonymously with terms like
‘intelligent’, ‘sustainable’, ‘digital’ and ‘ubiquitous’ - even the concept of
‘Artificial Intelligence Cities’ has been raised (Ullah, Al-Turjman, Mostarda
and Gagliardi, 2020). There is no universally accepted definition for a
smart city. We represent some of the key definitions and terminologies
used to describe the concept of ‘smart cities’ and give our position on
the definition of ‘smart cities’.
White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 7

Figure 1. Definitions and perspectives of Smart Cities

 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 8

We take a holistic citizen centric approach to smart cities, where we define a smart city as an “human-
centric ecosystem where physical and cyberspace systems are interconnected to bring about
social, economic, political and environmental changes”. We take the view that smart city services
(e.g. interaction between citizens and service systems) is an outcome - rather than the core proposition
of a smart city. For example, a citizen using a e-learning system is an outcome of a smart city to
bring about social change - rather than the e-learning system being one of the core propositions of a
smart city. Therefore the focus of our paper is on the relation between the citizen and sub-systems,
with the assumption that sub-systems are expandable and emerge to deliver social, economic and
environmental changes. There is a plethora of literature on both the typology and nature of these sub-
systems (O. Pribyl and M. Svitek, 2015; R. Fistola and R.A. La Rocca, 2013; M. Lom and O. Pribyl, 2021).
These subsystems range from transportation to public health, to work and employment.

Figure 2. Definition diagram of Smart Cities, adapted from Vito Albino,

Umberto Berardi & Rosa Maria Dangelico, ‘Smart Cities: Definitions,
Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives’, Journal of Urban
Technology (2015), 22:1, 3-21.
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 9

Technology Focus Definition References

IBM defines a smart city as “one Cosgrove M & al, (2011), Smart Cities
that makes optimal use of all the series: introducing the IBM city
interconnected information available operations and management solutions.
-
today to better understand and control IBM.
its operations and optimize the use of
limited resources”

Cisco defines smart cities as those Falconer G & Mitchell S. (2012), Smart
who adopt “scalable solutions that City Framework: A Systematic Process
take advantage of information and for Enabling Smart+Connected
-
communications technology (ICT) to Communities
increase efficiencies, reduce costs, and
enhance quality of life”.

According to the Manchester Digital MDDA website http://www.

Development agency, “a ‘smart city’ manchesterdda.com/smartcity/
means ‘smart citizens’ – where citizens
-
have all the information they need to
make informed choices about their
lifestyle, work and travel options”.

Communities could become smart and S. Alawadhi, A. Aldama-Nalda, H.

a city could be designed to implement Chourabi, J.R. Gil-Garcia, S. Leung, S.
information technologies. Mellouli, T. Nam, T.A. Pardo,H.J. Scholl,
-
S. Walker, “Building Understanding of
Smart City Initiatives,”Lecture Notes in
ComputerScience7443 (2012) 40 – 53

In particular, in the marketing language, T. Nam, and T.A. Pardo, “Conceptualizing

“smartness” is a more user-friendly term Smart City with Dimensions of
than the more elitist term “intelligent,” Technology, People, andInstitutions,”
-
which is generally limited to having a Proc. 12th Conference on Digital
quick mind and being responsive to Government Research, College Park,
feedback. MD, June 12 –15, 2011.

Being a smart city means using all J.M. Barrionuevo, P. Berrone, and
available technology and resources J.E. Ricart, “Smart Cities, Sustainable
in an intelligent and coordinated Progress,”IESE Insight14 (2012)50 – 57
-
manner to develop urban centers that
are at once integrated, habitable, and
sustainable.

A city is smart when investments A. Caragliu, C. Del Bo, and P. Nijkamp,

in human and social capital and “Smart Cities in Europe,”Journal of
traditional(transport) and modern Urban Technology18: 2 (2011)65 – 82.
-
(ICT) communication infrastructure
fuel sustainable economic growth
and a high quality of life, with a wise
management of natural resources,
through participatory governance.
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 10

Technology Focus Definition References

Smart cities will take advantage of T.M. Chen, “Smart Grids, Smart Cities
communications and sensor capabilities Need Better Networks [Editor’s
sewn into the cities’ infrastructures to Note],”IEEE Network24: 2(2010) 2 – 3.
- optimize electrical, transportation,and
other logistical operations supporting
daily life, thereby improving the quality
of life for everyone

The UK Department for Business, BIS (2013), Smart Cities Background

Innovation and Skills (BIS) considers Paper, London: Department for
smart cities a process rather than a static Business Innovation and Skills
outcome, in which increased citizen
Citizen Focus
engagement, hard infrastructure, social
capital and digital technologies make
cities more liveable, resilient and better
able to respond to challenges.

The British Standards Institute (BSI) M.N. Baqir, and Y. Kathawala, “Ba
defines the term as “the effective for Knowledge Cities: A Futuristic
integration of physical, digital and Technology Model,”Journal
-
human systems in the built environment ofKnowledge Management8: 5 (2004)
to deliver sustainable, prosperous and 83 – 95.
inclusive future for its citizens”

Smart city as a high-tech intensive M.N. Baqir, and Y. Kathawala, “Ba

and advanced city that connects for Knowledge Cities: A Futuristic
people,information and city elements Technology Model,”Journal
- using new technologies in order to ofKnowledge Management8: 5 (2004)
create a sustainable, greener city, 83 – 95.
competitive and innovative commerce,
and an increased quality of life quality.

A smart city is based on intelligent Gartner (2011)

exchanges of information that flows
between its many different subsystems.
This flow of information is analyzed and
translated into citizen and commercial
services. The city will act on this
Governance Focus information flow to make its wider
ecosystem more resource-efficient and
sustainable. The information exchange
is based on a smart governance
operating framework designed to make
cities sustainable.

[A] smart city [refers to] a local entity - IDA Singapore, “iN2015 Masterplan”
a district, city, region or small country ( 2 0 1 2 ) , h t t p : //w w w. i d a . g ov. s g / ~ /
- which takes a holistic approach to media/Files/Infocomm%20
-
employ[ing] information technologies Landscape/iN2015/Reports/
with real-time analysis that encourages realisingthevisionin2015.pdf.
sustainable economic development.
White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 11

02.
Background

IndexDNA
Framework
- The Need
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 12

Background IndexDNA Framework

- The Need
Cities are complex urban systems that have a number of heterogeneous
agents (e.g. citizens, policy makers, etc) where each agent makes
decisions about how they act and behave in such a system. These
decisions evolve over time and often become routines in systems. Cities
are self organising networks where holistic patterns are formed through
human interaction via feedback systems. Therefore to understand such
a complex adaptive system, there is a need to take a holistic view of a
city. We therefore advocate the use of a dynamic technology platform
to better “understand” a city: a key aspect which most other indexes
lack. Most other indexes fall short in the following respects:

• Lacking a balanced distribution of indicators.

• Using assessment tools which fail to engage local and regional

stakeholders in their development and implementation, and, in the
same vein, fail to consider locally specific conditions.

• Failing to consider the feasibility of smart city initiatives and

operations. Relativism is needed when it comes to developing
countries, which face additional challenges such as digital divide,
lack of infrastructure, insufficient funds and political instability.

• Failing to provide concrete, tangible recommendations on linking

results to action plans. In this area especially, citiesabc pulls ahead
of other indexes.
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 13

Example The metrics adopted by the China Urban Sustainability Index (2016)
exemplify a typical lack of capaciousness: “Society” and “Environment”
each account for 33% of the overall weighting, while “Economy” and
“Resources” each account for 17%. Streamlining individual criteria under
such broad headings runs the risk of being reductive; a high GDP cancels
out the shortcomings of significant income inequalities when these are
replaced within the same category (Economy). More troubling still, the
subsections within these metrics are incomplete: it is conspicuous that
the “Society” metric is so heavily weighted when the only subsection
within it is “social welfare”; a highly important rubric, but by no means
the only criterion to assess the performance of “Society” in Chinese
cities. Moreover, the distinct absence of a Governance metric (one that
is otherwise fairly common) is symptomatic of the country’s politics,
where corruption runs high and the government controls censuses so
they do not reflect this.

More complete and reliable indexes exist, of course, such as the IMD
Smart City Index. The latter evaluates cities according to five metrics
(Health & Safety; Mobility; Activities; Opportunities (Work/School);
Governance) in two separate categories: Structures and Technologies.
Yet the report remains static and rooted in metrics which are inflexible
and leave no room for relativism. Mexico City, for instance, ranks in
88th place worldwide according to IMD. The city performs badly
in the Structure rubric, and though it may fare slightly better on the
technologies front, Mexico City’s score remains low overall. There is little
data that seems to predict any upward trend in the city’s smartening.

This is because the IMD Index fails to consider context and feasibility.
Mexico City’s low mobility ratings, for instance, are in great part explained
by the difficulty to secure funds and financing for roadworks and public
transport, as well as the immense population and voracious demand
for (and use of) present road networks. A static index will not consider
the contextual differences between cities which leads to incongruous
results nearly always favouring developed cities. It seems flawed to
compare, like for like, the results of green initiatives undertaken in Paris
with those undertaken in Mexico City, as the demand, infrastructure and
financing options are simply not the same.
White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 14

03.
Background

IndexDNA
- Our Framework
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 15

Background IndexDNA
- Our Framework
The indexDNA framework, as depicted in Figure 1, takes a complex
systems perspective of smart cities. Smart cities, as defined in section
1, are complex ecosystems, where citizens interact with interconnected
systems like transport, education, health, welfare, etc. These
interconnected systems are large and often non-linear dynamic entities.
Citizens generate large amounts of data during their interaction with
these systems and operate in conditions that are far from balanced. The
collective memory of such systems are not static and are part of direct
and indirect feedback loops. The interaction of citizens in smart cities
ecosystems is rich, dynamic, feb back and more importantly cannot be
predicted from inspection of any one individual sub-system. This form
of emergence allows smart cities to be adaptive in nature.

Our framework, while building on a complex systems perspective, is

flexible and practical for policy & decision makers as it advocates an
interdisciplinary approach to understanding the rich interaction within
a smart city ecosystem. This framework is our attempt to clarify the
conceptual notions of a smart city rather than propose a prescriptive
“measuring system” for smart cities.

This framework builds on the concept that citizens are the heart of a
smart city ecosystem. Citizens interact with different smart city systems
via ICT technologies to access different services. The citizen data
generated via this process allows the system to be further refined. This
co-evolving interaction between the citizen and the ever-evolving smart
city systems forms the core of our framework. We view this relation as
synergistic in nature and constantly changing. This inner core of our
IndexDNA framework, called a co-evolving core, is important to any
smart city indexing activity, as it shows the importance of the citizen as
well as the citizens' relationship to the smart service systems. While the
importance of co-evolution and co-operation has been highlighted by
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 16

a number of researchers (T. Nam and T. A. Pardo, 2011), particularly in social systems, none of the
existing smart city indexes use this relationship in their indexes. In fact, our framework suggests that
the need to understand the complex relationship between citizens and the smart systems is central to
the human-centric ecosystem where physical and cyberspace systems are interconnected to bring
about social, economic, political and environmental changes.

Figure 3. Diagram of the inner core of the IndexDNA framework

The second layer in our framework is termed the open interaction zone and represents how the key
stakeholders interact with the inner core to create outcomes from the complex smart city ecosystem.
The index has been built on a matrix structure framework that applies the Quadruple Helix Innovation
model, which explores the interactions between university, industry, government and environment
sectors within a knowledge economy. In innovation helix frameworks, each sector is represented by a
circle (helix), with overlaps showing intersections (much like a venn diagram).

The Quadruple Helix model provides an inclusive and reliable framework as it incorporates the public
through the concept of a media-based democracy. Practically speaking, this means that when a
government develops innovation policy to improve the economy, it must adequately communicate
the innovation policy with the public and civil society via the media, in order to obtain public support
for new strategies.
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 17

Figure 4. Diagram of the open interaction zone and quadruple helix

The Quadruple Helix framework can be described in terms of the models of knowledge that it extends
and by the four subsystems it incorporates; knowledge and know-how are created and transformed,
circulating as inputs and outputs in a way that affects the natural environment.

The Quadruple Helix model builds on the Triple Helix model assessing interactions between university,
industry and government sectors; the addition of a helix focused on the environmental sector is
particularly relevant for assessing smart cities with an emphasis on sustainability. Socio-ecological
interactions via the quadruple helices can serve to highlight opportunities for the knowledge economy;
namely, innovation in the field of sustainable development.

As can be seen in our framework, the four key stakeholders in the interaction zone (university,
business, government, environment) are connected together via multi-directional feedback systems.
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 18

These stakeholders, while important, cannot be isolated from the core co-evolving zone. It is clear
that these four stakeholders are interconnected via smart systems, which also generates large
amounts of citizen-centric data, often without the involvement of the citizen. For example, secondary
data generated from a University research project might be used by Business and Government to
develop a new smart system in the inner core - without the knowledge or involvement of an individual
citizen. We advocate the use of open data to ensure both privacy as well as interaction between the
interacting stakeholders. We therefore define this layer as an open interaction zone.

The third layer in our framework is called the outcome zone, where the interactions of the interaction
zone and inner core can be observed. These interactions are outcomes from either the interaction
zone or the inner core or both.

Figure 5. Diagram of the outcome zone,

third layer in the IndexDNA framework
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 19

For example, the outcome of accessibility is determined by the interaction between society, Universities
and Government. By studying this interaction, the IndexDNA can outline the improvements needed to
provide a high quality of life for all citizens, regardless of their physical or mental disability. In this example,
European Government initiatives like the Disability strategy 2020 (C. O'Mahony and S. Quinlivan, 2020)
and the European 2020 Horizon (M Granieri and A Renda, 2012) agendas have taken societal views
to conceive accessibility as an outcome in terms of space, facilities, services and products. While
we have listed an example of accessibility, it should be noted that outcomes are connected to one
another. For example, accessibility will have an impact on urban environmental issues as well as traffic
control systems, etc. Our framework appreciates that outcomes are manifestations of rich interactions
rather than standalone measures or key performance indices.

Essentially, the IndexDNA framework replicates the helices of the Quadruple Helix Model, identifying
Functional Requirements within them. This model allows us to tease out the micro within the macro;
the government helix, for example, is identified by both Policy and Society. The performance of
an individual city (or region) is thus calculated by examining the relationship between Metrics (e.g.
Governance, Economy, People) and Functional Requirements. A city may therefore obtain both high
and low scores within the same metric: a city’s Governance, for instance, might score highly on the
Policy front but badly on the Sustainability front, depending on its implementation of smart schemes in
either field. In other words, a city’s score depends on the correlation between macro or micro functional
requirements and performance evaluation metrics.

The fourth layer is the technology layer. It is clear that most if not all the outcomes can only be realised
using ICT. While technology is not the panacea to all the interactions in a smart city ecosystem, it
can offer significant leverage to connect all layers of the framework. It is clear that the data from
the different layers need to be stored and analysed to help the citizen and the stakeholders from
the interaction layer to achieve a human-centric ecosystem where physical and cyberspace systems
are interconnected to bring about social, economic, political and environmental changes. The role of
technology is critical to a human-centric smart city ecosystem but is not synonymous with a smart
city ecosystem. There is a plethora of literature (R. R. Harmon, E. G. Castro-Leon and S. Bhide, 2015;
S. Vicini, S. Bellini and A. Sanna, 2012; S. Gopikumar, S. Raja, Y. Harold Robinson, V. Shanmuganathan,
H. Chang and S. Rho, 2021) that shows the benefits of using different types of technologies, ranging
from Artificial Intelligence to Internet of Things, to deliver the outcomes and eventually the desired
impact. Our framework does not advocate any specific technology and is set within the context of
the Collingridge dilemma (A. Genus and A. Stirling, 2018). That is, we fully appreciate “there is always
a trade-off between knowing the impact of a given technology and the ease of influencing its social,
political, and innovation trajectories” (E. Morozov, 2012). Nevertheless, emerging technologies can
offer smart city ecosystems an opportunity to truly transform a human-centric ecosystem where
physical and cyberspace systems are interconnected to bring about social, economic, political and
environmental change. We realize that issues of ethics in how technology is used and implemented is
critical to this layer and hence we term this layer an ethical technology layer.
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 20

The fifth layer of our framework is called the citizen impact layer. Impact is the long term effect of
an outcome. Impact is generally far reaching and broader in terms of its effect and can take time to
observe. We define 4 types of citizen-focused impact in our framework: social, political, environmental
and economic. We do not argue that any one impact is more important than the other. Rather, we
take a view that these impacts are interconnected and often any outcome can impact more than one
category.

Figure 6. The Fifth layer of the IndexDNA ICT Framework

for Smart Cities

Our 5-layer IndexDNA framework takes a complex systems perspective of a smart city ecosystem.
Our framework, while grounded in literature, defines a smart city as an “human-centric ecosystem
where physical and cyberspace systems are interconnected to bring about social, economic,
political and environmental changes”.
White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 21

04.
Background

Example of using
the IndexDNA
Framework for
Sustainable
Urban Mobility
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 22

Background Example of using the

IndexDNA Framework
for Sustainable Urban
Mobility
We use the example of sustainable urban mobility to show how the
IndexDNA Framework can be applied practically. The issue of efficient
and sustainable urban mobility is one of the key issues in a smart city
which aims to provide a human-centric ecosystem with mobility as
a solution. Urban mobility empowers citizens to fully participate in all
aspects of social, economic, political and environmental activity. There
are several indices that aim to measure urban mobility systems, however
none of these takes a holistic approach to sustainable urban mobility.

That being said, there are several legal and political frameworks that
provide guidance, like the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,
the UN paper on the right to cities for all as well as other national
and regional initiatives. As can be seen in our Framework, the issues
associated with sustainable urban mobility stem directly from citizens
and their daily experience with access to different mobility services. The
relationship between citizens and the different mobility systems forms
the core of our framework. For example, easy access to affordable
and green transport services and the amount of bicycle infrastructure
are important issues in the core of our framework. These issues are
not static and co-evolve where physical and cyberspace systems are
interconnected. For example, the uptake of a new metro system might
be low due to issues like affordability.

This dynamic co-evolving issue, as seen in Figure IndexDNA Framework

for Smart Cities, predominantly interacts with the core stakeholders -
Society and Government (dark blue lines) - as well as with secondary
White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 23

stakeholders - Universities and Businesses (dotted blue lines).

Based on different co-evolving issues – different stakeholders
are engaged with a specific issue.. It should be noted that while
the core stakeholders for this issue are Society and Government,
the four key stakeholders in the interaction zone are connected
to each other via multi-directional feedback systems. In fact,
these stakeholders cannot be isolated from the core co-evolving
zone and often generate large amounts of citizen-centric data
that feeds in the technology layer (shown as black lines). In our
framework we advocate the use of open data to ensure both
privacy as well interaction between the interacting stakeholders.

These interactions result in outcomes which can be observed in

layer 3 of our framework. For example, the following 16 outcomes
are associated with the different stakeholders:
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 24

16 outcomes are associated

with the different stakeholders

Government

Society

Business

University
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 25

• Provision of green space

• Bicycle infrastructure
• Monitoring air pollution
• EV infrastructure
• Tax incentives for using sustainable mobility systems
• Public investment in sustainable transportation systems

• Uptake of public commuting

• Safety training while driving
• Citizen-led initiatives for sustainable mobility

• Provision of green space

• Participation in green projects for transportation
• Employee initiatives to support green transport
• Funding projects to sustainable transportation projects

• Development of systems to support smart urban mobility

• Helping design efficient road networks with Government
and Business
• Transfer knowledge about urban mobility to other
stakeholders
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 26

It is clear that Government and Society are the core stakeholders in this project (shown by dark brown
lines). However, for the city to be fully sustainable with a smart and modern urban mobility solution the
other stakeholders (Universities and Business) also have a critical role. While these 16 outcomes can
be measured – these are not standalone measures or key performance indices.

As can be seen in Figure 6, the technology ICT layer provides solutions to make the outcomes a
reality. These are represented by the white circle and arrows.

The resulting impact (fifth layer) in this case is that Social and Environmental change has been achieved
to make a smart city truly sustainable with an urban mobility system. As can be seen this is a long-term
effect of all the outcomes. The Social and Environmental impact is connected to the other outcomes
of policy and economics.

Figure 7. IndexDNA Framework for Smart Cities applied

to sustainable urban mobility system
White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 27

05.
Background

Practical Use
of the IndexDNA
Framework
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 28

Background Practical Use of the

IndexDNA Framework
The developed IndexDNA has been designed to be open, academically
robust and accessible to all stakeholders. We aim to follow principles of
independence, neutrality and scientific diligence thanks to contributions
from industry partners in tech, healthtech, mobility, sustainability and
innovation.

Data neutrality protection is ensured with GDPR. Sponsorship,

subscriptions and an advisory council ensure reliability. The OpenAPI
interface gives access to code information, ensuring transparency while
processing data on smart cities in real time. This process makes the
index pragmatic, moral and cognitive.

We have identified several stakeholders that can participate and benefit

from this IndexDNA. We view all our stakeholders as “partners” in this
project.

We have listed four types of participation that would benefit the

IndexDNA project: contribute, consult, use and critique. This open
project can only succeed if stakeholders can help with all phases of the
IndexDNA development process: development of the framework; data
collection; data analysis; informing and sharing the IndexDNA framework;
and deployment of the framework in the real world.. As shown in Figure
3 above, we have identified the following 5 key stakeholders that can
participate in the IndexDNA project: Citizens, Businesses, Government,
Universities and Funders.

We view all our stakeholders as “partners” in this project. We list how our
key stakeholders can participate in this project, which is listed in Figure
3 below:
White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 29

Figure 8. Stakeholder participation matrix.

 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 30

Acknowledgment
This white paper is the result of a joint pilot project under the co-lead of citiesabc and
openbusinesscouncil, with the participation of the Durham University Business School. citiesabc and
openbusinesscouncil funded the research of this project.

This white paper presents a dynamic smart cities index – called IndexDNA – which captures the
complex relationship between citizens, industry, policymaking and society.

The authors of this white paper are:

Prof. Prof.
Kiran Fernandes Jamal Ouenniche
Professor and Associate Dean Professor in Business Analytics,
Durham University UK University of Edinburgh
Provided the conceptual framework Interpretation of the context and
for this whitepaper, analysis of the helped draft the report.
data and drafted the report.

Mr. Mr.
Dinis Guarda Hilton Supra
Chief Executive Officer Chief Business Development
of ztudium Officer and Vice Chairman
Supplied the context, interpretation of ztudium
of the context and helped draft the Research, guidance and
report. co-ordination

Mr.
William Hosie
Research Associate of ztudium
researching the conceptual
framework for this whitepaper,
analysis of the data and drafted the
report.
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 31

Contributions
This report would not have been possible without support from citiesabc and openbusinesscouncil,
as well as contributions and valuable insights provided by various members associated with the
development of this white paper.

Dr. Mr.
Atanu Chaudhuri Pedro Miguel
Associate Professor in Amaral
Technology Management, Associate Professor - Instituto
Durham University Superior Tecnico Lisbon

Mr. Mr.
Robert Bell Nick Rousseau
Global Gateways Federation CEO - Unconventional
Connections Ltd

Prof. Mr.
Yipeng Liu Ben Goertzel
Director of the Centre for CEO and founder of
China Management and SingularityNET
Global Business (CMGB)
- Reading University

Dr. Mr.
Yu Xiong Antonio de S.
Chair of Business Analytics; Limongi França
Associate Dean International Consultor e Gestor na LF1
- University of Surrey Inovação Tecnológica e
Estratégias Organizacionais
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 32

Highlights of the IndexDNA

To understand the smart city concept as
01. human-centric rather than technology-
centric. Technology serves as an enabler
of a city’s intelligence rather than its root
source.

To integrate cyberspace and physical

02. space using smart technologies.

To use the index as an academic tool

03. which can help determine smart policies
according to a city’s individual needs.

To view the co-evolving core of our

04. indexDNA framework as important to any
smart city indexing activity, as it shows the
importance of the citizen as well as the
citizen’s relationship to the smart service
systems.
 White paper citiesabc openbusinesscouncil cities and business indexdna 33

Bibliography
Agbedahin, A. V. 2019. ‘Sustainable development, Granieri, M. and A. Renda. 2012. Innovation Law and Policy
Education for Sustainable Development, and the 2030 in the European Union: Towards Horizon 2020 (Milan:
Agenda for Sustainable Development: Emergence, Springer-Verlag)
efficacy, eminence, and future’, ISDR 27:4, 669-680
Albino, V., U. Berardi and R. M. Dangelico. 2015. ‘Smart Cities: Komninos, N. 2007. ‘Intelligent Cities’, Encyclopedia of
Definitions, Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives’, digital government (Hershey and London: Idea Group
Journal of Urban Technology 22:1, 3-21 Reference)

Alawadhi, S., A. Aldama-Nalda, H. Chourabi, J.R. Gil- Leach, N. 2009. ‘Digital Cities’, Architectural Design 79.4
Garcia, S. Leung, S. Mellouli, T. Nam, T.A. Pardo,H.J. Scholl, (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley)
S. Walker. 2012. ‘Building Understanding of Smart City
Initiatives’, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 7443, 40 – Nam, T. and T.A. Pardo. 2011. ‘Conceptualizing Smart City
53 with Dimensions of Technology, People, and Institutions’,
Proc. 12th Conference on Digital Government Research,
Anthopoulos, L. and P. Fitsilis. 2010. ‘From Digital to College Park, MD, June 12 – 15
Ubiquitous Cities: Defining a Common Architecture for
Urban Development’, Sixth International Conference on O’Mahony, C. and S. Quinlivan. 2020. ‘The EU disability
Intelligent Environments (Malaysia: IE) strategy and the future of EU disability policy’, Research
Handbook on EU Disability Law (Cheltenham: Edward
Baqir, M.N. and Y. Kathawala. 2004. ‘Ba for Knowledge Cities: Elgar), 12-28
A Futuristic Technology Model’, Journal of Knowledge
Management 8: 5, 83 – 95 Pribyl, O. and M. Lom. 2021. ‘Smart city model based on
systems theory’, International Journal of Information
Barrionuevo, J.M., P. Berrone and J.E. Ricart. 2012. ‘Smart Management (Elsevier BV)
Cities, Sustainable Progress’, IESE Insight 14, 50 – 57
Pribyl, O. and M. Svitek. 2015. ‘System-oriented approach
Brown, A. and A. Kristiansen. 2009. ‘Urban Policies and to smart cities’, IEEE First International Smart Cities
the Right to City: rights, responsibilities and citizenship’, Conference (ISC2)
Unesdoc Digital Library
Ullah, Z., F. Al-Turjman, L. Mostarda, R. Gagliardi. March
BSI Standard Publications. 2014. ‘Smart cities framework 2020. ‘Applications of Artificial Intelligence and Machine
– Guide to establishing strategies for smart cities and learning in smart cities’, Computer Communications, 154,
communities’, PAS 181 313-323

Caragliu, A., C. Del Bo, and P. Nijkamp. 2011. ‘Smart Cities in UK BIS. 2013. ‘Smart Cities: Background Paper’ (London:
Europe’, Journal of Urban Technology 18: 2, 65 – 82. Department for Business Innovation and Skills)

Chen, T.M. 2010. ‘Smart Grids, Smart Cities Need Better

Networks [Editor’s Note]’, IEEE Network 24: 2, 2 – 3. http://www.manchesterdda.com/smartcity/
https://www.edge.org/response-detail/10898
Falconer, G., S. Mitchell. 2012. Cisco Internet Business
Solutions Group (IBSG) Cosgrove, M., W. Harthoorn, J. Hogan, R. Jabbar. 2011.
‘Smarter cities series: Introducing the IBM city operations
Fistola, R. and R.A. La Rocca. 2013. ‘Smart City Planning: a and management solution’.
systemic approach’, 6th Knowledge Cities World Summit
(KCWS) Gartner (2011)

Genus, A. and A. Stirling. 2018. ‘Collingridge and the IDA Singapore, “iN2015 Masterplan” (2012),http://www.
dilemma of control: Towards responsible and accountable ida.gov.sg/~/media/Files/Infocomm%20Landscape/
innovation’, Research Policy 47:1, 61-69 iN2015/Reports/realisingthevisionin2015.pdf
Indexdna Report
2021
www.citiesabc.com