Object structure

Ewolucja koncepcji i badania miasta inteligentnego = Evolution of the Smart City concept and of research into it


Przegląd Geograficzny T. 90 z. 4 (2018)


Masik, Grzegorz : Autor ; Studzińska, Dominika : Autor



Place of publishing:


Date issued/created:



24 cm

Type of object:


Subject and Keywords:

smart city ; smart growth ; urban management


The aim of the article is description of the concept and research of the smart city. Based on the review of international literature, the smart city idea is interpreted, indicating positive and negative aspects including the relationship between modern network technologies and the urban community. The smart city concept assumes the use of network infrastructure to improve the economic and political efficiency of resources and enable the development of urban areas. This development should be an intelligent and sustainable and should contribute to the improvement of the quality of life. The concept evolves over time and more and more attention is devoted not only to the technological infrastructure itself but also to its impact on urban communities. Questions are increasingly being asked about the impact of smart development on the improvement of human and social capital as well as on social polarization or social exclusion. Therefore, newer definition assumes that smart city is a city in which investments in human and social capital and traditional (transport) and modern (ICT) communication infrastructure fuel sustainable economic growth and a high quality of life, with a wise management of natural resources, through participatory governance. In this context different smart city schools can be distinguished. The scientific debate about the smart city concept covers not only issues related to the development of new technologies and solving problems of local communities, but also the impact of this concept on social and economic polarization. It can be noticed that in cities that undertake initiatives aimed at being called intelligent cities, on the one hand, the interests of residents and, on the other hand, companies implementing modern technologies, clash. The implementation of the smart city concept has its negative implications for urban development due to top-down management and the limited use of a bottom-up approach. For this reason, city residents should take an active part in the design, construction and management of cities.


1. Ahvenniemi H., Huovila A., Pinto-Seppa I., Airaksinen M., 2017, What are the differences between sustainable and smart cities, Cities, 60, s. 234–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.09.009
2. Angelidou M., 2014, Smart city policies: A spatial approach, Cities, 41, s. 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2014.06.007
3. Angelidou M., 2015, Smart cities: A conjecture of four forces, Cities, 47, s. 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2015.05.004
4. Atkinson R., Bridge G., 2005, Gentrification in a Global Context: The New Urban Colonialism, Routledge, London.
5. Bakici T., Almirall E., Wareham J., 2013, A smart city initiative: The case of Barcelona, Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 4, 2, s. 135–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-012-0084-9
6. Beretta I., 2018, The social effects of eco-innovations in Italian smart cities, Cities, 72, s. 115–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.07.010
7. Blanco I., 2015, Between democratic network governance and neoliberalism: A regime theoretical analysis of collaboration in Barcelona, Cities, 44, s. 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2014.10.007
8. Brenner N., Theodore N., 2002, Cities and the geographies of "actually existing neoliberalism", Antipode, 34, 3, s. 349–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00246
9. Bruska A., 2012, Logistyka jako komponent smart city, Studia Miejskie, 6, s. 9–19.
10. Bunnell T., 2015, Smart city returns, Dialogues in Human Geography, 5, 1, s. 45–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820614565870
11. Calzada I., 2017, The techno-politics of data and smart devolution in city regions: comparing Glasgow, Bristol, Barcelona and Bilbao, Systems, 5, s. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems5010018
12. Calzada I., Cobo C., 2015, Unplugging: Deconstructing the Smart City, Journal of Urban Technology, 22, 1, s. 23–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2014.971535
13. Capra C.F., 2016, The Smart City and its citizens: Governance and citizen participation in Amsterdam Smart City, International Journal of E-Planning Research (IJEPR), 5, 1, s. 20–38. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEPR.2016010102
14. Caragliu A., Del Bo C., Nijkamp P., 2011, Smart cities in Europe, Journal of Urban Technology, 18, 2, s. 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2011.601117
15. Datta A., 2015, A 100 smart cities, a 100 utopias, Dialogue in Human Geography, 5, 1, s. 49–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820614565750
16. Eger J., 1997, Cyberspace and Cyberplace: Building the Smart Communities of Tomorrow, San Diego Union-Tribune, Insight, San Diego.
17. Fernandes O. E., Meeus L., Leal V., Azevedo I., Delarue E., Glachant J.M., 2011, Smart Cities Initiative: How to Foster a Quick Transition towards Local Sustainable Energy Systems. Final Report, Firenze, European University Institute.
18. Gardner N., Hespanhol L., 2018, SMLXL: Scaling the smart city, from metropolis to individual, City, Culture and Society, 12, s. 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2017.06.006
19. Gibbs D., Krueger R., MacLeod G., 2013, Grappling with smart city politics in an era of market triumphalism, Urban Studies, 50, 11, s. 2151–2157. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098013491165
20. Giffinger R., Kramar H., Fertner C., Kalasek R., Pichler-Milanovic N., Meijers E., 2007, Smart Cities – Ranking of European Medium-sized Cities, Centre of Regional Science, Vienna.
21. Glasmeier A., Christopherson S., 2015, Thinking about smart cities, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 8, s. 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsu034
22. Gonzalez J.A., Rossi A., 2011, New Trends for Smart Cities, Open Innovation Mechanism in Smart Cities, European Commission, Brussels.
23. Graham S., 2002, Bridging urban digital divides: Urban polarisation and information and communication technologies, Urban Studies, 39, 1, s. 33–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980220099050
24. Granier B., Kudo H., 2016, How are citizens involved in smart cities? Analysing citizen participation in Japanese "Smart communities", Information Polity, 21, 1, s. 61–76. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-150367
25. Grossi G., Pianezz D., 2017, Smart cities: Utopia or neoliberal ideology? Cities, 69, s. 79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.07.012
26. Guarneros-Meza V., Geddes M., 2010, Local governance and participation under neoliberalism: Critical perspectives, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 34, s. 115–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00952.x
27. Hill D., 2013, On the smart city; or, a 'manifesto' for smart citizens instead, City of Sound https://www.wired.com/2013/02/dan-hill-essay-on-the-smart-city-or-a-manifesto-forsmart-citizens-instead/(12.01.2018).
28. Hogan T., Bunnell T., Pow C.P., 2012, Asian urbanisms and the privatization of cities, Cities, 29, 1, s. 29–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2011.01.001
29. Hollands R.G., 2008, Will the real smart city please stand up?, City, 12, 3, s. 303–320.
30. Hollands R.G., 2015, Critical interventions into the corporate smart city, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 8, 1, s. 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsu011
31. Komninos N., 2002, Intelligent Cities: Innovation, Knowledge Systems and Digital Spaces, Spon Press, London.
32. Kourtit K., Nijkamp P., 2012, Smart cities in the innovation age, Innovation: The European Journal of Social Sciences, 25, 2, s. 93–95.
33. Kummitha R.K.R., Crutzen N., 2017, How do we understand smart cities? An evolutionary perspective, Cities, 67, s. 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.04.010
34. Letaifa S.B., 2015, How to strategize smart cities: Revealing the SMART model, Journal of Business Research, 68, 7, s. 1414–1419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.024
35. McChesney R.W., 2013, Digital disconnect: How Capitalism is Turning the Internet Against Democracy, The New Press, New York.
36. Neirotti P., De Marco A., Cagliano A.C., Mangano G., Scorrano F., 2014, Current trends in Smart City initiatives: Some stylised facts, Cities, 38, s. 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.12.010
37. Organizacja Narodów Zjednoczonych, 2014, World Urbanization Prospects The 2014 Revision https://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Publications/Files/WUP2014-Report.pdf (22.01.2018).
38. Pięta-Kanurska M., 2017, Wehikuły rozwoju współczesnych miast. Wyzwania dla Wrocławia, [w:] A. Klasik, F. Kuźnik (red.), Wehikuły rozwoju lokalnego i regionalnego, Studia KPZK PAN, CLXXVII, s. 182–202.
39. Rayner K., 2015, Smart cities lead to smarter citizens, Forbes (12.01.2018).
40. Rosati U., Conti S., 2016, What is a smart city project? An urban model or a corporate business plan?, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 223, s. 968–973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.332
41. Shepard M., Simeti A., 2013, What's so smart about the smart citizen?, [w:] D. Hemment, A. Townsend (red.), Smart Citizens, Future Everything Publications, Manchester, s. 12–18.
42. Sikora-Fernandez D., 2013, Koncepcja "smart city" w założeniach polityki rozwoju miasta-polska perspektywa, Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Oeconomica, 290, s. 83–94.
43. Stachowiak K., Stryjakiewicz T., 2016, Rola specjalizacji w rozwoju miast kreatywnych, [w:] A. Klasik, F. Kuźnik (red.), Specjalizacja regionalna – współczesne podejścia, Studia KPZK PAN, CLXX, s. 82–111.
44. Stawasz D., Sikora-Fernandez D., Turała M., 2012, Koncepcja smart city jako wyznacznik podejmowania decyzji związanych z funkcjonowaniem i rozwojem miasta, Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego. Studia Informatica, 29, s. 97–109.
45. Stawasz D., Sikora-Fernandez D., 2015, Dobre praktyki inteligentnego zarządzania w polskich miastach, Studia Miejskie, 19, s. 35–46.
46. Stryjakiewicz T., Męczyński M., 2015, Klasa kreatywna w dużym mieście, Rozwój Regionalny i Polityka Regionalna, 31, s. 97–109. https://doi.org/10.14746/rrpr.2015.31.10
47. Szymańska D., Korolko M., 2015, Inteligentne miasta: idea, koncepcje i wdrożenia, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika, Toruń.
48. Traz-Ryan B., Velosa A., Jacobs A., 2011, Hipe Cycle for Smart City Technologies and Solutions, Gartner, Stamford.
49. Vanolo A., 2014, Smart mentality: The smart city as disciplinary strategy, Urban Studies, 51, 5, s. 883–898. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098013494427
50. Vanolo A., 2016, Is there anybody out there? The place and role of citizens in tomorrow's smart cities, Futures, 82, s. 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2016.05.010
51. Warner M.E., 2012, Privatization and urban governance: The continuing challenges of efficiency, voice and integration, Cities, 29, s. 38–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2012.06.007
52. Washburn D., Sindhu U., Balaouras S., Dines R.A., Hayes N.M., Nelson L.E., 2010, Helping CIOs Understand "Smart City" Initiatives: Defining the Smart City, its Drivers, and the Role of the CIO, Forrester Research, Inc., Cambridge, MA.
53. Welter V.M., 2003, Biopolis: Patrick Geddes and the City of Life, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
54. World Bank, 2018, www.data.worldbank.org (22.01.2018).


Przegląd Geograficzny





Start page:


End page:


Resource type:


Detailed Resource Type:



File size 0,4 MB ; application/pdf

Resource Identifier:

0033-2143 (print) ; 2300-8466 (on-line) ; 10.7163/PrzG.2018.4.2


CBGiOS. IGiPZ PAN, sygn.: Cz.181, Cz.3136, Cz.4187 ; click here to follow the link



Language of abstract:



Creative Commons Attribution BY 4.0 license

Terms of use:

Copyright-protected material. [CC BY 4.0] May be used within the scope specified in Creative Commons Attribution BY 4.0 license, full text available at: ; -

Digitizing institution:

Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization of the Polish Academy of Sciences

Original in:

Central Library of Geography and Environmental Protection. Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization PAS

Projects co-financed by:

Operational Program Digital Poland, 2014-2020, Measure 2.3: Digital accessibility and usefulness of public sector information; funds from the European Regional Development Fund and national co-financing from the state budget. ;





Citation style: