CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 51Smart Cities and TechnologiesUrban Planning and GovernanceSustainability and Climate Change Governance

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Smart governance in institutional context: An in-depth analysis of Glasgow, Utrecht, and Curitiba

Open access
Tomor, Zsuzsanna, Przeybilovicz, Erico, Leleux, Charles·2021·Cities
DOI 10.1016/j.cities.2021.103195
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Smart governance varies considerably across cities, allegedly due to the influence of the institutional setting. Nevertheless, the institutional factors influencing smart governance have yet to be systematically examined. This research proposes to remedy this by exploring the role of the institutional context in shaping the configuration of smart governance. For this purpose, this study, drawing on insights from institutional theory, zooms in on three cities with dissimilar institutional contexts — Curitiba (Brazil), Glasgow (UK), and Utrecht (the Netherlands). The findings suggest that institutional context does indeed affect how smart governance actualizes in cities. These empirical insights result in a heuristic framework for understanding smart governance in diverse urban environments. The framework exhibits a multi-layered influencing mechanism: institutions co-existing on multiple spatial scales interact and modify – reinforce or dissolve – each other's impact on smart governance. This study opens the door to a different approach to understanding smart governance and sheds new light on how this is interrelated with the institutional context.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cities.2021.103195

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 131

  1. Abella, 2017, A model for the analysis of data-driven innovation and value generation in smart cities’ ecosystems, Cities, 64, 47, 10.1016/j.cities.2017.01.011 · DOI
  2. Albino, 2015, Smart cities: Definitions, dimensions, performance, and initiatives, Journal of Urban Technology, 22, 1, 10.1080/10630732.2014.942092 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Allam, 2018, Redefining the smart city: Culture, metabolism and governance, Smart Cities, 1, 4, 10.3390/smartcities1010002 · DOI
  4. Allers, 2015, The Dutch local government bailout puzzle, Public Administration, 93, 451, 10.1111/padm.12123 · DOI
  5. de Almeida, 2006, Decentralization and centralization in a federal system: The case of democratic Brazil, Revista de Sociologia e Política, 1, 1
  6. Alusi, 2011, Sustainable cities: Oxymoron or the shape of the future?, SSRN Electronic Journal, 11-062, 1
  7. Angelidou, 2015, Smart cities: A conjuncture of four forces, Cities, 47, 95, 10.1016/j.cities.2015.05.004 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Angelidou, 2017, Enhancing sustainable urban development through smart city applications, Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management.
  9. Anthopoulos, 2017, Smart utopia vs smart reality: Learning by experience from 10 smart city cases, Cities, 63, 10.1016/j.cities.2016.10.005 · DOI
  10. Arnstein, 1969, A ladder of citizen participation, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 44, 216, 10.1080/01944366908977225 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Arts, 2016, Article three worlds of welfare capitalism or more? A state-of-the-art report, Journal of European Social Policy, 12, 137
  12. Baccarne, 2014, Urban socio-technical innovations with and by citizens, Interdisciplinary Studies Journal, 3, 143
  13. Bambra, 2009, Welfare state regimes, unemployment and health: A comparative study of the relationship between unemployment and self-reported health in 23 European countries, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 63, 92, 10.1136/jech.2008.077354 · DOI
  14. Bătăgan, 2011, Smart cities and sustainability models, Informatica Economică, 15, 80
  15. Batty, 2012, Smart cities of the future, European Physical Journal: Special Topics, 214, 481
  16. Bevort, 2016, Negotiated versus adversarial patterns of social democracy: A comparison between the Netherlands and France, Transfer, 22, 63, 10.1177/1024258915619298 · DOI
  17. Bochel, 2010, Local political leadership and the modernisation of local government, Local Government Studies, 36, 723, 10.1080/03003930.2010.523199 · DOI
  18. Brenner, 2009, Open questions on state rescaling, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 2, 123, 10.1093/cjres/rsp002 · DOI
  19. Breuer, 2014, Beyond defining the smart city. Meeting top-down and bottom-up approaches in the middle, Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment, 4, 153
  20. Broekema, 2016, Explaining trajectories of municipal amalgamations : A case comparison of the Netherlands and Flanders, Local Public Sector Reforms in Times of Crisis: National Trajectories and International Comparisons, 1, 43, 10.1057/978-1-137-52548-2_3 · DOI
  21. Bunders, 2019, Problematizing data-driven urban practices: Insights from five Dutch “smart cities”, Cities, 93, 145, 10.1016/j.cities.2019.05.004 · DOI
  22. Calzada, 2017, The techno-politics of data and smart devolution in city-regions: Comparing Glasgow, Bristol, Barcelona, and Bilbao, Systems, 5, 18, 10.3390/systems5010018 · DOI
  23. Camboim, 2019, Driving elements to make cities smarter: Evidences from European projects, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142, 154, 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.09.014 · DOI
  24. Capdevila, 2015, Smart city or smart citizens? The Barcelona case, Journal of Strategy and Management, 8, 266, 10.1108/JSMA-03-2015-0030 · DOI
  25. Capra, 2016, The smart city and its citizens: Governance and citizen participation in Amsterdam smart city, International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), 5, 20
  26. Caragliu, 2019, Smart innovative cities: The impact of Smart City policies on urban innovation, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142, 373, 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.022 · DOI
  27. Cardullo, 2018, Being a “citizen” in the smart city: Up and down the scaffold of smart citizen participation in Dublin, Ireland, GeoJournal, 1
  28. Castelnovo, 2016, Smart cities governance: The need for a holistic approach to assessing urban participatory policy making, Social Science Computer Review, 34, 724, 10.1177/0894439315611103 · DOI
  29. Coenen, 2012, Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions, Research Policy, 41, 968, 10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.014 · DOI
  30. Cowley, 2017, The smart city and its publics: Insights from across six UK cities, Urban Research and Practice, 11, 1
  31. Crossan, 2016, Contesting neoliberal urbanism in Glasgow’s community gardens: The practice of DIY citizenship, Antipode, 48, 937, 10.1111/anti.12220 · DOI
  32. Datta, 2015, A 100 smart cities, a 100 utopias, Dialogues in Human Geography, 5, 49, 10.1177/2043820614565750 · DOI
  33. Davies, 2004, Conjuncture or disjuncture? An institutionalist analysis of local regeneration partnerships in the UK, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28, 570, 10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00536.x · DOI
  34. De Oliveira, 2015, Constructing human smart cities, Communications in Computer and Information Science, 579, 32, 10.1007/978-3-319-27753-0_3 · DOI
  35. DiMaggio, 1983, The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields, Am. Sociol. Rev., 10.2307/2095101 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Edwards, 2017, Margaret Thatcher's privatization legacy, Cato J., 37, 89
  37. Eisenhardt, 1989, Building theories from case study research, Academy of Management Review, 14, 532, 10.2307/258557 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Eisenstadt, 1980, Cultural orientations, institutional entrepreneurs, and social change: Comparative analysis of traditional civilizations, American Journal of Sociology, 85, 840, 10.1086/227091 · DOI
  39. Energy and Climate Studies, KTH, 2018, Smart city concepts in Curitiba Innovation for sustainable mobility and energy efficiency, Executive Summary, 2018
  40. Ertiö, 2015, Participatory apps for urban planning—Space for improvement, Planning Practice and Research, 30, 303, 10.1080/02697459.2015.1052942 · DOI
  41. Fernandez-Anez, 2018, Smart city implementation and discourses: An integrated conceptual model. The case of Vienna, Cities, 78, 4, 10.1016/j.cities.2017.12.004 · DOI
  42. Figee, 2008, Local government in the Netherlands, The Hague.
  43. Follador, 2018, Informal institutions and path dependence in urban planning: The case of Curitiba, Brazil, Journal of Urban Affairs, 00, 1
  44. Gabrys, 2014, Programming environments: Environmentality and citizen sensing in the smart city, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 32, 30, 10.1068/d16812 · DOI
  45. Galvani, 2018, Bridging the implementation gap in poor areas: A study of how municipal socio-economic characteristics impact intergovernmental policy implementation, Social Policy and Administration, 52, 408, 10.1111/spol.12346 · DOI
  46. Gil-Garcia, 2015, What makes a city smart? Identifying core components and proposing an integrative and comprehensive conceptualization, Information Polity, 20, 61, 10.3233/IP-150354 · DOI
  47. Grafstein, 1988, The problem of institutional constraint, The Journal of Politics, 50, 577, 10.2307/2131459 · DOI
  48. Granier, 2016, How are citizens involved in smart cities? Analysing citizen participation in Japanese “smart communities”, Information Polity, 21, 61, 10.3233/IP-150367 · DOI
  49. Gray, 2015, By any means necessary: Urban regeneration and the “state of exception” in Glasgow’s Commonwealth Games 2014, Antipode, 47, 380, 10.1111/anti.12114 · DOI
  50. Grossi, 2017, Smart cities: Utopia or neoliberal ideology?, Cities, 69, 79, 10.1016/j.cities.2017.07.012 · DOI
  51. Haarstad, 2017, Constructing the sustainable city: Examining the role of sustainability in the “smart city” discourse, Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 19, 423, 10.1080/1523908X.2016.1245610 · DOI
  52. Hambleton, 2000, Modernising political management in local government, Urban Studies (Routledge), 37, 931, 10.1080/00420980050011163 · DOI
  53. Hansen, 2015, The geography of sustainability transitions: Review, synthesis and reflections on an emergent research field, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 17, 92, 10.1016/j.eist.2014.11.001 · DOI
  54. He, 2017, E-participation for environmental sustainability in transitional urban China, Sustainability Science, 12, 187, 10.1007/s11625-016-0403-3 · DOI
  55. Heinelt, Hubert, Nikos Hlepas, Sabine Kuhlmann, and Pawel Swianiewicz. 2018. Local government systems: Grasping the institutional environment of mayors. Political Leaders and Changing Local Democracy. · DOI
  56. Helmke, 2004, Informal institutions and comparative politics: A research agenda, Perspectives on Politics, 2, 725, 10.1017/S1537592704040472 · DOI
  57. Henderson, 2018, From charity to social enterprise: The marketization of social care, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 24, 651
  58. Hollands, 2015, Critical interventions into the corporate smart city, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 8, 61, 10.1093/cjres/rsu011 · DOI · Paper page
  59. Inch, 2018, “Opening for business”? Neoliberalism and the cultural politics of modernising planning in Scotland, Urban Studies, 55, 1076, 10.1177/0042098016684731 · DOI
  60. Jiang, 2019, Smart urban governance: An urgent symbiosis?, Information Polity, 24, 245, 10.3233/IP-190130 · DOI
  61. Jornal Agua Verde, 2018, ‘Vale Do Pinhão Será Grande Atração Do Smart City Curitiba’, Destaca Greca, Jornal Agua Verde, 2018
  62. Kantor, 1997, The political economy of urban regimes: A comparative perspective, Urban Affairs Review, 32, 348, 10.1177/107808749703200303 · DOI
  63. Karvonen, 2014, Urban laboratories: Experiments in reworking cities, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38, 379, 10.1111/1468-2427.12075 · DOI
  64. Kincaid, 1999, De facto devolution and urban defunding: The priority of persons over places, Journal of Urban Affairs, 21, 135, 10.1111/0735-2166.00009 · DOI
  65. Kitchin, 2015, Making sense of smart cities: Addressing present shortcomings, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 8, 131, 10.1093/cjres/rsu027 · DOI
  66. Kittilson, 2010, Engaging citizens: The role of power-sharing institutions, Journal of Politics, 72, 990, 10.1017/S0022381610000484 · DOI
  67. Koirala, 2016, Local alternative for energy supply: Performance assessment of integrated community energy systems, Energies, 9, 10.3390/en9120981 · DOI
  68. Kourtit, 2017, The significance of digital data systems for smart city policy, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 58, 13, 10.1016/j.seps.2016.10.001 · DOI
  69. Kruger, 2018, A holistic model integrating value co-creation methodologies towards the sustainable development, Journal of Cleaner Production, 191, 400, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.180 · DOI
  70. Kummitha, 2017, How do we understand smart cities? An evolutionary perspective, Cities, 67, 43, 10.1016/j.cities.2017.04.010 · DOI
  71. Ladner, 2016, Measuring local autonomy in 39 countries (1990–2014), Regional and Federal Studies, 26, 321, 10.1080/13597566.2016.1214911 · DOI
  72. Lee, 2014, Towards an effective framework for building smart cities: Lessons from Seoul and San Francisco, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 89, 80, 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.08.033 · DOI
  73. Lim, 2018, Smart cities with big data: Reference models, challenges, and considerations, Cities, 82, 86, 10.1016/j.cities.2018.04.011 · DOI
  74. Lobato, Lenaura de Vasconcelos Costa. 2016. “Políticas Sociais e Modelos de Bem-Estar Social: Fragilidades Do Caso Brasileiro.” Saúde Em Debate 40 (spe): 87–97. doi:https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-11042016s08. · DOI
  75. Lowndes, 2001, Rescuing Aunt Sally: Taking institutional theory seriously in urban politics, Urban Studies, 38, 1953, 10.1080/00420980120080871 · DOI
  76. March, 2016, Smart contradictions: The politics of making Barcelona a self-sufficient city, European Urban and Regional Studies, 23, 816, 10.1177/0969776414554488 · DOI
  77. March, 1984, The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life, The American Political Science Review, 78, 734, 10.2307/1961840 · DOI
  78. Marques, 2002, Ideological clevage and private companies in matters of urban public investments: São Paulo 1978/1998, Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, 17, 71
  79. Martínez, 2016, Revealing Curitiba’s flawed sustainability: How discourse can prevent institutional change, Habitat International, 53, 350, 10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.12.007 · DOI
  80. McCann, 2010, Relationality/territoriality: Toward a conceptualization of cities in the world, Geoforum, 41, 175, 10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.06.006 · DOI
  81. McConnell, 2006, Central-local government relations in Scotland, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 72, 73, 10.1177/0020852306061622 · DOI
  82. McGarvey, 2002, Intergovernmental relations in Scotland post-devolution, Local Government Studies, 28, 29, 10.1080/714004157 · DOI
  83. Meijer, 2016, Smart city research: Contextual conditions, governance models, and public value assessment, Social Science Computer Review, 34, 647, 10.1177/0894439315618890 · DOI
  84. Meijer, 2016, Governing the smart city: A review of the literature on smart urban governance, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 82, 392, 10.1177/0020852314564308 · DOI · Paper page
  85. Molinari, 2009, Framing web 2.0 in the process of public sector innovation: Going down the participation ladder, European Journal of EPractice, 9, 20
  86. Molotch, 1976, The city as a growth machine: Toward a political economy of place, American Journal of sociology, 82, 309, 10.1086/226311 · DOI
  87. Mora, 2001, Fiscal decentralization and subnational fiscal autonomy in Brazil: Some facts of the nineties, Texto Para Discussão, 854, 1
  88. Morais, 2012, Neo-developmentalism and the challenges of economic policy-making under Dilma Rousseff, Critical Sociology, 38, 789, 10.1177/0896920512441635 · DOI
  89. Mueller, 2018, Citizen design science: A strategy for crowd-creative urban design, Cities, 72, 181, 10.1016/j.cities.2017.08.018 · DOI
  90. Muis, 2018, G5 En VNG Werken Samen in smart city strategie, Architectenweb., 2018
  91. Neirotti, 2014, Current trends in smart city initiatives: Some stylised facts, Cities, 38, 25, 10.1016/j.cities.2013.12.010 · DOI · Paper page
  92. Niederer, 2016, Smart citizens: Exploring the tools of the urban bottom-up movement, Computer Supported Cooperative Work: CSCW: An International Journal, 25, 137, 10.1007/s10606-016-9249-6 · DOI
  93. Pagano, 1995, The state of American federalism, 1994–1995, Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 25, 1, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubjof.a038199 · DOI
  94. Parkinson, 1990, Leadership and regeneration in Liverpool: Confusion, confrontation, or coalition, Leadership and urban regeneration, 37, 241
  95. Phillimore, 2013, Understanding intergovernmental relations: Key features and trends, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 72, 228, 10.1111/1467-8500.12025 · DOI
  96. Pierre, 1999, Models of urban governance: The institutional dimension of urban politics, Urban Affairs Review, 34, 372, 10.1177/10780879922183988 · DOI
  97. Pierre, 2005, Comparative urban governance: Uncovering complex causalities, Urban Affairs Review, 40, 446, 10.1177/1078087404273442 · DOI
  98. Pierre, 2005, Comparative urban governance: Uncovering complex causalities, Urban Affairs Review, 40, 446, 10.1177/1078087404273442 · DOI
  99. Pierre, 2014, Can urban regimes travel in time and space? Urban regime theory, urban governance theory, and comparative urban politics, Urban Affairs Review, 50, 864, 10.1177/1078087413518175 · DOI
  100. Pierson, 1996, The path to European integration: A historical institutionalist analysis, Comparative Political Studies, 29, 123, 10.1177/0010414096029002001 · DOI · Paper page
  101. Raven, 2019, Urban experimentation and institutional arrangements, European Planning Studies, 27, 258, 10.1080/09654313.2017.1393047 · DOI
  102. Roche, 2016, Geographic information science II: Less space, more places in smart cities, Progress in Human Geography, 40, 565, 10.1177/0309132515586296 · DOI
  103. Ruhlandt, 2018, The governance of smart cities: A systematic literature review, Cities, 81, 1, 10.1016/j.cities.2018.02.014 · DOI
  104. Ruijer, 2017, Connecting societal issues, users and data. Scenario-based design of open data platforms, Government Information Quarterly, 34, 470, 10.1016/j.giq.2017.06.003 · DOI
  105. Ruijer, 2017, Open data for democracy: Developing a theoretical framework for open data use, Government Information Quarterly, 34, 45, 10.1016/j.giq.2017.01.001 · DOI
  106. Saad-Filho, 2013, Mass protests under ‘left neoliberalism’: Brazil, June–July 2013, Critical Sociology, 39, 657, 10.1177/0896920513501906 · DOI
  107. Scholl, 2016, Creating smart governance: The key to radical ICT overhaul at the city of Munich, Information Polity, 21, 21, 10.3233/IP-150369 · DOI
  108. Sellers, 2002, The nation-state and urban governance: Toward multilevel analysis, Urban Affairs Review, 37, 611, 10.1177/107808740203700501 · DOI
  109. Sellers, 2007, Decentralization, local government, and the welfare state, Governance, 20, 609, 10.1111/j.1468-0491.2007.00374.x · DOI
  110. Silveira, 2018, Primeiros Resultados Do Programa Do Vale Do Pinhão Já São Observados Em Curitiba, Tribuna., 2018
  111. Stratigea, 2015, Tools and technologies for planning the development of smart cities, Journal of Urban Technology, 22, 43, 10.1080/10630732.2015.1018725 · DOI
  112. Sweeting, 2002, Leadership in urban governance: The mayor of London, Local Government Studies, 28, 3, 10.1080/714004134 · DOI
  113. Swianiewicz, 2014, An empirical typology of local government systems in Eastern Europe, Local Government Studies, 40, 292, 10.1080/03003930.2013.807807 · DOI
  114. Tapscott, 1999, Governance in the digital economy, Finance and Development, 36, 34
  115. Taylor Buck, 2017, Competitive urbanism and the limits to smart city innovation: The UK future cities initiative, Urban Studies, 54, 501, 10.1177/0042098015597162 · DOI
  116. Tomor, 2019, Smart governance for sustainable cities: Findings from a systematic literature review, Journal of Urban Technology, 26, 3, 10.1080/10630732.2019.1651178 · DOI
  117. Trencher, 2019, Towards the Smart City 2.0: Empirical evidence of using smartness as a tool for tackling social challenges, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142, 117, 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.033 · DOI · Paper page
  118. Viitanen, 2014, Smart cities and green growth: Outsourcing democratic and environmental resilience to the global technology sector, Environment and Planning A, 46, 803, 10.1068/a46242 · DOI
  119. Villadsen, 1986, Local corporatism? The role of organisations and local movements in the local welfare state, Policy and Politics, 14, 247, 10.1332/030557386782628217 · DOI
  120. Walravens, 2012, Mobile business and the smart city: Developing a business model framework to include public design parameters for mobile city services, Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 7, 121, 10.4067/S0718-18762012000300011 · DOI
  121. Walters, 2011, Smart cities, smart places, smart democracy: Form-based codes, electronic governance and the role of place in making smart cities, Intelligent Buildings International, 3, 198, 10.1080/17508975.2011.586670 · DOI
  122. Wampler, 2004, Expanding accountability through participatory institutions: Mayors, citizens, and budgeting in three Brazilian municipalities, Latin American Politics and Society, 46, 73, 10.1111/j.1548-2456.2004.tb00276.x · DOI
  123. Webb, 2016, Governing cities for sustainable energy: The UK case, Cities, 54, 28, 10.1016/j.cities.2015.10.014 · DOI
  124. Wiig, 2016, The empty rhetoric of the smart city: From digital inclusion to economic promotion in Philadelphia, Urban Geography, 37, 535, 10.1080/02723638.2015.1065686 · DOI
  125. Wiig, 2016, Introduction: Thinking through the politics of the smart city, Urban Geography, 37, 485, 10.1080/02723638.2016.1178479 · DOI
  126. Wilson, 2017, Urban planning, public participation and digital technology: App development as a method of generating citizen involvement in local planning processes, Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science
  127. Wincott, 2006, Paradoxes of new labour social policy: Toward universal child care in Europe’s “most liberal” welfare regime?, Social Politics, 13, 286, 10.1093/sp/jxj011 · DOI
  128. van Winden, 2017, Smart city pilot projects: Exploring the dimensions and conditions of scaling up, Journal of Urban Technology, 24, 51, 10.1080/10630732.2017.1348884 · DOI
  129. Yigitcanlar, 2018, Understanding “smart cities”: Intertwining development drivers with desired outcomes in a multidimensional framework, Cities, 81, 145, 10.1016/j.cities.2018.04.003 · DOI
  130. Yin, 1981, The case study crisis: Some answers, Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 58, 10.2307/2392599 · DOI
  131. Zhao, 2015, The evolution of the urban planning system in contemporary China: An institutional approach, International Development Planning Review, 37, 269, 10.3828/idpr.2015.18 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Tomor, Z., Przeybilovicz, E., & Leleux, C.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • University of Stirling (GB)
Corresponding author
Tomor, Zsuzsanna
ORCID
Leleux, Charles
Venue
Cities
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-07
Volume
114
Pages
103195
ISSN
0264-2751 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cities.2021.103195
OpenAlex
W3149881401
Cited by
51
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2
FWCI
5.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Cities (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Stirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/N011473/1)
  • FAPESP
  • International Centre for Theoretical Sciences
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (485\u201314-036)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Smart Cities and Technologies
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban Planning and Governance
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
Keywords
smart governance, institutional environment, institutional theory, smart cities, urban governance, spatial scale, institutional influence, heuristic framework, Glasgow, Utrecht, Curitiba

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review