기본연구과제

Smart cities represent a conceptual urban development model based on the utilization of human, collective, and technological capitals for the enhancement of development and prosperity in urban agglomerations(Angelidou, 2014). However, strategic planning for smart city development still tends to focus on technological advancement of the city’s hard infrastructures(i.e. transport) rather than soft infrastructure and people(i.e.social and human capital, knowledge, inclusion, participation, social innovation and equity).Infrastructure-oriented smart city products provide replicable solutions that address a range of common problems. However, a large fraction of smart city advocates tends to regard infrastructure-oriented strategies as fragmented, stressing the idea that ‘Technology is not enough.’ This means that such a hardware based approach does not guarantee the real smartness of cities, and it actually does not necessarily make people themselves think or act smart. In this regard, the purpose of this research was to investigate the role of local governments in coordinating and guiding innovations in the process of smart city developments with the people-oriented approaches. The following specific questions were considered: what are cities actually doing for innovation of smart cities? How can we approach for understanding of the smart city innovation? what elements should be considered for the emergence of the smart city innovation?
   In order to examine above research questions, this research highlighted that there are three different ideal-typical elements to achieve the smart city innovation through a review of the relevant literature: 1) technology, data and infrastructure, 2) innovative capacity 3) institutional setting. The combination of the three elements has been conceptualized as an analytical framework of this research. Specifically, first element of technology, data and infrastructure indicates the utilization of new technology and new information and communication technology(ICT) in the development of physical infrastructure and urban system such as platforms. The second element of innovative capacity means local capacity that facilitates innovative ideas and activities at the local level, thus including the creation and application of new ideas for local problems, the participation of diverse local actors and new relationships, open and collaborative networking and the collective capacity to act. In this notion, interactions between citizen and different stakeholder can be highlighted as a critical source that enhances innovative capacity for smart city. For example, the participations of smart citizens through project-oriented living labs can be an effective strategies to innovate smart cities by working together in solving challenges their communities are facing. Networking through collaborative efforts between different actors is an important key driver behind for smart city innovation. The third element of institutional setting indicates institutional environments at the local level, such as collaborative environment between different government departments, particular policy or strategies, public-private partnership and governance. In particular, solving social problems is not merely a question of developing good policies, but much more a managerial question of organizing effective collaboration between government and other stakeholder. In this regard, our research highlighted that smart governance is a significant institutional mechanism for coordinating the many different components that comprise the smart city. Based upon these analytical frameworks, this research critically examined typical smart city cases(City of Busan, City of Sejong, City of Buchen) in South Korea. Simultaneously, the research explored diverse smart city approaches in Europe, with a detailed examination of two typical cases(Helsinki Finland, Barcelona Spain).
   Building on the main findings from the case study, this research provided policy directions and detailed policy strategies that can be considered for the smart city innovation policies at the local government level. First of all, the fundamental policy direction at the local level needs to set its main goal as improving the ‘quality of life’ on the basis of ‘people-oriented’ approach with ‘new technology.’ Instead of just focusing on issues such as existing physical environment, safety, and environmental problems, then, local governments need to take one step further and expand its policy target to comprehensive areas to solve diverse local problems. For this aim, it is necessary to establish “smart governance” as a bottom-up mechanism, through which co-productive process for smart city can be facilitated. Here, the role of local governments is to manage diverse and collective efforts so that innovative ideas and activities can be practiced for smart city innovation. So far, local governments used to be the direct actor for doing everything for local citizens. But for smart city innovation, the main role of local governments will be to form environmental and institutional conditions that enable diverse local actors such as local governments, residents, business sectors and civil society groups to actively participate in the process of smart city innovation. The participation of diverse local actors can draw on the embedded knowledge of the people, their skills, and their expertise to develop innovative solutions that serves the needs of the citizens. Such active engagement can also provide valuable insights about the assets and the needs of the smart city.
   Under these basic directions, this study presented detailed strategies that can be promoted by local governments in the future to realize smart cities, divided into ① technology･data･infrastructure, ② innovative capacity, and ③ institutional setting. Finally, the study proposes priorities and tasks that each local government can consider in different policy stages.