Evaluation of the dimensions and indicators of the smart city in the 22nd district of Tehran
sayd ghlamreza baniahmad
1
(
PhD student, Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Qeshm Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qeshm, Iran
)
hamidreza joodaki
2
(
)
علی شکور
3
(
جغرافیا،علوم پایه،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد مرودشت،شیراز،ایران
)
Keywords: Dimensions and indicators, Smart City, District 22 of Tehran,
Abstract :
. The purpose of the current research is to evaluate the dimensions and indicators of the smart city in the 22nd district of Tehran metropolis. It is analytical. In this research, descriptive statistics techniques including frequency table were used for data analysis and sample t-test. The evaluation of smart city indicators in the 22nd district of Tehran showed that the indicators of entrepreneurship, productivity, development of business spaces, bio-intelligence, transparent governance, electronic democracy, educational, cultural and health facilities, personal safety and security, e-health of education and education, e-learning, creativity and participation in social life are below the average level in the region. Also, each of the dimensions of the smart city was investigated in the 22nd district of Tehran metropolis. The results showed that this area In terms of intelligent environment with a significant level (0.000) and intelligent transportation with a significant level (0.002), they are in above average conditions and these dimensions have an acceptable status in the region. Also, according to the obtained results, the dimension of governance and smart government is at an average level of significance (0.005), and the dimensions of smart citizen with a significant level (0.008), smart economy with a significant level (0.007) ) and intelligent life with a significant level (0.006) is lower than the average in the region.
-Anthopoulos, L. G., & Reddick, C. G. (2016). Smart City and SmartGovernment: Synonymous or Complementary?. In Proceedings of the25th International Conference
-Dameri, R. P. (2017), Urban smart dashboard. Measuring smart city performance. In Smart City Implementation )pp. 67-84). Springer, Cham
-European Parliament( 2014) Strasbourg, France
-Kumar, H., Singh, M. K., Gupta, M. P., & Madaan, J. (2018). Moving towards smart cities: solutions that lead to the smart city transformation framework. Technological forecasting and social change
-Giffinger, R., HGudrun, H., (2010). Smart cities ranking: An effective instrument for the positioning of cities. Architecture, City and Environment, Vol.4, No.12, pp.7–25.
-Global City Indicators Facility (2014) ISO37120
-International Telecommunication Union (2023)
-Masik, Grzegorz, Sagan, Iwona, James W.Scott(2021), Smart City strategies and new urban development policies in the Polish context,
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264275120313184.
-Nam, T. Pardo, T, A. (2011). Conceptualizing Smart City with Dimensions of Technology, People, and Institutions. The Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research.
-The International Telecommunication Union (2024)
-The British Standards Institution (2020)
-Zbigniew J. Makieła, Magdalena M. Stuss, Karolina Mucha-Kuś, (2022), Smart City 4.0: Sustainable Urban Development in the Metropolis GZM, https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/6/3516/htm.