IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i5p2136-d330651.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Access to ICT in Poland and the Co-Creation of Urban Space in the Process of Modern Social Participation in a Smart City—A Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Patrycja Szarek-Iwaniuk

    (Faculty of Geoengineering, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-720 Olsztyn, Poland)

  • Adam Senetra

    (Faculty of Geoengineering, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-720 Olsztyn, Poland)

Abstract

A smart city is one of the latest concepts in the development of modern cities. It has evolved from the foregoing smart cities 1.0 and 2.0 to the smart city 3.0, where members of the local community play the main role as not only the recipients of the introduced changes and modern technology, but also as the creators of urban space. One of the goals of a smart city 3.0 is to promote sustainable urban development by improving the quality of life, enhancing social participation, and involving local community members in planning and decision-making processes. This study set out to determine the role and significance of e-participation methods in the smart city concept. The results of questionnaires exploring the importance of e-participation in urban development are presented. The paper also discusses changes in the availability of information and communication technologies (ICT) in Poland. The secondary goal was to present the geo-questionnaire and Public Participation GIS (PPGIS) as modern research tools. Internet tools based on geoinformation systems have considerable potential for mobilizing social participation in spatial planning (Public Participation GIS). The present study postulates the need for modern social participation methods in shaping urban space and promoting the sustainable development of cities. The study highlights the main challenges in the research process. The cooperation between the authorities and the citizens contributes to the development of a civil society, informed decision-making, social involvement in public life, and more effective governance at the local, regional, and national level. Measures that foster cooperation between the authorities and local communities, the use of information and communication technologies (ICT), and growing social awareness and social participation in managing development are the components of a modern smart city and the building blocks of an e-society. The study also revealed positive changes in access to ICT and their contribution to bridging the digital divide in Poland. Higher levels of social awareness regarding participation and e-participation promote the growth of smart cities.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrycja Szarek-Iwaniuk & Adam Senetra, 2020. "Access to ICT in Poland and the Co-Creation of Urban Space in the Process of Modern Social Participation in a Smart City—A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-21, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:5:p:2136-:d:330651
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/2136/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/2136/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amparo Novo Vázquez & María Rosalía Vicente, 2019. "Exploring the Determinants of e-Participation in Smart Cities," Public Administration and Information Technology, in: E-Participation in Smart Cities: Technologies and Models of Governance for Citizen Engagement, pages 157-178, Springer.
    2. Youngmin Oh & Seong-ho Jeong & Heontae Shin, 2019. "A Strategy for a Sustainable Local Government: Are Participatory Governments More Efficient, Effective, and Equitable in the Budget Process?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-16, September.
    3. Robert G. Hollands, 2008. "Will the real smart city please stand up?," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 303-320, December.
    4. Yueping Zheng & Hindy Lauer Schachter, 2017. "Explaining Citizens’ E-Participation Use: the Role of Perceived Advantages," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 409-428, September.
    5. Seyed Hamid Mohammadi & Sharifah Norazizan & Hedayat Allah Nikkhah, 2018. "Conflicting perceptions on participation between citizens and members of local government," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1761-1778, July.
    6. Paul Streeten, 1998. "Globalization: Threat or Salvation?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: A. S. Bhalla (ed.), Globalization, Growth and Marginalization, chapter 1, pages 13-47, Palgrave Macmillan.
    7. Margaret Gollagher & Janette Hartz-Karp, 2013. "The Role of Deliberative Collaborative Governance in Achieving Sustainable Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-24, May.
    8. M. Sirgy & Dong-Jin Lee & Chad Miller & James Littlefield, 2004. "The Impact of Globalization on a Country's Quality of Life: Toward an Integrated Model," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 251-298, September.
    9. Annalisa Cocchia, 2014. "Smart and Digital City: A Systematic Literature Review," Progress in IS, in: Renata Paola Dameri & Camille Rosenthal-Sabroux (ed.), Smart City, edition 127, pages 13-43, Springer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Songling Chang & Melanie Kay Smith, 2023. "Residents’ Quality of Life in Smart Cities: A Systematic Literature Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-17, April.
    2. A. Szczepańska & M. Zagroba & K. Pietrzyk, 2022. "Participatory Budgeting as a Method for Improving Public Spaces in Major Polish Cities," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 231-252, July.
    3. Sergiu Gherghina & Paul Tap, 2021. "Ecology Projects and Participatory Budgeting: Enhancing Citizens’ Support," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-14, September.
    4. Lopata Ewelina & Rogatka Krzysztof, 2021. "CSR&COVID19 – How do they work together? Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility transformation during a pandemic crisis. Towards smart development," Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, Sciendo, vol. 53(53), pages 87-103, September.
    5. Marcin Janusz & Marcin Kowalczyk, 2022. "How Smart Are V4 Cities? Evidence from the Multidimensional Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-19, August.
    6. Vasja Roblek & Maja Meško & Mirjana Pejić Bach & Oshane Thorpe & Polona Šprajc, 2020. "The Interaction between Internet, Sustainable Development, and Emergence of Society 5.0," Data, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-27, September.
    7. Maria Schulders, 2022. "Co-Creating Smart Cities – Design Thinking for 21st Century Urban Planning," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2), pages 301-315.
    8. Gustavo Bermejo-Martín & Carlos Rodríguez-Monroy & Yilsy M. Núñez-Guerrero, 2020. "Design Thinking for Urban Water Sustainability in Huelva’s Households: Needfinding and Synthesis through Statistic Clustering," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-26, November.
    9. Anna Sołtysik-Piorunkiewicz & Iwona Zdonek, 2021. "How Society 5.0 and Industry 4.0 Ideas Shape the Open Data Performance Expectancy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    10. Monika Wawer & Kalina Grzesiuk & Dorota Jegorow, 2022. "Smart Mobility in a Smart City in the Context of Generation Z Sustainability, Use of ICT, and Participation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-30, June.
    11. Andrzej Paszkiewicz & Bartosz Pawłowicz & Bartosz Trybus & Mateusz Salach, 2021. "Traffic Intersection Lane Control Using Radio Frequency Identification and 5G Communication," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-17, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jalaluddin Abdul Malek & Seng Boon Lim & Tan Yigitcanlar, 2021. "Social Inclusion Indicators for Building Citizen-Centric Smart Cities: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-29, January.
    2. Anthony Simonofski & Estefanía Serral Asensio & Johannes Smedt & Monique Snoeck, 2019. "Hearing the Voice of Citizens in Smart City Design: The CitiVoice Framework," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 61(6), pages 665-678, December.
    3. Johannes Stübinger & Lucas Schneider, 2020. "Understanding Smart City—A Data-Driven Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-23, October.
    4. Renata Biadacz & Marek Biadacz, 2021. "Implementation of “Smart” Solutions and An Attempt to Measure Them: A Case Study of Czestochowa, Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-28, September.
    5. Certomà, Chiara & Corsini, Filippo & Frey, Marco, 2020. "Hyperconnected, receptive and do-it-yourself city. An investigation into the European “imaginary” of crowdsourcing for urban governance," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    6. Solis, Miriam & Bashar, Samira Binte, 2022. "Social equity implications of advanced water metering infrastructure," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    7. Jörg Becker & Friedrich Chasin & Michael Rosemann & Daniel Beverungen & Jennifer Priefer & Jan vom Brocke & Martin Matzner & Adela del Rio Ortega & Manuel Resinas & Flavia Santoro & Minseok Song & Kan, 2023. "City 5.0: Citizen involvement in the design of future cities," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-21, December.
    8. Guido Perboli & Mariangela Rosano, 2020. "A Taxonomic Analysis of Smart City Projects in North America and Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-23, September.
    9. Pevcin Primož, 2019. "The Evolution of City Labelling in the Literature," Economics and Culture, Sciendo, vol. 16(1), pages 40-45, June.
    10. Kummitha, Rama Krishna Reddy, 2018. "Entrepreneurial urbanism and technological panacea: Why Smart City planning needs to go beyond corporate visioning?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 330-339.
    11. Jianjun Sun & Jiaqi Yan & Kem Z. K. Zhang, 2016. "Blockchain-based sharing services: What blockchain technology can contribute to smart cities," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-9, December.
    12. Parul Gupta & Sumedha Chauhan & M. P. Jaiswal, 2019. "Classification of Smart City Research - a Descriptive Literature Review and Future Research Agenda," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 661-685, June.
    13. Wang, Chao & Zhan, Jinyan & Xin, Zhongling, 2020. "Comparative analysis of urban ecological management models incorporating low-carbon transformation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    14. Anne Parlina & Kalamullah Ramli & Hendri Murfi, 2021. "Exposing Emerging Trends in Smart Sustainable City Research Using Deep Autoencoders-Based Fuzzy C-Means," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-28, March.
    15. Schiavone, Francesco & Paolone, Francesco & Mancini, Daniela, 2019. "Business model innovation for urban smartization," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 210-219.
    16. Sergiu Gherghina & Paul Tap, 2021. "Ecology Projects and Participatory Budgeting: Enhancing Citizens’ Support," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-14, September.
    17. Ruben Sánchez-Corcuera & Adrián Nuñez-Marcos & Jesus Sesma-Solance & Aritz Bilbao-Jayo & Rubén Mulero & Unai Zulaika & Gorka Azkune & Aitor Almeida, 2019. "Smart cities survey: Technologies, application domains and challenges for the cities of the future," International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, , vol. 15(6), pages 15501477198, June.
    18. Ardito, Lorenzo & Ferraris, Alberto & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Bresciani, Stefano & Del Giudice, Manlio, 2019. "The role of universities in the knowledge management of smart city projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 312-321.
    19. Adrian Buttazzoni & Marta Veenhof & Leia Minaker, 2020. "Smart City and High-Tech Urban Interventions Targeting Human Health: An Equity-Focused Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-23, March.
    20. Jooseok Oh & Minho Seo, 2021. "Measuring Citizens-Centric Smart City: Development and Validation of Ex-Post Evaluation Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-22, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:5:p:2136-:d:330651. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.