Advertisement

Smart Planning: Tools, Concepts, and Approaches for a Sustainable Digital Transformation

  • Alexandre C. Barbosa
  • Taciano M. Moraes
  • Danielle T. Tesima
  • Ricardo C. Pontes
  • Alex de Sá Motta Lima
  • Barbara Z. Azevedo
Chapter
Part of the Urban Computing book series (UC)

Abstract

The Smart Planning has been presented in the discussions in both urban computing, operational research, and digital cities and in the urban and regional planning field. The first can be referred as process of the integration, analysis, and processing of data in order to optimize city services, while the second group has a long trajectory in defining and understanding the urban dynamics. As a matter of fact, conflicts in identifying key similarities in approaches for a more sustainable use of those tools are constant and must be carefully handled. Through an exploratory perspective, the goal is to highlight the vastness of the planning field and the rise of several complexities when introducing modern technologies in the urban sphere.

References

  1. 1.
    Albrechts, L.: Strategic (spatial) planning reexamined. Environ. Plann. B. Plann. Des. 31(5), 743–758 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Albrechts, L.: Bridge the gap: from spatial planning to strategic projects. Eur. Plan. Stud. 14(10), 1487–1500 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310600852464 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Albrechts, L.: Ingredients for a more radical strategic spatial planning. Environ. Plann. B. Plann. Des. 42(3), 510–525 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1068/b130104p CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arnstein, S.R.: A ladder of citizen participation. J. Am. Inst. Plann. 35(4), 216–224 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bafarasat, A.Z.: In pursuit of productive conflict in strategic planning: project identification. Eur. Plan. Stud. 24(11), 2057–2075 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2016.1231800 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bank, I.D.: Urban dashboard. www.urbandashboard.org. Accessed 25 Jan 2018
  7. 7.
    Barkwith, A.: Optimising subsurface use for future cities. UK Government Office for Science (2015). https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/461763/future-cities-optimising-subsurface-use.pdf
  8. 8.
    Bencardino, M., Nesticó, A.: Urban Sprawl, Labor Incomes and Real Estate Values. In: Gervasi, O., et al. (eds.) Computational Science and Its Applications – ICCSA 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10405, pp. 17—30. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62395-5_2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Berrone, P., Ricart, J.E., Carraso, C., Ricart, R.: IESE Cities in Motion Index 2017. IESE Business School, University of Navarra, Navarra (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brash, J.: Bloomberg’s New York: Class and Governance in the Luxury City, vol. 6. University of Georgia Press, Athens (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Breheny, M.J.: A practical view of planning theory. Environ. Plann. B. Plann. Des. 10(1), 101–115 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1068/b100101 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Briggs, J.: Management reports & dashboard best practice. Target Dashboard. Retrieved 18 (2013). https://www.targetdashboard.com/site/Dashboard-Best-Practice/Management-Report- and-Dashboard-best-practice-index.aspx
  13. 13.
    British Geological Survey urban geoscience: future cities. http://www.bgs.ac.uk/research/engineeringGeology/urbanGeoscience/futureCities.html. Accessed 28 Feb 2018
  14. 14.
    Buck, N.T., While, A.: Competitive urbanism and the limits to smart city innovation: the UK future cities initiative. Urban Stud. 54(2), 501–519 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015597162 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chaminé, H.I., Teixeira, J., Freitas, L., Pires, A., Silva, R.S., Pinho, T., Monteiro, R., Costa, A.L., Abreu, T., Trigo, J.F., et al.: From engineering geosciences mapping towards sustainable urban planning. Eur. Geologist J. 41, 16–25 (2016)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Checkoway, B.: Paul Davidoff and advocacy planning in retrospect. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 60(2), 139–143 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369408975562 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Diallo, S.Y., Herencia-Zapana, H., Padilla, J.J., Tolk, A.: Understanding interoperability. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Emerging M&S Applications in Industry and Academia Symposium, EAIA’11, pp. 84–91. Society for Computer Simulation International, San Diego (2011). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2048513.2048530
  18. 18.
    do Rio de Janeiro, P.: Centro de operacoes do rio. http://cor.rio/. Accessed 17 Mar 2018
  19. 19.
    Friendly, A.: The right to the city: theory and practice in Brazil. Plann. Theory Pract. 14(2), 158–179 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2013.783098 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gasser, U.: Interoperability in the digital ecosystem (2015). http://dx.doi.or/10.213/ssrn.2639210
  21. 21.
    Geertman, S., Stillwell, J.: Planning Support Systems: Content, Issues and Trends. Springer, Dordrecht (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Giacaglia, G.E.O.: A industria aeroespacial: questoes economicas, tecnologicas e sociais. Estudos Avancados 8, 42–49 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Healey, P.: The treatment of space and place in the new strategic spatial planning in Europe. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 28(1), 45–67 (2004). http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00502.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hetherington, V.: Dashboard demystified: what is a dashboard. Olszak & Ziemba (2004). Business intelligence systems as a new generation of decision support (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Iassinovski, S., Artiba, A., Bachelet, V., Riane, F.: Integration of simulation and optimization for solving complex decision making problems. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 85(1), 3–10 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jean, L.: Dahl (robert a.) lindblom (charles e.) - politics, economics and welfare. Planning and politico-economic systems resolved into basic social processes. Revue économique 6(2), 328–329 (1955)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kantor, P., Savitch, H.V., Haddock, S.V.: The political economy of urban regimes: a comparative perspective. Urban Aff. Rev. 32(3), 348–377 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1177/107808749703200303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lefebvre, H.: Le Droit a la ville. Anthropos, Paris (1968)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Li, H.Q., Parriaux, A., Thalmann, P., Li, X.Z.: An integrated planning concept for the emerging underground urbanism: deep city method part 1 concept, process and application. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 38, 559–568 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Li, H., Li, X., Soh, C.K.: An integrated strategy for sustainable development of the urban underground: from strategic, economic and societal aspects. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 55, 67–82 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Metzger, J.T.: The theory and practice of equity planning: an annotated bibliography. J. Plan. Lit. 11(1), 112–126 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1177/088541229601100106 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Moore, G.: Gordon Moore: the man whose name means progress, the visionary engineer reflects on 50 years of Moore’s law. IEEE Spectrum: Special Report, 50 (2017)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Palfrey, J.G., Gasser, U.: Interop: The Promise and Perils of Highly Interconnected Systems. Basic Books (2012)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pike, A., Rodríguez-Pose, A., Tomaney, J.: What kind of local and regional development and for whom? Reg. Stud. 41(9), 1253–1269 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400701543355 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Plewe, B.: GIS Online: Information Retrieval, Mapping, and the Internet, 1st edn. OnWord Press, Santa Fe (1997)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rodriguez, S.K.: Geologia urbana da região metropolitana de São Paulo. Ph.D. thesis, Universidade de São Paulo (1998)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Saleh, B., Sadoun, B.: Design and implementation of a gis system for planning. Int. J. Digit. Libr. 6(2), 210–218 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-005-0117-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Scott, A.J., Roweis, S.T.: Urban planning in theory and practice: a reappraisal. Environ. Plan. A Econ. Space 9(10), 1097–1119 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1068/a091097 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Singer, N.: Mission control, built for cities: IBM takes ‘smarter cities’ concept to Rio de Janeiro. New York Times, March 3 (2012)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sugumaran, R., Degroote, J.: Spatial Decision Support Systems: Principles and Practices, 1st edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    UK Government Office for Science future of cities collection. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/future-of-cities. Accessed 28 Feb 2018
  42. 42.
    UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs world population projected to reach 9.8 billion in 2050, and 11.2 billion in 2100. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS. Accessed 28 Feb 2018
  43. 43.
    Vahaaho, I.: 0-land use: underground resources and master plan in Helsinki. In: Zhou, Y., Cai, J., Sterling, R. (eds.) Advances in Underground Space Development, Copyright, p. 56-14 (2013)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    World Bank urban population. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS. Accessed 28 Feb 2018

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandre C. Barbosa
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Taciano M. Moraes
    • 4
  • Danielle T. Tesima
    • 5
  • Ricardo C. Pontes
    • 6
  • Alex de Sá Motta Lima
    • 7
  • Barbara Z. Azevedo
    • 8
  1. 1.Università Degli Studi di PadovaPadovaItaly
  2. 2.Katholieke Universiteit LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  3. 3.Universitè Paris 1 Panthèon-SorbonneParisFrance
  4. 4.UFG Media LabGoianiaBrazil
  5. 5.Architecture and Urbanism UFOPSao PauloBrazil
  6. 6.Graduate Program, UFSCFlorianópolisBrazil
  7. 7.Graduate ProgramUniversité Paris 1 Panthéon-SorbonneParisFrance
  8. 8.Geological Engineering UFOPBelo HorizonteBrazil

Personalised recommendations