Smart City Index 2021

Smart City Index 2021 A tool for action, an instrument for better lives for all citizens.

A collaboration between:

IMD WORLD COMPETITIVENESS CENTER

SCO SMART CITY OBSERVATORY

3

S

0

R

Y

A

E

“What strange phenomena we find in a great city, all we need do is stroll about with our eyes open.”

Charles Baudelaire, Mademoiselle Bistouri

“Cities, like dreams, are made of desires and fears, even if the thread of their discourse is secret, their rules are absurd, their perspectives deceitful, and everything conceals something else.”

Italo Calvino, Invisible Cities

Preface Welcome to the third edition of the IMD-SUTD Smart City Index Report. Last year, we wrote in the preface to the same report that it was still too early to draw conclusions from the lessons of the pandemic and of its effects on smart cities. This remains true at the time of launching this latest edition (October 2021). The warnings that emerged from last year’s report also remain very much with us a year later: the health crisis might very well be only a harbinger for other challenges for cities around the world, including social and economic ones. During the same time, other global challenges (climate change, inequalities) have not abated. In many respects, on the contrary, they have taken an emergency dimension. Such global concerns are bound to have sizeable consequences on cities. One of the most visible aspects of the pandemic has been that of lock-down measures affecting shops, restaurants, entertainment locations, and work places. City centres emptied almost overnight, while traffic was reduced to a small proportion of its previous levels. Teleworking and online meetings became the norm, and those who had the opportunity started to flee large cities and operate from less densely populated areas. It is now becoming clear that a significant part of the new habits created will not fade away after the pandemic. A new normal has been defined for cities. Health-related emergencies have had dire consequences on cities and on their populations. However, they did not relegate other emergencies (including climate-related issues) to the back burner. As this year’s report data show, quality of life, safety, mobility and waste management remained high on the list of citizens’ concerns in all parts of the world. Moreover, the same data seems to indicate that

the acceleration of deep processes such as digitization has changed some perceptions, creating significant differences between last year’s rankings and this year’s. COVID-19 also highlighted how cities could take fresh responsibilities, and come up with innovative solutions in the face of unprecedented emergencies. New definitions of resilience have been offered – and put in practice – in all types of cities around the world. In that context, some smart cities have displayed higher capabilities to mobilize and harmonize their services and resources. While some hopes lead to partial disappointments (including thoseput inAI tohelpaccelerate the production of vaccines and relevant medical solutions and equipment), the technologies and analytical tools available in smart cities proved important to manage the tracking tools that were so critical in slowing the spread of COVID-19. On the other hand, the ubiquitous use of such tools raised increasing concerns about the limitation of personal freedoms that they entailed, and the potential misuse of the personal data collected in the process. Since the creation of the Smart City Index (SCI), we insisted on the fact that it is the position of the authors of this report that smart cities will not generate their full potential unless priority attention is devoted to the necessary balance between the technological aspects of smart cities and their human aspects. The recent crisis has underlined the relevance and importance of this mantra. On the methodological side, we pursue our efforts to make the SCI methodology and coverage ever better and more relevant to decision makers and analysts. We also strive to maintain the degree of coherence and continuity that will progressively allow the index to generate the longer-term

time series required for urban policies and strategies. Fundamentally, the approach has not changed: In line with previous and ongoing efforts initiated and carried out by IMD’s World Competitiveness Centre, the Smart City Index presented here remains a holistic attempt to capture the various dimensions of how citizens could consider that their respective cities are becoming better cities by becoming smarter ones. Part of the SCI’s uniqueness is to rely first and foremost on the perceptions of those who live and work in the cities covered by the index, while providing a realistic recognition that not all cities start from the same level of development, nor with the same set of endowments and advantages. In SCI’s context, a ‘smart city’ continues to be defined as an urban setting that applies technology to enhance the benefits and diminish the shortcomings of urbanization for its citizens. This year’s report includes 118 cities. One important improvement has been brought to the SCI methodology, which now relies on a compounded weighted average of scores obtained in 2019, 2020 and 2021. Details are provided in the methodology section of the report. The SCI report is the result of a close cooperation between IMD and SUTD (Singapore University for Technology and Design), and benefitted from inputs by numerous experts and city specialists around the world, who we want to thank most warmly. It is our collective hope that this new edition of the SCI index and report will continue to generate the productive feedback and discussions that previous editions produced, and we look forward to further opportunities to make them even more valuable in what promises to be an exciting post-pandemic era for smart cities around the world.

Professor Cheong Koon Hean Chair Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities

Bruno Lanvin President IMD Smart City Observatory

Professor Arturo Bris Director IMD World Competitiveness Center

3 Smar t C i t y I ndex 2021

Table of contents

Preface. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................3 Table of contents..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................4 The IMD World Competitiveness Center.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................6 City performance overview..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................7 Alphabetical. ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................7 By ranking......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................9 User’s Guide to the Smart City Index................................................................................................................................................................................................................................11 Methodology in a nutshell. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................13 City profiles. .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................14 City Profiles

Abu Dhabi............................................................................................................. 15 Abuja..................................................................................................................... 16 Amsterdam........................................................................................................... 17 Ankara.................................................................................................................. 18 Athens. ................................................................................................................. 19 Auckland............................................................................................................... 20 Bangkok. .............................................................................................................. 21 Barcelona............................................................................................................. 22 Beijing................................................................................................................... 23 Bengaluru. ........................................................................................................... 24 Berlin.................................................................................................................... 25 Bilbao. .................................................................................................................. 26 Birmingham......................................................................................................... 27 Bogota. ................................................................................................................. 28 Bologna. ............................................................................................................... 29 Bordeaux.............................................................................................................. 30 Boston. ................................................................................................................. 31 Bratislava. ............................................................................................................ 32 Brisbane............................................................................................................... 33 Brussels............................................................................................................... 34 Bucharest............................................................................................................. 35

Budapest. ............................................................................................................. 36 Buenos Aires........................................................................................................ 37 Busan. .................................................................................................................. 38 Cairo. .................................................................................................................... 39 Cape Town............................................................................................................ 40 Chengdu............................................................................................................... 41 Chicago................................................................................................................. 42 Chongqing............................................................................................................ 43 Copenhagen......................................................................................................... 44 Denver. ................................................................................................................. 45 Dubai. ................................................................................................................... 46 Dublin................................................................................................................... 47 Dusseldorf............................................................................................................ 48 Geneva.................................................................................................................. 49 Glasgow................................................................................................................ 50 Gothenburg. ......................................................................................................... 51 Guangzhou. .......................................................................................................... 52 Hamburg. ............................................................................................................. 53 Hangzhou. ............................................................................................................ 54 Hanoi. ................................................................................................................... 55 Hanover................................................................................................................ 56

4 Smar t C i t y I ndex 2021

Helsinki. ............................................................................................................... 57 Ho Chi Minh City................................................................................................... 58 Hong Kong............................................................................................................ 59 Hyderabad............................................................................................................ 60 Istanbul................................................................................................................. 61 Jakarta. ................................................................................................................ 62 Kiel........................................................................................................................ 63 K y i v....................................................................................................................... 6 6 Krakow................................................................................................................. 6 4 Kuala Lumpur...................................................................................................... 6 5 Lagos.................................................................................................................... 67 Lausanne.............................................................................................................. 68 Leeds.................................................................................................................... 69 Lille....................................................................................................................... 70 Lisbon................................................................................................................... 71 London.................................................................................................................. 72 Los Angeles.......................................................................................................... 73 Lyon. ..................................................................................................................... 74 Madrid. ................................................................................................................. 75 Makassar.............................................................................................................. 76 Manchester. ......................................................................................................... 77 Manila................................................................................................................... 78 Marseille............................................................................................................... 79 Medan................................................................................................................... 80 Medellin................................................................................................................ 81 Medina.................................................................................................................. 82 Melbourne............................................................................................................ 83 Mexico City. .......................................................................................................... 84 Milan..................................................................................................................... 85 Montreal............................................................................................................... 86 Moscow................................................................................................................. 87 Mumbai................................................................................................................. 88 Munich.................................................................................................................. 89 Nairobi.................................................................................................................. 90 Nanjing................................................................................................................. 91 New Delhi............................................................................................................. 92 New York. ............................................................................................................. 93 Newcastle............................................................................................................. 94

Osaka.................................................................................................................... 95 Oslo....................................................................................................................... 96 Paris. .................................................................................................................... 97 Philadelphia. ........................................................................................................ 98 Phoenix................................................................................................................. 99 Prague................................................................................................................ 100 Rabat. ................................................................................................................. 101 Rio de Janeiro. ................................................................................................... 102 Riyadh................................................................................................................. 103 Rome. ................................................................................................................. 104 Rotterdam. ......................................................................................................... 105 San Francisco..................................................................................................... 106 San José............................................................................................................. 107 Santiago.............................................................................................................. 108 Sao Paulo. .......................................................................................................... 109 Seattle. ............................................................................................................... 110 Seoul................................................................................................................... 111 Shanghai. ........................................................................................................... 112 Shenzhen............................................................................................................ 113 Singapore. .......................................................................................................... 114 Sofia.................................................................................................................... 115 St. Petersburg.................................................................................................... 116 Stockholm.......................................................................................................... 117 Sydney. ............................................................................................................... 118 Taipei City........................................................................................................... 119 Tallinn................................................................................................................. 120 Tel Aviv................................................................................................................ 121 The Hague.......................................................................................................... 122 Tianjin................................................................................................................. 123 Tokyo................................................................................................................... 124 Toronto. .............................................................................................................. 125 Vancouver........................................................................................................... 126 Vienna................................................................................................................. 127 Warsaw............................................................................................................... 128 Washington D.C.................................................................................................. 129 Zaragoza............................................................................................................. 130 Zhuhai................................................................................................................. 131 Zurich. ................................................................................................................ 132

5 Smar t C i t y I ndex 2021

The IMD World Competitiveness Center

For more than thirty years, the IMD World Competitiveness Center has pioneered research on how countries and companies compete to lay the foundations for sustainable value creation. The competitiveness of nations is probably one of the most significant developments in modern management and IMD is committed to leading the field.

The IMD World Competitiveness Center team:

Professor Arturo Bris Christos Cabolis Bruno Lanvin José Caballero Madeleine Hediger Catherine Jobin

Director

Chief Economist & Head of Operations President, Smart City Observatory

Senior Economist

Data Research and Online Services Specialist

Order and Sales Administrator

William Milner

Research Projects Associate Manager

Marco Pistis

Research Specialist Research Specialist

Maryam Zargari

6 Smar t C i t y I ndex 2021

Alphabetical City performance overview

Structure 2021

Smart City Rank 2021

Smart City Rating 2021

Structure 2021

Technology 2021

Smart City Rank 2020

Smart City Rank 2021

Smart City Rating 2021

Technology 2021

Smart City Rank 2020

Change

Change

City

City

▲ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼

▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼

Abu Dhabi

28

BB

BB

BB

42

+14

Copenhagen

7

A

AA BB BB BB

A B

6

-1

Abuja

114

D

C A B C A

D A B C A B

107

-7 -8 +2 -5 -5 -9

Denver Dubai Dublin

45 29 48 20 49 46 68 40 66 87 47 88 41 92 94 91 53 80 74 82 8 6

BB BB BB

35 43 34 13

-10 +14 -14

Amsterdam

17 55

BBB

9

BB

Ankara Athens

B C A

57 99

BBB BBB

111

-12

Dusseldorf

BBB

A

-7 -1

Auckland Bangkok Barcelona

9

4

Geneva Glasgow

A

AA BB

A

7

76 58 69 93 50 10 51 77 32 57 96 16 52 97 98 37

CCC

CC

71 49 82 95 38 24 40 92 70 36 76 14 60 87 77 88 46

BB BB

BBB BBB CCC BBB CCC

NEW

B

B

BB

Gothenburg Guangzhou Hamburg Hangzhou

BBB CCC

31 68 22 65 84 33 83 32 85 2

-15

Beijing

CCC

CC CC

CCC

+13

CCC

▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼

Bengaluru

CC BB

CC BB

+2

BB

A

-18

Berlin Bilbao

BBB

-12 +14 -11 -24

CCC

CCC

-1 -3

BBB

A

BBB BBB

Hanoi

CC BB

CC

CC BB

Birmingham

BB

BB

Hanover Helsinki

A

-14

Bogota Bologna Bordeaux Bratislava Brisbane Brussels Bucharest Budapest Boston

116

D

D B

D

A

AA CC BB CC CC CC

A

-4 -5 -9 -7

CCC

CCC

-7

Ho Chi Minh City

CC BB CC CC CC BB

CC

BB

BBB BBB

BB

NEW

Hong Kong Hyderabad

A

B

B

-21 -20

CC

CC

CC

CC

Istanbul Jakarta

B

NEW

BBB

A

BBB BBB

-2 +8

CC BB

94

+3

BB

BB

Kiel

BBB CCC CCC

NEW

▲ ▼ ▼ ▼

+16 -20 -22

106

C

C

CC CC CC

-19 -20 -10

Krakow

CCC CCC CCC

CCC CCC CCC

98 54 58

CC CC BB

CC

Kuala Lumpur

Buenos Aires

C B D C

K y iv

CC

-6

Busan

BBB

+9 +2 -2 -3

Lagos

115

D A

D

D A A

109

▬ ▬ ▬

Cairo

104 105

C C

C C

106 103

Lausanne

5

AAA BBB

NEW NEW NEW

Cape Town Chengdu Chicago Chongqing

Leeds

24 44 95 22

BBB

72 59 67

CCC

CC

CCC

69 41 64

Lille

BB CC

B

BB

▼ ▼

B

B

BB

-18

Lisbon London

CC

CCC

75 15

-20

CCC

CCC

CCC

-3

BBB

BBB

A

-7

7 Smar t C i t y I ndex 2021

Structure 2021

Smart City Rank 2021

Smart City Rating 2021

Structure 2021

Technology 2021

Smart City Rank 2020

Smart City Rank 2021

Smart City Rating 2021

Technology 2021

Smart City Rank 2020

Change

Change

City

City

▼ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼

▲ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▲

Los Angeles

31 39 34

BB BB BB

BB BB

BBB

26 51 45 96 17 78 97 72 20 90 74 21 56 93 11 66 86 10 23 80 61 52 39 44 5

-5

Riyadh Rome

30

BB

B C

BB

53

+23 -11

Lyon

BB

+12 +11

112

C

C

101

Madrid

B

BBB

Rotterdam

27 60

BBB

BBB

BBB

29 27

+2

Makassar Manchester

100

C

CC

C

-4 -9 +2 -5 -2

San Francisco

B C C D

B C C D

B C

-33

26

BBB

BBB

BBB

San José Santiago Sao Paulo

109 110 117

NEW

Manila

102

C

C

C B

104

CC

91

-19 -17

Marseille

83 99

CCC

CCC

D

100

Medan

C C

C C

CC

Seattle

43 13 71 65

BB

BB

BB

37 47 81 67 89 73 16 18 59 50 28 63 79 30 19 25 55 12 48 62 1 8

-6

Medellin

101

C

-29

Seoul

BBB CCC CCC AAA CCC BBB BBB C

B

A

+34 +10

Medina

73 19

CCC BBB

CCC BBB

CCC

NEW

Shanghai Shenzhen Singapore

CC

CCC CCC AAA

Melbourne Mexico City

A

+1

CCC AAA

+2

108

C

C

CC

-18

1

Milan

81 38 54 90 14 64 89 12 21 86 61 85 62 78 3

CCC

CCC BBB

CCC

-7

Sofia

107

C

CC

-18

Montreal Moscow Mumbai Munich Nairobi Nanjing New Delhi New York Newcastle

BB

BB

-17

St. Petersburg

79 25 18 56 42 23 70 84 36 33 11 75 35 15 63 4

CCC

CCC BBB

-6 -9

B

B

B

+2 +3 -3 -5 +2 -3 -2 +2 -6 +2

Stockholm

A

CC

CC AA

CC

Sydney

BBB

A A

BBB

BBB

Taipei City

A B

A B B A

+4 +3 +8 +5 -7 -5 -6

113

D

D

D

108

Tallinn Tel Aviv

CCC

CCC

CCC

CCC

BB

BB

CC

CC BB

CC

The Hague

BBB CCC CCC

BBB CCC CCC

BBB BBB CCC

BBB BBB CCC

Tianjin Tokyo Toronto

CCC

A B

B

Osaka Oslo Paris

BB BB

BBB BBB

BB BB BB

AA

AAA CCC CCC

A

Vancouver

-14 +14 -20 -23 +33

B

BB

Vienna Warsaw

BBB CCC

A

Philadelphia

CCC

B B

-33 -23 -34

CCC BBB

CCC

Phoenix Prague

B

BB

Washington D.C.

BB

BB BB

CCC

B C D

CCC

Zaragoza

BBB CCC

A

Rabat

103 118

C D

D D

105 102

+2

Zhuhai Zurich

CCC AAA

CCC

-1 +1

Rio de Janeiro

-16

2

AA

A

3

8 Smar t C i t y I ndex 2021

By ranking Smart City Rank 2021

Structure 2021

Smart City Rating 2021

Structure 2021

Technology 2021

Smart City Rank 2020

Smart City Rank 2021

Smart City Rating 2021

Technology 2021

Smart City Rank 2020

Change

Change

City

City

▲ ▼

53 26

+23

BB

B

BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB

30 Riyadh

1 3 5 8 2 6 7 4

AAA

AAA AAA AAA

AAA

Singapore

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

▲ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▲ ▲

-5

BBB

BB

31 Los Angeles 32 Bordeaux 33 Vancouver

+1 +2 +4 -4 -1 -1 -5

A A A A A A A A

AA AA

Zurich

NEW

BBB BBB

BB BB

Oslo

▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▼

19 45 12 30 46 21 51 22 32 50 37 35 31 33 34 38 40 60 56 57 59 36 49

-14 +11 -23

A A A A A A

A

Taipei City Lausanne

BBB

B

34 Madrid

NEW

AAA

BB BB

BBB BBB

35 Washington D.C.

AA AA AA

Helsinki

-6 +9

36 Toronto 37 Busan 38 Montreal

Copenhagen

B

BBB

Geneva

-17 +12 -18

BBB

BB BB

A A A

Auckland

BB

39 Lyon

+14 +14

24 25 10 47 11 48 14 18 20 13 23 15 28 16 17 29 42 43 9

BBB

BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB BBB

10 Bilbao 11 Vienna 12 New York 13 Seoul 14 Munich 15 Zaragoza 16 Brisbane 17 Amsterdam 19 Melbourne 20 Dusseldorf 21 Newcastle 18 Sydney

A

BBB

40 Hamburg 41 Hong Kong

BB

-9 +8 -6

BB

A

-2

BBB

BB

B

BB BB BB

+34

42 Tel Aviv 43 Seattle

B

A

BB

-3

BBB

AA

NEW

B

+33

44 Lille

BB

A A A

-10 -15 -14 -14

B

BB

45 Denver

-2 -8

BBB

BBB

BBB

46 Gothenburg 47 Hanover 48 Dublin 49 Glasgow 50 Berlin 51 Birmingham

A A A

BB

A

BBB BBB

BB BB

BBB BBB

+1 -7 +2 -7 +5 -9 -9 +2

NEW

A A

BBB BBB

BB

-12 -11

BBB

BB BB

BBB BBB

A

BBB

22 London

+8

52 Brussels

BBB

A

23 The Hague

BB

NEW

BBB

A

NEW

53 Kiel

24 Leeds

BBB

+2 +2 +3

B B

B B B B B

B B B

54 Moscow 55 Ankara 56 Tallinn 57 Boston 58 Barcelona

A

BBB BBB BBB

25 Stockholm 26 Manchester 27 Rotterdam 28 Abu Dhabi

BBB BBB

CCC

-21

BBB

B

+14 +14

BB BB

BB BB

BB BB

-9

BB

B

29 Dubai

9 Smar t C i t y I ndex 2021

Structure 2021

Smart City Rank 2021

Smart City Rating 2021

Structure 2021

Technology 2021

Smart City Rank 2020

Smart City Rank 2021

Smart City Rating 2021

Technology 2021

Smart City Rank 2020

Change

Change

City

City

▼ ▼

▼ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼

59 Chicago

B B B B

B B

BB

41 27 61 39 62 66 67 65 64 68 82 63 81 69 54 55 71 70 44 73 58 74 98 78 79 52 80 84 83

-18 -33

89 Delhi

CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC

CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC

CC CC CC CC CC

86 93 94 85 95 75 76 77 88 97 96 72

-3 +3 +3 -7 +2

60 San Francisco

B

90 Mumbai 91 Jakarta 92 Hyderabad 93 Bengaluru 94 Istanbul 96 Bratislava 97 Budapest 98 Buenos Aires 95 Lisbon

61 Paris

CCC

BB

▼ ▼ ▲ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▲ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼

62 Phoenix 63 Zhuhai 64 Nanjing 65 Shenzhen 66 Hangzhou 67 Chongqing 68 Guangzhou 69 Beijing 70 Tianjin 71 Shanghai 72 Chengdu 73 Medina 74 Kuala Lumpur

BB

B

-23

CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC

CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC

CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC CCC B

-1 +2 +2 -1 -3

B

NEW

CCC

-20 -20 -20 -10

CC CC CC CC

C C

CC

+13

99 Medan

C C C C C C C C C C C C C C D D D D D D

-2 -4

CCC

-7

100 Makassar 101 Medellin 102 Manila

CC

C C C D C C

CC CC

+10

C C C D C C C C C C C C D C D D D D

-29

-3

104 105 106 103

+2 +2 +2 -2

CCC CCC CCC

NEW

103 Rabat 104 Cairo

-20 -20

75 Warsaw 76 Bangkok 77 Bologna 78 Prague

105 Cape Town 106 Bucharest

CC

-5 -7

CC CC CC

87 89 90

-19 -18 -18 -19 -12 -11

B B

107 Sofia

-34

108 Mexico City 109 San José 110 Santiago 111 Athens 112 Rome 113 Nairobi 114 Abuja 115 Lagos 116 Bogota 117 Sao Paulo 118 Rio de Janeiro

79 St. Petersburg

CCC CCC CCC

-6

C

NEW

80 Krakow 81 Milan

-22

CC

91 99

-7

C C D D D D D D

82

CC

+16

101 108 107 109

K y iv

83 Marseille

CCC

B

-5 -5

-5 -7 -6

84 Tokyo

B

CCC

85 Philadelphia

CCC

B

-33

86 Osaka 87 Hanoi

B

CCC

-6 -3 -5

92

-24 -17 -16

CC CC

CC CC

CC CC

100 102

88 Ho Chi Minh City

10 Smar t C i t y I ndex 2021

User’s Guide to the Smart City Index

Abu Dhabi Smart City Ranking

PRIORITY AREAS Background Information

% of respondents who chose the Priority Area

Abu Dhabi

% of respondents who chose th

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

PRIORITY AREAS

0%

20%

40%

6

affordable housing fulfilling employment unemployment health services road congestion air pollution green spaces public transport school education recycling basic amenities citizen engagement security social mobility corruption

74.3% This presents the UNHuman Development Index and its four components of the parent economy of the city, as well as the city’s position on the map. For Taipei City, the data is calculated using the same methodology and comparable data. This section also presents the population of the city as defined through the UN World Urb nization Prospects for the majority of cities or Eurostat for a number of European cities. From a list of 15 indicators, survey respondents were asked to select 5 that they perceived as the most urgent for their city. This is the total bar. The higher the percentage of responses per area, the greater the priority for the city. The left and section of each bar shows the Alignment - the proportion of those respondents who also answered the corresponding survey questions low. A strong Alignment implies that these areas also demand priority attention. 24.5% 24.5% 24.3% 23.1% 21.8% 21.1% 20.7% 16.5% 11.8% affordable housing fulfilling employment unemployment health services road congestion air pollution green spaces public transport school education recycling basic amenities citizen engagement security social mobility corruption 0% 20% You are willing to concede personal data in order to improve traffic congestion You are comfortable with face recognition technologies to lower crime You feel the availability of online information has increased your trust in authorities The proportion of your day-to-day payment transactions that are non-cash (% of transactions) 75.3% 89.1% 89.8% 70.0% 80% 100% ATTITUDES

BACKGROUND INFORMATION Smart City Ranking: The Ranking position of the city amongst the 118 cities measured, based upon the Rating and its components. Group: Each city is assigned to one of four groups, based upon its HDI values. Smart City Rating and Factor Ratings: The Ratings for each city are calculated from the city’s performance relative to the other cities within the group. The Methodology section provides the exact procedure for these calculations. The 2021 Ranking and Rating are also shown for the 109 cities included in last year’s index. City Population 1,480,000 (UN World Urbanization Prospects) Country HDI Life expectancy at Birth Expected years of schooling Mean years of schooling GNI per capita (PPP $) 2016 0.863 2017 0.864 2018 0.866 10.8 13.6 10.9 13.6 11.0 13.6 77.5 77.6 77.8 67,410 67,136 66,912 STRUCTURES

From a list of 15 indicators, survey respondents were asked to select 5 that they perceived as the most urgent for their city. This is the total bar. The higher the percentage of responses per area, the greater the priority for the city. The left hand section of each bar shows the Alignment - the proportion of those respondents who also answered the corresponding survey questions low. A strong Alignment implies that these areas also demand priority attention.

49.2%

49.2%

46.5%

SMART CITY RANKING 28

46.5%

34.8%

SMART CITY RANKING 28

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

34.8%

27.9%

27.9%

25.7%

25.7%

24.5% 24.5% 24.3%

City

Population 1,480,000

23.1%

21.8% 21.1% 20.7%

(UN World Urbanization Prospects)

Out of 118

16.5%

Out of 118

11.8%

▲ 42 in 2020

▲ 42 in 2020

% of respondents who agree or strongly agree with the statement

ATTITUDES

% of respondents who agree or strongly

0%

20%

40%

60%

Map tiles by Stamen Design CC BY 3.0 Map Data © OpenStreetMap

40%

60

You are willing to concede personal data in order to improve traffic congestion You are comfortable with face recognition technologies to lower crime You feel the availability of online information has increased your trust in authorities The proportion of your day-to-day payment transactions that are non-cash (% of transactions) 2016 2017 2018 0.863 0.864 0.866 77.5 77.6 77.8

Map tiles by Stamen Design CC BY 3.0 Map Data © OpenStreetMap

0.890 2019

1 yr change

0.890 2019

1 yr change

LEGEND: Mean years of schooling GNI per capita (PPP $) Country HDI Life expectancy at Birth Expected years of schooling

+0.024

BB SMART CITY RATING

+0.024

14.3 12.1 78.0 SMART CITY RATING 67,462 BB

+0.7 +1.1 +0.2 +550

14.3 12.1 78.0

+0.7 +1.1 +0.2 +550

10.8 13.6

10.9 13.6

11.0 13.6

GROUP MEAN

CITY

67,410

67,136

66,912

67,462

LEGEND:

GROUP MEAN

CITY

LEGEND:

MIN

CITY MEAN

GROUP MAX

LEGEND:

MIN

CITY MEAN

GROUP MAX

Health & Safety Summarizes the areas that the respondents perceive as the priority area for their city. From a list of 15 indicators, survey respondents were asked to select 5 that they perceived as the most urgent for their city. The total bar indicates the percentage of the respondents that included a given area as one of their five choices. The higher the percentage of responses per area, the greater the priority for the city. The left-hand section of each bar shows the Alignment - the proportion of those respondents who also answered the corresponding survey questions low. A strong Alignment implies that these areas also demand priority attention. Priority Areas Health & Safety Health & Safety Basic sanitation meets the needs of the poorest areas Online reporting of city maintenance problems provides a speedy solution Recycling services are satisfactory A website or App allows residents to easily give away unwanted items Public safety is not a problem Free public wifi has i proved access to city services Air pollution is not a problem CCTV cameras has made residents feel safer Medic l services provision is sati fac ory A w bsite or App allows residents to effectively monitor a r pollution Finding housing with rent equal to 30% or less of a monthly salary is not a problem Arranging medical appointments online has improved access Mobility Mobility Traffic congestion is not a problem Car-sharing Apps have reduced congestion Public transport is satisfactory 85.9 STRUCTURES TECHNOLOGIES 81.9 84.4 74.5 60.8 88.1 51.0 66.4 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Score Online reporting of city maintenance problems provides a speedy solution A website or App allows residents to easily give away unwanted items Free public wifi has improved access to city services CCTV cameras has made residents feel safer A website or App allows residents to effectively monitor air pollution Arranging medical appointments online has improved access Mobility Car-sharing Apps have reduced congestion 85.9 84.4 74.5 60.8 88.1 51.0 74.5 74.6 71.7 85.7 58.4 85.3 TECHNOLOGIES 81.9 66.4 0 20 40 60 80 100 80 100 Score

BB in 2020

Score BB in 2020

Score

0

20

40

60

Health & Safety

20

40

Basic sanitation meets the needs of the poorest areas

Recycling services are satisfactory Public safety is not a problem

FACTOR RATINGS

FACTOR RATINGS

Air pollution is not a problem

Medical services provision is satisfactory

Finding housing with rent equal to 30% or less of a monthly salary is not a problem

BB

BB

Mobility

69.9 63.9 65.7 82.4 78.5

Traffic congestion is not a problem Public transport is satisfactory

STRUCTURES

Apps that direct you to an available parking space have reduced journey time Bicycle hiring has reduced congestion Online scheduling and ticket sales has made public transport easier to use The city provides information on traffic congestion through mobile phones

STRUCTURES

Apps that direct you to an available parking space have reduced journey time Bicycle hiring has reduced congestion Online scheduling and ticket sales has made public transport easier to use The city provides information on traffic congestion through mobile phones

BB

BB TECHNOLOGIES

Activities Abu Dhabi

% of respondents who chose the Priority Area

Activities PRIORITY AREAS

Activities

Activities 60%

0%

20%

40%

80%

100%

TECHNOLOGIES

80.8 84.3

87.5

Green spaces are satisfactory

Online purchasing of tickets to shows and museums has made it easier to attend

80.8 84.3

Green spaces are satisfactory

Online purchasing of tickets to shows and museums has made it easier to attend

Cultural activities (shows, bars, and museums) are satisfactory

affordable housing fulfilling employment

74.3%

Opportunities (Work & School) From a list of 15 indicators, survey respondents were asked to select 5 that they perceived as the most urgent for their city. This is the total bar. The higher the percentage of responses per area, the greater the priority for the city. The left hand section of each bar shows the Alignment - the proportion of those respondents who also answered the corresponding survey questions low. A strong Alignment implies that these areas also demand priority attention. Online access to job listings has made it easier to find work IT skills are taught well in schools The current internet speed and reliability meet connectivity needs Governance Online public access to city finances has reduced corruption Online services provided by the city has made it easier to start a new business

Cultural activities (shows, bars, and museums) are satisfactory

49.2%

unemployment health services road congestion air pollution green spaces

46.5%

Opportunities (Work & School) Employment finding services are readily available Most children have access to a good school BACKGROUND INFORMATION

3 SMART CITY RANKING 28

Opportunities (Work & School)

Opportunities (Work & School)

34.8%

66.6 77.9 70.1 67.5 80.1

76.3 76.7 75.1 83.4

GROUP

27.9%

66.6 77.9 70.1 67.5 80.1 24.5% 24.5% 24.3%

Employment finding services are readily available Most children have access to a good school

Online access to job listings has made it easier to find work

GROUP

25.7%

City

IT skills are taught well in schools

Lifelong learning opportunities are provided by local institutions

Lifelong learning opportunities are provided by local institutions

Online services provided by the city has made it easier to start a new business

Businesses are creating new jobs

3

public transport school education recycling basic amenities citizen engagement security social mobility corruption

Businesses are creating new jobs

The current internet speed and reliability meet connectivity needs

Minorities feel welcome Population

Minorities feel welcome

1,480,000

23.1%

Governance

21.8% 21.1% 20.7%

Governance

Governance

82.3 69.7 60.5 69.8

68.2 65.6 71.3 82.8

Information on local government decisions are easily accessible (UN World Urba ization Prospects) Corruption of city officials is not an issue of concern Residents contribute to decision making of local government Residents provide feedback on local government projects

82.3 69.7 60.5 69.8

Information on local government decisions are easily accessible Corruption of city officials is not an issue of concern Residents contribute to decision making of local government Residents provide feedback on local government projects

Online public access to city finances has reduced corruption

Online voting has increased participation

Out of 118

16.5%

Online voting has increased participation

All ratings range from AAA to D

An online platform where residents can propose ideas has improved city life Processing Identification Documents online has reduced waiting times

11.8%

All ratings range from AAA to D

An online platform where residents can propose ideas has improved city life Processing Identification Documents online has reduced waiting times

▲ 42 in 2020

% of respondents who agree or strongly agree with the statement

ATTITUDES

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Map tiles by Stamen Design CC BY 3.0 Map Data © OpenStreetMap

You are willing to concede personal data in order to improve traffic congestion You are comfortable with face recognition technologies to lower crime

75.3%

11 Smar t C i t y I ndex 2021

2016 0.863

2017 0.864

2018 0.866

0.890 2019

1 yr change

Country HDI

89.1%

+0.024

Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker