IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i16p9146-d615020.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Social Acceptance of Collecting and Utilizing Personal Information in Smart Cities

Author

Listed:
  • Yuho Shimizu

    (Graduate School of Humanities and Sociology, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 1130033, Japan)

  • Shin Osaki

    (Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 1138656, Japan)

  • Takaaki Hashimoto

    (Faculty of Sociology, Toyo University, Tokyo 1128606, Japan)

  • Kaori Karasawa

    (Graduate School of Humanities and Sociology, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 1130033, Japan)

Abstract

In recent years, active efforts to implement smart cities have increased worldwide. In smart cities, a large amount of personal information is captured, and urban development is based on these data. In Japan, implementations of smart cities continue to gain momentum, but the issue of social acceptance has become apparent, as smart cities are not fully accepted by citizens because of concerns about data leaks and misuse of personal information. This study examines the social acceptance of collecting and utilizing personal information in smart cities in relation to a variety of factors such as trust and perceptions of risk, justice, benefit, and necessity. An online survey was conducted wherein participants ( N = 568) were presented with a vignette depicting an overview of a typical smart city. The results of structural equation modeling showed that perceived justice was positively related to trust and trust was negatively related to perceived risk and positively related to perceived benefit and necessity. Trust, perceived benefit, and perceived necessity were significantly related to social acceptance, with trust having the greatest relationship. The model obtained in this study contributes to practical efforts for the implementation of smart cities, and future directions are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuho Shimizu & Shin Osaki & Takaaki Hashimoto & Kaori Karasawa, 2021. "The Social Acceptance of Collecting and Utilizing Personal Information in Smart Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-10, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:16:p:9146-:d:615020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/9146/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/16/9146/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Monique Mann & Peta Mitchell & Marcus Foth & Irina Anastasiu, 2020. "#BlockSidewalk to Barcelona: Technological sovereignty and the social license to operate smart cities," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(9), pages 1103-1115, September.
    2. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    3. Gary Sands & Pierre Filion & Laura A. Reese, 2020. "Techs and the Cities: A New Economic Development Paradigm?," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 392-402.
    4. Stigka, Eleni K. & Paravantis, John A. & Mihalakakou, Giouli K., 2014. "Social acceptance of renewable energy sources: A review of contingent valuation applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 100-106.
    5. Walter, Jorge, 2000. "Technological Adaptation and "Learning by Cooperation": A Case Study of a Successful Onshore Technology Transfer in Tierra del Fuego," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 13-22, March.
    6. Sonnberger, Marco & Ruddat, Michael, 2017. "Local and socio-political acceptance of wind farms in Germany," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 56-65.
    7. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    8. Kim, Yohan & Lee, Joosung & Ahn, Jaemyung, 2019. "Innovation towards sustainable technologies: A socio-technical perspective on accelerating transition to aviation biofuel," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 317-329.
    9. Michael Siegrist, 2000. "The Influence of Trust and Perceptions of Risks and Benefits on the Acceptance of Gene Technology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 195-204, April.
    10. Iliopoulos, Nikolaos & Esteban, Miguel & Kudo, Shogo, 2020. "Assessing the willingness of residential electricity consumers to adopt demand side management and distributed energy resources: A case study on the Japanese market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    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. Irina A. Morozova & Stanislav S. Yatsechko, 2022. "The Risks of Smart Cities and the Perspectives of Their Management Based on Corporate Social Responsibility in the Interests of Sustainable Development," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, February.
    2. Yuho Shimizu & Aimi Ishizuna & Shin Osaki & Takaaki Hashimoto & Mitsuharu Tai & Tetsushi Tanibe & Kaori Karasawa, 2022. "The Social Acceptance of Smart Health Services in Japan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-11, January.
    3. Yuho Shimizu & Shin Osaki & Takaaki Hashimoto & Kaori Karasawa, 2021. "How Do People View Various Kinds of Smart City Services? Focus on the Acquisition of Personal Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-10, October.
    4. Tuomo Eskelinen & Oswald Sydd & Miika Kajanus & David Fernández Gutiérrez & Miguel Mitsou & José M. Soriano Disla & Manuel Vals Sevilla & Johan Ib Hansen, 2022. "Fortifying Social Acceptance When Designing Circular Economy Business Models on Biowaste Related Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-24, November.

    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. Yuho Shimizu & Shin Osaki & Takaaki Hashimoto & Kaori Karasawa, 2021. "How Do People View Various Kinds of Smart City Services? Focus on the Acquisition of Personal Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-10, October.
    2. Busse, Maria & Siebert, Rosemarie, 2018. "Acceptance studies in the field of land use—A critical and systematic review to advance the conceptualization of acceptance and acceptability," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 235-245.
    3. Nuortimo, Kalle & Härkönen, Janne, 2018. "Opinion mining approach to study media-image of energy production. Implications to public acceptance and market deployment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 210-217.
    4. Prosperi, Maurizio & Lombardi, Mariarosaria & Spada, Alessia, 2019. "Ex ante assessment of social acceptance of small-scale agro-energy system: A case study in southern Italy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 346-354.
    5. Antoine Boche & Clément Foucher & Luiz Fernando Lavado Villa, 2022. "Understanding Microgrid Sustainability: A Systemic and Comprehensive Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-29, April.
    6. Hübner, Gundula & Leschinger, Valentin & Müller, Florian J.Y. & Pohl, Johannes, 2023. "Broadening the social acceptance of wind energy – An Integrated Acceptance Model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    7. Johanna Pfeiffer & Andreas Gabriel & Markus Gandorfer, 2021. "Understanding the public attitudinal acceptance of digital farming technologies: a nationwide survey in Germany," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(1), pages 107-128, February.
    8. Salm, Sarah & Hille, Stefanie Lena & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2016. "What are retail investors' risk-return preferences towards renewable energy projects? A choice experiment in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 310-320.
    9. Maarten Wolsink, 2020. "Framing in Renewable Energy Policies: A Glossary," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-31, June.
    10. Harper, Michael & Anderson, Ben & James, Patrick A.B. & Bahaj, AbuBakr S., 2019. "Onshore wind and the likelihood of planning acceptance: Learning from a Great Britain context," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 954-966.
    11. Peng Liu & Run Yang & Zhigang Xu, 2019. "Public Acceptance of Fully Automated Driving: Effects of Social Trust and Risk/Benefit Perceptions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 326-341, February.
    12. Alam, Syed Shah & Nik Hashim, Nik Hazrul & Rashid, Mamunur & Omar, Nor Asiah & Ahsan, Nilufar & Ismail, Md Daud, 2014. "Small-scale households renewable energy usage intention: Theoretical development and empirical settings," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 255-263.
    13. Franziska Schlichte & Sebastian Junge & Jan Mammen, 2019. "Being at the right place at the right time: does the timing within technology waves determine new venture success?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(8), pages 995-1021, December.
    14. Woo, JongRoul & Chung, Sungsam & Lee, Chul-Yong & Huh, Sung-Yoon, 2019. "Willingness to participate in community-based renewable energy projects: A contingent valuation study in South Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 643-652.
    15. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2018. "Renewable energy research and technologies through responsible research and innovation looking glass: Reflexions, theoretical approaches and contemporary discourses," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 792-808.
    16. de Wildt, T.E. & Chappin, E.J.L. & van de Kaa, G. & Herder, P.M. & van de Poel, I.R., 2019. "Conflicting values in the smart electricity grid a comprehensive overview," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 184-196.
    17. Macht, Janine & Klink-Lehmann, Jeanette & Hartmann, Monika, 2023. "Don't forget the locals: Understanding citizens' acceptance of bio-based technologies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    18. Perlaviciute, Goda & Steg, Linda, 2014. "Contextual and psychological factors shaping evaluations and acceptability of energy alternatives: Integrated review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 361-381.
    19. Zhao, Dong-Xue & He, Bao-Jie & Johnson, Christine & Mou, Ben, 2015. "Social problems of green buildings: From the humanistic needs to social acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1594-1609.
    20. Anna Kowalska-Pyzalska, 2018. "An Empirical Analysis of Green Electricity Adoption Among Residential Consumers in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.

    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:13:y:2021:i:16:p:9146-:d:615020. 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.