Volume 12, Issue 4 (2023)
Naqshejahan 2023, 12(4): 22-50 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Ziari K, Hataminejad H, Pourahmad A, Zanganehshahraki S, Hamghadam N. Presentation the model of smart city governance with a future study approach; Case study: Rasht City. Naqshejahan 2023; 12 (4) :22-50
URL: http://bsnt.modares.ac.ir/article-2-61823-en.html
URL: http://bsnt.modares.ac.ir/article-2-61823-en.html
Presentation the model of smart city governance with a future study approach; Case study: Rasht City
Keramatollah Ziari 
1, Hossein Hataminejad2 , Ahmad Pourahmad3 , Saeed Zanganehshahraki4 , Noosha Hamghadam5
1, Hossein Hataminejad2 , Ahmad Pourahmad3 , Saeed Zanganehshahraki4 , Noosha Hamghadam5
1- Professor of Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Iran , zayyari@ut.ac.ir
2- Associate Professor of Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Iran.
3- Professor of Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Iran.
4- . Associate Professor of Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
5- PhD Student of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2- Associate Professor of Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Iran.
3- Professor of Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Iran.
4- . Associate Professor of Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
5- PhD Student of Geography and Urban Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (1840 Views)
Aims: Cities play a key role in promoting human values. Nowadays, population growth, widespread urbanization in developing countries, demographic change, environmental challenges, economic problems, urban transportation problems, advances in information and communication technology, and bureaucracy have necessitated the need for smart urban governance. Therefore, the main purpose of this study is to provide a model of smart urban governance with a future study approach.
Methods: The research method is descriptive-analytical and exploratory. The statistical community is experts in the field of research. The sample size was determined using Roscoe rules 45 people and the sampling method is snowball.
Findings: the key drivers of smart city governance were extracted from Latin sources as well as the Delphi method, 9 key drivers for the future of smart city governance were considered. In the next step, scenarios were developed for each driver and strategies were considered for each desired scenario. Finally, the model of smart city governance in Rasht was presented.
Conclusion: direct citizenship education, design of public participation opportunities, formulation of local policies, integrated urban management, create a financial model to allocate appropriate budgets, development of data communication infrastructure and access network, encourage investors, develop The law as a means of attracting private sector investment in public infrastructure, Creating open data portals, enacting strong laws to protect the privacy, providing online services and eliminating bureaucracy and careful planning of smart government at the national level, the highest score in achieving They achieved the model of futuristic smart city governance.
Methods: The research method is descriptive-analytical and exploratory. The statistical community is experts in the field of research. The sample size was determined using Roscoe rules 45 people and the sampling method is snowball.
Findings: the key drivers of smart city governance were extracted from Latin sources as well as the Delphi method, 9 key drivers for the future of smart city governance were considered. In the next step, scenarios were developed for each driver and strategies were considered for each desired scenario. Finally, the model of smart city governance in Rasht was presented.
Conclusion: direct citizenship education, design of public participation opportunities, formulation of local policies, integrated urban management, create a financial model to allocate appropriate budgets, development of data communication infrastructure and access network, encourage investors, develop The law as a means of attracting private sector investment in public infrastructure, Creating open data portals, enacting strong laws to protect the privacy, providing online services and eliminating bureaucracy and careful planning of smart government at the national level, the highest score in achieving They achieved the model of futuristic smart city governance.
Keywords: Urban governance, Smart City, Smart City Governance, Future study, Rasht city, New technologies
Article Type: Original Research |
Subject:
Urban Design
Received: 2022/05/26 | Accepted: 2022/09/8 | Published: 2023/01/1
Received: 2022/05/26 | Accepted: 2022/09/8 | Published: 2023/01/1
References
1. Geng Y, Zhang H. Coordinated Interactions of Sustainable Urbanization Dimensions: Case Study in Hunan, China. SAGE Open. 2021, 1–16. DOI: 10.1177/21582440211009198 [Article] [DOI]
2. Pires F M, Mendes L D S, Quin˜onez L. integrated system architecture for decision-making and urban planning in smart cities International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks. 2019, 15(8): 1-15. DOI: 10.1177/1550147719867829 [Article] [DOI]
3. Jiang H, Geertman S, Witte P. avoiding the planning support system pitfalls? What smart governance can learn from the planning support system implementation gap EPB: Urban Analytics and City Science. 2020, 47(8): 1343– 1360. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808320934824 [Article] [DOI]
4. Tomor Z, Meijer A, Michels A, Geertman S. Smart Governance for Sustainable Cities: Findings from a Systematic Literature Review. JOURNAL OF URBAN TECHNOLOGY. 2019, 26(4): 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2019.1651178 [Article] [DOI]
5. Prasetyo Y A, Lubis M. Smart City Architecture Development Methodology (SCADM): A Meta-Analysis Using SOA-EA and SOS Approach. SAGE Open. 2020, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020919528 [Article] [DOI]
6. Mishra A K. Henry George and Mohring–Harwitz Theorems: Lessons for Financing Smart Cities in Developing Countries. Environment and Urbanization Asia. 2019, 10(1): 13–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0975425318821797 [Article] [DOI]
7. Tan S Y, Taeihagh A. Smart City Governance in Developing Countries: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability. 2020, 12: 1-30. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030899 [Article] [DOI]
8. Gupta K, Zhang W, Hall R P. Risk priorities and their co-occurrences in smart city project implementation: Evidence from India’s Smart Cities Mission (SCM). EPB: Urban Analytics and City Science. 2020, 0(0): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808320907607 [Article] [DOI]
9. Aina Y A, Wafer A, Ahmed F, Alshuwaikhat H M. Top-down sustainable urban development? Urban governance transformation in Saudi Arabia. Cities. 2019, 90: 272–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.03.003 [Article] [DOI]
10. Leitheiser S, Follmann A. the social innovation–(re)politicisation nexus: Unlocking the political in actually existing smart city campaigns? The case of Smart City Cologne, Germany. Urban Studies. 2020, 57(4): 894–915. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098019869820 [Article] [DOI]
11. Jiang H, Geertman S, Witte P. Smart urban governance: an alternative to technocratic ‘‘smartness’’. GeoJournal, Published online. 2020, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-020-10326-w [Article] [DOI]
12. Peng B. Digital leadership: State governance in the era of digital technology. Cultures of Science. 2021, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/209660832198983 [Article] [DOI]
13. Nesti G. Defining and assessing the transformational nature of smart city governance: insights from four European cases. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2020, 86(1): 20–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852318757063 [Article] [DOI]
14. Zolfaghari M, Mahdavinejad M, Mansoori B, Ansari M. Biophilic Development in Natural-Heritage-Intensive Geography; Case Study: Abyaneh. Human Geography Research, 2022 Apr 21; 54(2): 479-98. https://doi.org/10.22059/jhgr.2021.311420.1008187 [Article] [DOI]
15. Ranchod R. the data-technology nexus in South African secondary cities: The challenges to smart governance. Urban Studies. 2020, 57(16): 3281–3298. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098019896974 [Article] [DOI]
16. Gohari S, Ahlers D, Nielsen B F, Junker E. the Governance Approach of Smart City Initiatives.Evidence from Trondheim, Bergen, and Bodø. Infrastructures. 2020, 5(31): 1-20. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures5040031 [Article] [DOI]
17. Xu H, Zhu W. Evaluating the impact mechanism of citizen participation on citizen satisfaction in a smart city. EPB: Urban Analytics and City Science. 2020, 0(0): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808320980746 [Article] [DOI]
18. 17- Zandbergen D, Uitermark J. In search of the Smart Citizen: Republican and cybernetic citizenship in the smart city. Urban Studies. 2020, 57(8): 1733–1748. DOI: 10.1177/0042098019847410.
19. Mutiara D, Yuniarti S, Pratama B. Smart governance for smart city. Earth and Environmental Science. 2018, 126: 1-10. DOI:10.1088/1755-1315/126/1/012073 [Article] [DOI]
20. Praharaj S, Han J h, Hawken S. towards the right model of smart city governance in INDIA. Int. J. Sus.Dev. Plan. 2018, 13(2): 171-186. DOI: 10.2495/SDP-V13-N2-171-186 [Article] [DOI]
21. Hatami A, Sasanpour F, Ziparo A, Soleimani M. Sustainable smart city: concepts, dimensions and indicators. Applied Research Journal of Geographical Sciences. 2021; 21 (60): 315-339. [Persian] 10.52547/jgs.21.60.315 [Article]
22. Zafarmandi S, Mahdavinejad M. Technology of Modern Windcatchers: A Review. Int. J. Architect. Eng. Urban Plan. 2021 Jul; 31(3):1-11. https://doi.org/10.22068/ijaup.31.3.549 [Article] [DOI]
23. Hosseini S A, Laalinit I, Heydarinia S. Explaining the smart urban management model, a new solution to improve urban governance. Urban planning geography researches. 2018; 7(4): 743-762. https://jurbangeo.ut.ac.ir/article_75043.html?lang=en [Article]
24. Tajfar A H, Shayan A, Pour Moqadasi M. Evaluation and Ranking of Effective Strategies in the Smart City for Success of the Partners of the Municipality of Tehran by the Grounded Theory Method. Strategic Management Thought. 2019, 13(1): 189-214. [Persian] http://ensani.ir/fa/article/download/410559 [Article]
25. Sarkar S. a mission to converge for inclusion? The smart city and the women of Seelampur. Media, Culture & Society. 2019, 41(3): 278–293. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443718810905 [Article] [DOI]
26. Myeong S, Jung Y, Lee E. A Study on Determinant Factors in Smart City Development: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Analysis. Sustainability. 2018, 10: 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082606 [Article] [DOI]
27. Mandic A, Kennell J. Smart governance for heritage tourism destinations: Contextual factors and destination management organization perspectives. Tourism Management Perspectives. 2021, 39: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2021.100862 [Article] [DOI]
28. Irazabal C, Jiron P. Latin American smart cities: Between worlding infatuation and crawling provincialising. Urban Studies. 2020, 00(0): 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098020945201 [Article] [DOI]
29. Sanchez-Corcuera R, Nunez-Marcos A, Sesma-Solance J, Bilbao-Jayo A, Mulero R, Zulaika U, Azkune G, Almeida A. Smart cities survey: Technologies, application domains and challenges for the cities of the future. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks. 2019, 15(6): 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1550147719853984 [Article] [DOI]
30. Ehwi R J, Holmes H, Maslova S, Burgess G. the ethical underpinnings of Smart City governance: Decision-making in the Smart Cambridge programme, UK. Urban Studies. 2022, 00(0): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980211064983 [Article] [DOI]
31. Bibri S E. Data-driven smart sustainable cities of the future: An evidence synthesis approach to a comprehensive state-of-the-art literature review. Sustainable Futures. 2021, 3: 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2021.100047 [Article] [DOI]
32. 31- Burns R, Andrucki M. Smart cities: Who cares? EPA: Economy and Space. 2020, 0(0): 1–19. DOI: 10.1177/0308518X20941516.
33. Jiron P, Imila´n W A, Lange C, Mansilla P. Placebo urban interventions: Observing Smart City narratives in Santiago de Chile. Urban Studies. 2020, 00(0): 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098020943426 [Article] [DOI]
34. Masik G, Sagan I, Scott J W. Smart City strategies and new urban development policies in the Polish context. Cities. 2021, 108: 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102970 [Article] [DOI]
35. Tomor Z, Przeybilovicz E, Leleux C. Smart governance in institutional context: An in-depth analysis of Glasgow, Utrecht, and Curitiba. Cities. 2021, 114: 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103195 [Article] [DOI]
36. Pereira G V, Parycek P, Falco E, Kleinhans R. Smart governance in the context of smart cities: A literature review. Information Polity. 2018, 23: 143–162. DOI 10.3233/IP-170067 [Article] [DOI]
37. Konig P D. Citizen-centered data governance in the smart city: From ethics to accountability. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2021, 75: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103308 [Article] [DOI]
38. Lofgren K, Webster C W R. the value of Big Data in government: The case of ‘smart cities’. Big Data & Society. 2020, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720912775 [Article] [DOI]
39. Talaei M, Mahdavinejad M, Azari R, Prieto A, Sangin H. Multi-objective optimization of building-integrated microalgae photobioreactors for energy and daylighting performance. Journal of Building Engineering. 2021 Jun 5:102832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102832 [Article] [DOI]
40. Miguel Valdez A, Cook M, Potter S. Roadmaps to utopia: Tales of the smart city. Urban Studies. 2018, 55(15): 3385–3403. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017747857 [Article] [DOI]
41. Basmi W, Boulmakoul W, Karim L, Lbath A. Modern approach to design a distributed and scalable platform architecture for smart cities complex events data collection. Procedia Computer Science. 2020, 170: 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.03.008 [Article] [DOI]
42. Guimaraes J C F D, Severo E A, únior L A F, Costa W P L B D, Salmoria F T. Governance and quality of life in smart cities: Towards sustainable development goals. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2020, 253: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119926 [Article] [DOI]
43. Baykurt B, Raetzsch C. what smartness does in the smart city: From visions to policy. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies. 2020, 26(4): 775–789. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856520913405 [Article] [DOI]
44. Qi L, Guo J. Development of smart city community service integrated management platform. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks.2019, 15(6): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1550147719851975 [Article] [DOI]
45. 43- Dorin Pop M, Proștean O. A Comparison between Smart City Approaches in Road Traffic Management. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2018, 238: 29–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2018.03.004 [Article] [DOI]
46. Lopez L J R, Castro A I G. Sustainability and Resilience in Smart City Planning: A Review. Sustainability. 2021, 13(181): 1-25. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13010181 [Article] [DOI]
47. 45- Silva A O D, Fernandes R A S. Smart governance based on multipurpose territorial cadaster and geographic information system: An analysis of geoinformation, transparency and collaborative participation for Brazilian capitals. Land Use Policy. 2020, 97: 1-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104752.
48. Abdi H, Shahbazitabar M. Smart city: A review on concepts, definitions, standards, experiments, and challenges. Journal of Energy Management and Technology (JEMT). 2020, 4(3): 1-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.22109/jemt.2020.206444.1205 [Article] [DOI]
49. 47- Falco S D, Angelidou M, Addie J P D. from the “smart city” to the “smart metropolis”? Building resilience in the urban periphery. European Urban and Regional Studies. 2019, 26(2): 205–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776418783.
50. Datta A, Odendaal N. Smart cities and the banality of power. EPD: Society and Space. 2019, 37(3): 387–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263775819841765 [Article] [DOI]
51. Choi J, Lee S, Jamal T. Smart Korea: Governance for smart justice during a global pandemic. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 2020, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1777143 [Article] [DOI]
52. Abs H J. Options for developing European strategies on citizenship education. European Educational Research Journal. 2021, 20(3): 329–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904121994418 [Article] [DOI]
53. Idrissi H, Engel L C, Benabderrazik Y. new visions for citizen formation: An analysis of citizenship education policy in Morocco. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice. 2021, 16(1): 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1746197919886279 [Article] [DOI]
54. Leighton R. Radical citizenship Education. Citizenship and Social Justice. 2022, 00(0): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/17461979221080604 [Article] [DOI]
55. Ye W. Socioeconomic Status and Out-of-School Citizenship Education in China’s Shanghai. Education and Urban Society. 2017, 00(0): 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124517713609 [Article] [DOI]
56. Sweeting D, Alba-Ulloa J D, Pansera M, Marsh A. Easier said than done? Involving citizens in the smart city. EPC: Politics and Space. 2022, 0(0): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/23996544221080643 [Article] [DOI]
57. Bherer L, Gauthier M, Simard L. Developing the Public Participation Field: The Role of Independent Bodies for Public Participation. Administration & Society. 2020, 00(0): 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399720957606 [Article] [DOI]
58. Clark J K. Public Values and Public Participation: A Case of Collaborative Governance of a Planning Process. American Review of Public Administration. 2020, 00(0): 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074020956397 [Article] [DOI]
59. Baek K. The Geographic Dimension of Citizenship in Digital Activism: Analysis of the Relationships among Local and Global Citizenship, the Use of Social Networking Sites, and Participation in the Occupy Movement. American Behavioral Scientist. 2018, 00(0): 1-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002764218764242 [Article] [DOI]
60. Krzywoszynska A, Matt W, Buckley A, Chiles P, Gregson N, Holmes H, Mawyin J. Opening up the Participation Laboratory: The Cocreation of Publics and Futures in Upstream Participation. Science, Technology & Human Values. 2018, XX(X): 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243917752865 [Article] [DOI]
61. Mbithi A, Ndambuki D, Juma F O. Determinants of Public Participation in Kenya County Governments. Journal of Asian and African Studies. 2019, 54(1): 52–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021909618794028 [Article] [DOI]
62. Menon S, Hartz-Karp J. Applying mixed methods action research to explore how public participation in an Indian City could better resolve urban sustainability problems. Action Research. 2020, 0(0): 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750320943662 [Article] [DOI]
63. Andersson M. Smart city and metropolitan governance. Urban Management Consultant, San Francisco, United States. 2021, 235-246 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816816-5.00011-5 [Article] [DOI]
64. Ghosh B, Arora S. Smart as (UN) democratic? The making of a smart city imaginary in Kolkata, India. EPC: Politics and Space. 2022, 40(1): 318–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/23996544211027583 [Article] [DOI]
65. Meijer A, Bolı´var M P R. governing the smart city: a review of the literature on smart urban governance. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2016, 82(2): 392–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314564308 [Article] [DOI]
66. Bartocci L, Grossi G, Mauro S G, Ebdon C. the journey of participatory budgeting: a systematic literature review and future research directions. International Review of Administrative Sciences 2022, 0(0): 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523221078938 [Article] [DOI]
67. Cabannes Y, Lipietz B. Revisiting the democratic promise of participatory budgeting in light of competing political, good governance and technocratic logics. ENVIRONMENT & U RBANIZATION. 2018, 30(1): 67-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247817746279 [Article] [DOI]
68. Calabrese T, Williams D, Gupta A. Does Participatory Budgeting Alter Public Spending? Evidence from New York City. Administration & Society. 2020, 00(0): 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399720912548 [Article] [DOI]
69. Godwin M L. Studying Participatory Budgeting: Democratic Innovation or Budgeting Tool? State and Local Government Review. 2018, XX(X): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X18784333 [Article] [DOI]
70. Holdo M. Contestation in Participatory Budgeting: Spaces, Boundaries, and Agency. American Behavioral Scientist. 2020, 64(9): 1348–1365. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764220941226 [Article] [DOI]
71. 69- Miller S A, Hildreth R W, Stewart L M. the Modes of Participation: A Revised Frame for Identifying and Analyzing Participatory Budgeting Practices. Administration & Society. 2017, 00(0): 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399717718325 [Article] [DOI]
72. Tahmouri A, Mansouri B, Azizi S. Iconic Aspect of Technology in Production of Heritage of Contemporary Architecture. Naqshejahan - Basic Studies and New Technologies of Architecture and Planning. 2022 Sep 10;12(3):22-41. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.23224991.1401.12.3.3.7 [Article] [DOI]
73. Keramati A, Behmanesh I, Noori H. Assessing the impact of readiness factors on e-government outcomes: An empirical investigation. Information Development. 2016, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666916685603 [Article] [DOI]
74. Ahmad A, Jeon G, Yu C W. Challenges and emerging technologies for sustainable smart cities. Indoor and Built Environment. 2021, 0(0): 1–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1420326X211001698 [Article] [DOI]
75. Dowling R, McGuirk P, Maalsen S, Sadowski J. How smart cities are made: A priori, ad hoc and post hoc drivers of smart city implementation in Sydney, Australia. Urban Studies. 2021, 58(16): 3299–3315. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098020986292 [Article] [DOI]
76. Berrone P, Ricart J E, Carrasco C. the Open Kimono: Toward a General Framework for Open Data Initiatives in Cities. CALIFORNIA 40 MANAGEMENT REVIEW. 2016, 59(1): 39–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125616683703 [Article] [DOI]
77. Boudreau C. Reuse of open data in Quebec: from economic development to government transparency. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2020, 0(0): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852319884628 [Article] [DOI]
78. Gao Y, Janssen M, Zhang C. Understanding the evolution of open government data research: towards open data sustainability and smartness. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2021, 0(0): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211009955 [Article] [DOI]
79. Rasche A, Morsing M, Wetter E. Assessing the Legitimacy of “Open” and “Closed” Data Partnerships for Sustainable Development. Business & Society. 2021, 60(3): 547–581. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650319825876 [Article] [DOI]
80. Slibar B, Oreski D, Redep N B. Importance of the Open Data Assessment: An Insight into the (Meta) Data Quality Dimensions. SAGE Open. 2021, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211023178 [Article] [DOI]
81. Wiencierz C, Lünich M. Trust in open data applications through transparency. New media & society.2020, 00(0): 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820979708 [Article] [DOI]
82. Arimoro A E. Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure in Sub-Saharan Africa Post-COVID-19: The Role of Law. Public Works Management & Policy. 2021, 27(2): 108–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087724X211059531 [Article] [DOI]
83. Jacob D W, Fudzee M F M, Salamat M A, Herawan T. a review of the generic end-user adoption of e-government services. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2019, 0(0):1-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852319861895 [Article] [DOI]
84. Manoharan A P, Ingrams A. Conceptualizing E-Government from Local Government Perspectives. State and Local Government Review. 2018, XX(X): 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X18763964 [Article] [DOI]
85. 83- Tajgardoon M G, Shalmani M T M, Habibi J. A knowledge flow framework for e-government in Iran. Information Development. 2015, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666915595690 [Article] [DOI]
86. Tan H, Zhao X, Zhang N. Technology symbolization: political mechanism of local e-government adoption and implementation. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 2020, 0(0): 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852320915637 [Article] [DOI]
87. Elueze I, Quan-Haase A. Privacy Attitudes and Concerns in the Digital Lives of Older Adults: Westin’s Privacy Attitude Typology Revisited. American Behavioral Scientist. 2018, 62(10): 1372–1391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218787026 [Article] [DOI]
88. Epstein D, Quinn K. Markers of Online Privacy Marginalization: Empirical Examination of Socioeconomic Disparities in Social Media Privacy Attitudes. Literacy, and Behavior. Social Media + Society. 2020, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120916853 [Article] [DOI]
89. Li X. Understanding eHealth Literacy from a Privacy Perspective: eHealth Literacy and Digital Privacy Skills in American Disadvantaged Communities. American Behavioral Scientist. 2018, 00(0): 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218787019 [Article] [DOI]
90. Li H. Negotiating Privacy and Mobile Socializing: Chinese University Students’ Concerns and Strategies for Using Geosocial Networking Applications. Social Media + Society. 2020, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120913887 [Article] [DOI]
91. Lutz C, Hoffmann C P. Data capitalism and the user: An exploration of privacy cynicism in Germany. New media & society. 2020, 22(7): 1168–1187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820912544 [Article] [DOI]
92. Shams G, Rasoolzadeh M. Bauchemie: Environmental Perspective to Well-Building and Occupant Health. Naqshejahan - Basic Studies and New Technologies of Architecture and Planning. 2023 Jan 10; 12(4):51-69. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.23224991.1401.12.4.2.8 [Article] [DOI]
93. Shaeri J, Mahdavinejad M. Prediction Indoor Thermal Comfort in Traditional Houses of Shiraz with PMV/PPD model. International Journal of Ambient Energy. 2022 Jun 21. https://doi.org/10.1080/01430750.2022.2092774 [Article] [DOI]
94. Saadatjoo P, Mahdavinejad M, Zhang G, Vali K. Influence of permeability ratio on wind-driven ventilation and cooling load of mid-rise buildings. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2021 Jul 1;70:102894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.102894 [Article] [DOI]
95. Shaeri J, Mahdavinejad M, Zalooli A. Physico-mechanical and Chemical Properties of Coquina Stone Used as Heritage Building Stone in Bushehr, Iran. Geoheritage. 2022 Sep;14(3):1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-022-00738-0 [Article] [DOI]
96. Torabi M, Mahdavinejad M. Past and Future Trends on the Effects of Occupant Behaviour on Building Energy Consumption. J. Sustain. Archit. Civ. Eng. 2021 Oct 27;29(2) 83-101. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.sace.29.2.28576 [Article] [DOI]
97. Quinn K, Epstein D, Moon B. We Care About Different Things: Non-Elite Conceptualizations of Social Media Privacy. Social Media + Society. 2019, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119866008
98. Heidari A, Navimipour NJ, Unal M. Applications of ML/DL in the management of smart cities and societies based on new trends in information technologies: A systematic literature review. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2022 Jul 23:104089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.104089 [Article] [DOI]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |