Blockchain Papers

Man Zhang, Jing Wang, Danwen Ji

No abstract is available for this record.

Temitope Omotayo, Bankole Awuzie, Saheed Ajayi, Alireza Moghayedi · 5 authors

The contribution of smart campuses to smart cities’ development and vice versa has been elucidated in extant literature. The micro-transfer of smart technologies and probable procurement and contracting models remain critical for such contributions to take place. This study used a systems thinking approach to establish the interrelationships existing between smart campus technologies which can be scaled towards the development of smart cities and assess the critical failure factors negating the micro-transfer of these technologies to smart city development initiatives in developing countries. To achieve its objective, the study adopted a phenomenological research design wherein qualitative data was elicited from a purposively selected sample of seven interviewees in South African Universities. The next phase of the analysis involved a thematic approach for the production of a causal loop diagram (CLD) reflecting the interrelationships between the abovementioned facets and the associated impact on the transference of knowledge and technologies from smart campuses to smart cities. This CLD was subsequently validated by a cohort of five experts. Findings from the validation phase were incorporated in an improved CLD which provided different archetypes for engendering successful transference. This study holds salient implications for universities, cities and other stakeholders seeking to engage in a quadruple helix innovative arrangement for smart campus/city development. This study concluded that smart campuses could act as living labs for future smartness of cities globally. Government funding and willingness to produce smart cities from campuses is a fundamental feature of creating smart infrastructure in cities.

Temitope Omotayo, Alireza Moghayedi, Bankole Awuzie, Saheed Ajayi

Sustainable development can be attained at a microlevel and having smart campuses around the world presents an opportunity to achieve city-wide smartness. In the process of attaining smartness on campuses, the elements requiring attention must be investigated. There are many publications on smart campuses, and this investigation used the bibliometric analysis method to identify such publications produced over the last decade. A matrix of 578 nodes and 3217 edges was developed from 285 publications on smart campus construction and procurement. Fifteen cluster themes were produced from the bibliometric analysis. The findings revealed that China contributed 48.4% of all published articles on the smart campus. The findings presented a framework from the cluster themes under the four broad infrastructure areas of building construction or repurposing, technology and IT network, continuous improvement, and smart learning and teaching management. The implications of the findings identified that IT project management, traditional procurement strategy, and standard forms of contracts such as the New Engineering Contract (NEC) and the Joint Contract Tribunal (JCT) are applicable in the procurement of smart cities.

Ulrich Schmitt

The envisioned embracing of thriving knowledge societies is increasingly compromised by threatening perceptions of information overload, attention poverty, opportunity divides, and career fears. This paper traces the roots of these symptoms back to causes of information entropy and structural holes, invisible private and undiscoverable public knowledge which characterize the sad state of our current knowledge management and creation practices. As part of an ongoing design science research and prototyping project, the article's (neg)entropic perspectives complement a succession of prior multi-disciplinary publications. Looking forward, it proposes a novel decentralized generative knowledge management approach that prioritizes the capacity development of autonomous individual knowledge workers not at the expense of traditional organizational knowledge management systems but as a viable means to foster their fruitful co-evolution. The article, thus, informs relevant stakeholders about the current unsustainable status quo inhibiting knowledge workers; it presents viable remedial options (as a prerequisite for creating the respective future generative Knowledge Management (KM) reality) to afford a sustainable solution with the generative potential to evolve into a prospective general-purpose technology.

Darcy Parks

Malmö aims to become Sweden’s most climate-smart city and Hyllie, its newest city district, is to lead the way. This ambition is front and centre in the 2011 Climate Contract that envisioned Hyllie as a climate-neutral city district. Malmö signed the Climate Contract with Eon, a multinational energy company. But five years after signing the Climate Contract, Malmö and Eon gave up their goal of a making Hyllie climate-neutral by 2020. The Climate Contract resembles other smart city initiatives that many researchers have criticised for promoting technology-centric, corporation-controlled visions of cities. Assemblage urbanism and the sociology of expectations help to analyse the techno-political dynamics between organisations, visions and urban infrastructure. The realisation of a vision is a techno-political process that requires the coordination of multiple groups around multiple promises. At first, it was the Climate Contract that helped Eon and the city administration to coordinate their activities. Subsequently, Eon made a promise to build wind turbines, and that promise then took precedence in the coordination of their activities. But controversies arose with two publics that emerged in opposition to Eon’s promise: neighbours to the site of the proposed wind turbine and the city’s Property Department. Unable to resolve these controversies, Eon and Malmö acknowledged that they lacked the resources need to make Hyllie climate-neutral. They adapted their original promise to the current state of socio-material assemblages, and Hyllie was demoted from a role model for the climate-smart city to a source of lessons learned.

Chris Elsden, Kate Symons, Raluca Bunduchi, Chris Speed · 5 authors

Recent work within HCI and CSCW has become attentive to the politics of data and metrics in order to highlight the implications of what counts and how. In this paper, we relate these discussions to the longstanding distinctions made between value and values. We introduce literature on 'Valuation Studies' and argue for understanding the politics of data through valuation - an ongoing social practice that transforms socially embedded values into different forms of more abstract value. This theoretical work is developed through an ethnographic study of contemporary UK charity shops, as a site focused on the labour of valuation, but embedded in both local and global values. Through this study, we consider implications for the intervention and design of 'data-driven innovation', with a particular focus on distributed ledger technologies. We argue that these technologies inevitably engage in valuation, and require careful attention to the ongoing processes by which value is translated and performed by different stakeholders.

Syed Omer Husain, Alex Franklin, D. Roep

This article introduces the concept of ‘place-based civic tech’ — citizen engagement technology co- designed by local government, civil society and global volunteers. It investigates to what extent creating such a digital space for autonomous self-organization allows for the emergence of a parallel, self-determining and more place-based geography of politics and political action. It finds that combining online tools with offline collaborative practices presents a unique opportunity for decentralization of power and decision-making in a manner which both politically motivates civil society and begins to update the infrastructure of democracy. The discussion is supported by a combination of primary and secondary data, with research methods including ethnographic and participatory observation techniques. Research data is drawn from a range of empirical sources, including an in-depth case study of the radical municipalist movement in Spain. The article concludes that there is a clear and compelling narrative of cities taking power back, in the form of a plural and globally networked movement. As such, this study contributes to both the theory and practice of civic tech, collective impact, municipalism and place-based urban politics while emphasizing the need for further research on experiments and movements currently existing below the academic radar. <br/>

Michel Rauchs, Andrew Glidden, Brian Gordon, Gina Pieters · 8 authors

The DLT ecosystem is plagued with the use of incomplete and inconsistent definitions and a lack of standardised terminology, creating a needlessly complicated landscape for everyone from experienced policymakers and developers to individuals venturing into the field for the first time. This study sets out to contribute to international discussions to create a shared, common language around DLT systems to clarify terminology and concepts.

Kristoffer Nærland, Christoph Müller-Bloch, Roman Beck, Søren Palmund

Many decentralized, inter-organizational environments such as supply chains are characterized by high transactional uncertainty and risk. At the same time, blockchain technology promises to mitigate these issues by introducing certainty into economic transactions. This paper discusses the findings of a Design Science Research project involving the construction and evaluation of an information technology artifact in collaboration with Maersk, a leading international shipping company, where central documents in shipping, such as the Bill of Lading, are turned into a smart contract on blockchain. Based on our insights from the project, we provide first evidence for preliminary design principles for applications that aim to mitigate the transactional risk and uncertainty in decentralized environments using blockchain. Both the artifact and the first evidence for emerging design principles are novel, contributing to the discourse on the implications that the advent of blockchain technology poses for governing economic activity.

Elizabeth K. Briody, Ken C. Erickson

People who work in large organizations often lament the decentralized structures that defi ne their work functions and day-to-day activities. Finance, IT, supply chain, legal, and any number of other organizational functions exhibit cultures that are distinctive in their work practices, processes, and perspectives. Colloquially referred to as silos, these internal organizational units are often characterized as impenetrable, and are frequently the subject of fi nger pointing and blame. They seem to stand in opposition to each other; the people within them seem to be optimizing for their own individual area rather than for the wellbeing of the wider corporate whole.

Amy Glasmeier, Susan Christopherson

How should we think about ‘smart cities’? This issue brings together a set of articles that examine current debates around the goals, ethics, potential and limitations of a concept that has become a metaphor for urban modernity. We also include an unusual addition, a short intervention that surfaces some of the controversial issues related to smart cities, as a conception and as a practical undertaking. Some of the seeds of today’s smart cities can be found in a series of conversations among scholars and practitioners in the 1980s, reflecting on the future of cities. In a book review, Phil Harris, describes a particularly significant intervention by Sheridan Tatsuno of NeoConcepts, a consultant connected to the Institute for Constructive Capitalism at the University of Texas at Austin, a think tank founded in the 1980s by George Kosmetsky, an entrepreneur turned academic. Like others at the conference, Tatsuno was writing at a time when Silicon Valley was the place to emulate and ventures such as the Research Triangle Park in North Carolina served as alternative examples of successful future industrialisation. He, like many others, was propagating the idea that any and every place could be Silicon Valley-like, if they simply followed a prescription: As Harris (1992) describes: Tatsuno calls out “the age of technopolis and the metamorphosis of traditional cities and even high-tech parks. One alternative is the global network city of dispersed, highly interactive economic nodes linked by massive networks of airports, highways, and communications. Another metaphor is the “intelligent city” featuring advanced information/communication technologies, complexes wired for satellite and fiber optics. These network cities are inhabited by “knowledge processors” engaged in rapid information exchanges (Harris, 1992). As Rob Kitchin lays out in his article in this issue, however, the origins of the smart city are not found solely in the search for technological utopias (Kitchin, 2015). They also originate in the 1980s prescriptions for managed, entrepreneurial cities—whose speed and flexibility in adapting to global markets make them more efficient and competitive (Logan and Molotch, 1987). Kitchin also raises the provocative question of whether another model of ‘smartness’, the digital or wired city, belongs in the ‘smart city’ genre. The wired city in fact offered a somewhat different vision, that of inclusiveness in access to digital technologies. These two competing visions of cities transformed by technologies have not been reconciled despite the recognition that the Internet and particularly, the Internet of things, is a central feature of smart city models. Although the ‘smart city’ concept has emerged from long-persisting ideas about urban technological utopias and the perfectly competitive city, it also differs from these urban visions in some important ways. What is new about the contemporary smart city narrative is the emphasis on places transformed by the application of technologies rather than, as in the case of Silicon Valley, places where sectors such as microelectronics and computers drive the urban economy. Smart cities are not just where new technologies might be born. They are the receptacles for technology, the target of its applications. Although saturated as consumer markets, cities present opportunities for firms seeking markets for modern sensing, forecasting and management technologies. Although 1990s city policymakers sought to replicate the job base and innovative milieu of high-tech centres, the contemporary purveyors of smart city technologies see city governments as markets for the products of the last 40 years of technology development. At the same time, ambitious politicians and civil servants are ever on the search for the next ‘big idea’ to move their city to the top of the rank of attractive places. The race to get on the bandwagon and become a smart city has encouraged city policymakers to endogenise the process of technology-led growth, directing municipal budgets toward investments that bestow smart city status. The public investments that confer smart city status are impressive. A recent report from a large Australian development company puts a dollar figure on the expected growth of smart cities. According to Ivan Fernandez, Industry Director for Frost & Sullivan, Australia and New Zealand, a consulting firm promoting growth through globalisation, The global smart city market will be valued at US$1.565 trillion in 2020. Over 26 Global Cities are expected to be Smart Cities in 2025, with more than 50% of these smart cities from Europe and North America. By 2025, it is expected that around 58% of the world’s population or 4.6 billion people will live in urban areas. In developed regions and cities, the urban population in cities could account for up to 81% of total population. This will pose serious challenges for city planners, who will have to re-think how they provide basic city services to residents in a sustainable manner. Governments of smart cities are transforming from a traditional model of a silo-based organization to a more collaborative, integrated service delivery model. Cities will collaborate with each other to drive smart city innovation by entering into partnerships with each other. Technology and ecosystem convergence, collaboration and partnerships between stakeholders from different industries, such as energy and infrastructure, IT, telecoms and government will also expedite the delivery of integrated services http://www.newswiretoday.com/news/148711/Global-Smart-Cities-Market-to-Reach-US1.56-Trillion-by-2020-Finds-Frost-and-Sullivan/ Smart city advocates include not only large information economy businesses, such as IBM, Intel, Siemens, CISCO and SAP, but also academic and philanthropic organisations. Each has a distinctive sense of what smart cities can accomplish. Academics are attracted to technology applications that offer the ability to ‘sense’ and track human use of urban infrastructure. They are drawn by the potential that these applications offer to remediate urban problems such as snarled traffic, the lack of parking spaces, and inefficient energy use and waste disposal. Philanthropists see solutions to urban ills with an eye toward greater equity, improved quality of life and citizen empowerment. The large information firms see the vastly expanding market for management applications in an urbanising world as an opportunity to develop stable revenue streams in the form of continuous contracts. These firms are, however, selling different visions of ‘smart’ and products to achieve the vision. Competing and sometimes contradictory stakeholder goals contribute to the inevitable conclusion that the smart city is a chaotic concept. What the smart cities movement has done, albeit perhaps inadvertently, is to reignite interest in cities as engines of growth. This has been perhaps most evident with the model cities created on greenfield sites. A few have gone beyond drawing boards and taken shape on the ground. Each of these cities is unique and hence an unlikely candidate for reproducibility as ‘the’ smart city model. The distinctiveness characteristic of Song Do in South Korean or Plan IT in Portugal belies one of the most common complaints about smart city applications, that they espouse only a single development model. What they do have in common, however, beyond encompassing expansive views of ‘smart city’ development, is acceptance of urban competitiveness and the primacy of economic goals as intrinsic to the smart city concept. Looking closely, there are a dizzying array of attempts at smart city formation and membership. As Hollands’s contribution to this special issue highlights, there are all manner and scale of potential candidates. He highlights eight well-known examples. Singapore’s iN2015 (intelligent nation) project, Songdo, South Korea’s purpose built, globally competitive, high-tech, environmentally sustainable, business city, or Guangzhou Knowledge City in China are designed to attract talent, skilled manpower and knowledge-based industries. Masdar City, in the UAE, is currently being designed as an ‘oasis of the future’ (quite literally as it is built in the desert) and intended to become the world’s first sustainable, renewable, energy-powered cleantech cluster (Kingsley, 2013). In Scandinavia and Europe, Helsinki and ‘Intelligent’ Thessaloniki (Greece) are held up as examples of encouraging the development of new mobile applications utilising open data and using IT to increase competitiveness and sustainability, respectively (Komninos et al., 2013). In Europe, Barcelona, continues to be renowned for its Smart City Model and in November 2014 hosted its fourth Smart City Expo World Congress in as many years (see http://www.smartcityexpo.com/), while the Amsterdam Smart City initiative is held up as the example of how to retrofit a city to improve living and economic conditions and reduce carbon emissions (Hollands, 2015; Kirby, 2013). An important takeaway from this list of smart cities is the tailored nature of their approach. The objective is not just as technology users but as shrines of economic development practice. Some are using the smart city title to gain status by offering annual events to newcomers wishing to take up the mantle of smart city development (http://smartcitiesportugal.net). There is frequently an alliance between the prototype smart city builders and scholars discussing the phenomenon. Their perspectives come together under the umbrella of cities as machines for living. Both promote at least somewhat utopian visions based on technological fixes for those aspects of urban settlement and the concentration of human beings that make for human frustration and slow the flow of goods and services. The authors in this special issue are all aware of this perspective although some emphasise it more than others. A special issue on such a nebulous topic can never be comprehensive, but authors in this issue place the smart city in historical context, provide concrete examples of smart city applications and point to arenas where the concept and practice differ from prior urban technological fixes. The authors also indicate where the urban technological fix, in both its historical and contemporary forms has failed—for example, in addressing equity concerns. They demonstrate that there is a difference between what we can measure and what we need to know. The limits of the smart city are created both by the absence of data applications that could drive collective rather than individual solutions and by the inability to address intangible qualities of cities that both improve and detract from the quality of urban life for city residents. These critiques have been part of the discussions on the closely related topic of ‘big data’. Although the authors in this issue approach the subject of smart cities from very different angles, they generally agree that smart city technologies are ill-suited to solving the problems that lie at the heart of improving the quality of urban life. Poverty is not on the agenda of smart city planners. They may solve traffic problems, but it is not clear how they will regenerate failing schools or find ways to include neighbourhoods facing disinvestment. The contradiction between the promise of smart cities and its limited policy scope is aptly demonstrated in one of the most celebrated smart cities, Rio de Janeiro. The city, with its control centre filled with wall size computer monitors, can perhaps use forecasts of threatening weather to send out warnings of storm intensity thus leading to speedier evacuation. What it does not address is the question of why people build housing in such high-risk environments and what it would take to change this In this at smart city technologies with rather than the are evident in the eight this They some important about what the concept of smart cities is and and what it can and What do people by the ‘smart A search of the up of to the Some the smart city as an urban that is than the urban environments we live in firms in the business of selling and technology to drive smart smart city is a new market for urban is an urban form to be or to make and however, are more in their smart city’ to a few that use data to solve problems, such as waste management and traffic The authors in this special issue have different perspectives but the smart city by two is the use of technologies to the of urban example, built ‘smart’ by is to be with new and economic growth. In a and more smart cities are urban places where the calls a new There are, in few examples of greenfield that of the As even the greenfield such as or Masdar City, to out that the will and the As and the greenfield smart city will be the et al., 2015). smart cities are about by technology to such as to make more in with In the of smart cities are about rather than about new urban environments as they will all be different of the of municipal budgets and the to the Rob smart city with one urban and economic development, while the other on use of technology for public 2015). The limits of around the concept in part as with prior when the of economic growth has economic for new markets to They for a that will a of job and example, one of the smart city, the city’ to the 1980s, another of economic growth, on the of the 1980s economic development for another of in the economy. the greenfield and for the the of there is new and in the technologies and this of urban development economic and urban growth in its the next years we will live on an urban According to in the New and by the and by the that more than of the world’s population will in cities. This that another cities of or more population will be to today’s the cities by will be in size and these what do the in this issue have to about the of smart city the of et this of toward more of how and from where these have and how they are in places around the The is that although data applications and technological are their will be in cities are and where the and for collective goods are such as waste and to and cities are new ways to use IT and What smart city As and in this issue, many of these new cities with One of is with such as for in the et al., 2015). In another a set up by the for technology around energy and it is important to whether the new are being by new smart city technology or public budgets by special issue on in the city particularly by et al., and and the many ways that city was and being out to reduce do the come from for smart city could be in a such would have and been for through these of investments have to be in the of municipal the last of encompassing of and those of Smart city have to be in of whether they are and provide new such as for public Internet by do they for and what would be of public such as and of How and in what ways do such as those to and address in cities, such as New and and speed the process of the would provide a more of smart city is from smart city Although smart city technology investments are of rather than on the citizen they offer access to information on They can and interest the opportunity to conditions and the potential to improve the urban these potential however, on the of the contribution to the fact that the of an intervention has significant for its and and that each has an intended city the of an intervention can be open and is an important By what also highlights is the of and to use smart city The many of these is that a smart and how to it at Technology are to just how and these technology there is the In some of the cities of the world like as as a is Although not technology by today’s the innovation in highlights how like a up a city’ life to that are The absence of as basic as a of the how we have to to make technology for the of basic also that the smart city being developed for cities are years of the of most of the world’s urban et al., 2015). to have a is like a can do and places to and gain from smart city we need more than the of of the smart city narrative currently we are to and propagating one size all and we need this will to beyond a of that of from places. of the authors in the special issue based on the about smart city the in his of the with in South and Portugal the of smart city who that the and of the technologies could be in the absence of human at the of case the out of the process and the idea that technology in to conception with In other the to that do not address As both and Kitchin we need more in to the and of smart city The authors in this special issue make significant toward this and demonstrate what we can from up the about smart cities. These could be built on through a series of that the of different cities in we might in and example, cities of the same size in the same and those that we might to differ but are as if they are example, cities in the Global South and or greenfield and The would the of smart city and their on economic development and of to be The would the ways in smart city and are being and in different and the ways in the concept and Although we can what urban the of the smart city movement is a like that in technology would and more efficient urban areas. Their was at an of time and from urban and urban policymakers to make for urban more that their smart city and CISCO have to the emphasis of some of their from being to and citizen (Kitchin, are also more with and out in urban to be as the next Intel, or other of smart city development. In an of with South and that has been a in will be is to have Smart Cities and different for each Smart we should not at technological rather at how to the and that more people come to these cities. is the more practical approach. need to at the is a place and should be but it is There is with the waste also need a people need to have A Smart City is when people to the city for have to that opportunity to them engaged of even the advocates and of smart city technologies the limits of beyond the to the and economic citizen have demonstrated the ability to and the of smart city technologies to in public and to for urban and also have been at utilising the of data from of and not for such as a that of public for applications to and for city to for urban and 2015). Cities are being by technology in the that the cities can the for smart city technology Director of and for the City of as is the case with technological the users into but by through collaboration and cities more their are more are to make using such as City data from users who are seeking to track life does this urban with technologies that to track of people on a how of the smart city is being toward of in unlikely to be or to use the of a What of the the the and of and the use of the data the absence of from the it just that neighbourhoods have or or is it that residents about on their the of or the of are they in need of service in their or frequently to get from to and 2015). In other do they need different data and point promise is that more information will improve the of urban life and to the of many and efficient The question is that promise to is the conception of the ‘smart city’ or does by the very nature of the data it important in In the smart city the is all to for on smart city we would that there is a need to form around the of cities. Although the promise of is up in the of such as and they are only one of smart city City are as in the that promise the as are their to and toward the array of urban city are also and should be held in the of the status of ‘smart They are if for the future city have only the most most residents in and who may not the technology or who use it solely for Research on technology that the technology is that there are few places in the where a In a example, in the what limits is not the technology but its and the of the to and the technology et al., In we offer a of to As Kitchin if we to see smart city development and take on and more of new technology applications, it is to the that the practitioners what the technology can and what the application conditions are market and how applications are from These are The point is that we just to the We have to be and to get up and how new applications and technologies can be to improve the quality of urban life. we we out of this are that billion people will move to or be into urban by of these residents will live in or many of these cities will out of or and of these have to be built from the Smart city is into the future and at places and How and whether the to the discussions of the city of the future will on ability to and of this process of urban we up to the the current of smart cities to of the cities of The of change is to be that to provide the and of scholars are to have or on these cities of the this issue can as a point to an about the cities we in the future and whether and how smart city technologies are to provide

Annelie Ekelin, Sara Eriksén

No abstract is available for this record.

Juhana Kokkonen, Sami Paavola, Yrjö Engeström

This article analyzes the problems of bringing in social media in a traditional, hierarchical organization. Difficulties rise from the contradiction between the bureaucratic approach of an organization and the collaborative community approach connected to social media. A change in the role of a developer is analyzed through a case study. The data was collected in a co-development process of a work unit at a Finnish University of Applied Sciences. The method of this study is analytic autoethnography, which proved to be a valuable tool for capturing a long-term development process and the changing role of the developer inside the organization. A new change agent, a swarm catalyst, is introduced at the end of the article. The initial characteristics of a swarm catalyst are based on the experiences of various, iterative developmental experiments. A swarm catalyst operates within an organization as an autonomous developer, and as a negotiator between the traditional organization and decentralized developmental swarms.

Walter Kickert

An analysis is made of agencification reform in the Netherlands from the viewpoint of the management of the complex change process. We will present a processual analysis of the complex change process of agencification reform by means of organization science insights on ‘emergent change’ and administrative science insights on ‘complex networks’. The analysis of the process of change events shows that it is not an example of centrally planned and controlled change. The reform is rather an example of ‘emergent and complex change’. The reform is a complex system of different intertwined change processes with many different decentralized actors, which is ‘managed’ by different central ‘change agents’. The ‘change managers’ themselves form a complex system as well. Points for practitioners One of the important reform trends in Dutch central administration is the ‘agencification’ of executive government organizations, that is, the increase of managerial autonomy of executive parts of ministerial departments. In this article we analyse how this two-decades-long reform process was ‘managed’ by various central actors like Parliament, the National Audit Office, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Home Affairs, various internal and external advisory committees and supervisory committees. It turned out that the reform can hardly be described as a centrally planned and controlled process. Initiatives for reform, in fact, popped up locally within the various ministries and agencies. The reform process was more a continuous accumulation of local initiatives for agencification. The various central actors tried to exercise some coordinating or supervisory influence, but that was rather indirect, reactive and limited.