Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Spatial Data Management and Visualization Tools and Technologies for Enhancing Participatory e-Planning in Smart Cities

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Smart Cities in the Mediterranean

Part of the book series: Progress in IS ((PROIS))

Abstract

In recent years the concept of “smart cities” has emerged as a new promising paradigm for urban management, capable of attaining sustainability objectives. The issue of citizens and stakeholders’ participation, whose contribution to the collection of empirical knowledge, identification and prioritization of urban inefficiencies as well as selection and deployment of city- and citizen-specific smart applications and policies for coping with these inefficiencies and steering sustainable, inclusive and resilient urban environments, is of critical importance and lies at the heart of this new paradigm. Digitally enhanced environments, supported by Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and their applications have marked a noteworthy shift towards e-Planning and e-Participation, setting the ground for more knowledgeable policy-making towards the planning/implementation of smart city solutions that are mostly citizens- and city-oriented rather than purely technology-pushed. The focus of the present paper is on the delineation of participatory e-Planning as a digitally enabled perspective for effectively communicating various planning problems to citizens and stakeholders and actively involving them in decision-making. Along these lines, the most significant tools and technologies are described, which are currently available in planners’ portfolio in order for participatory planning exercises to be optimally implemented by successfully integrating spatial planning approaches, public participation and visualization techniques; while the role of Public Participation Geographic Information Systems (PPGIS) in spatial planning is also discussed. Finally, some concluding remarks are drawn as to the key components and obstacles planners are confronted with, while carrying out participatory e-Planning projects in a smart city context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Atzmanstorfer, K., & Blaschke, T. (2013). The geospatial web: A tool to support the empowerment of citizens through participation? In C. N. Silva (Ed.), Citizen e-Participation in urban governance: Crowdsourcing and collaborative creativity (pp. 144–170). Pennsylvania, Hershey: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balint, P., Stewart, R., Desai, A., & Walters, L. (2011). Wicked environmental problems. Washington DC: Island Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bizjak, I. (2012). Improving public participation in spatial planning with Web 2.0 tools. Urbani Izziv, 23(1), 112–124. UDK: 711.4:316.772.5:004.774.6. doi:10.5379/urbani-izziv-en-2012-23-01-004

  • Bousset, J.-P., Macombe, C., & Taverne, M. (2005). Participatory methods, guidelines and good practice guidance to be applied throughout the project to enhance problem definition, co-learning, synthesis and dissemination. System for Environmental and Agricultural Modelling; Linking European Science and Society (SEAMLESS) Project. Report Νo.: 10, Ref.: D7.3.1, December 2005. http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/9302/1/re050010.pdf. Accessed January 13, 2015.

  • Brabham, D. C. (2008). Crowdsourcing as a model for problem solving: An introduction and cases. Convergence, 14(1), 75–90. doi:10.1177/1354856507084420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brabham, D. C. (2009). Crowdsourcing the public participation process for planning projects. Planning Theory, 8(3), 242–262. doi:10.1177/1473095209104824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G. (2012). Public participation GIS (PPGIS) for regional and environmental planning: Reflections on a decade of empirical research. URISA Journal, 25(2), 7–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campagna, M., & Deplano, G. (2004). Evaluating geographic information provision within public administration websites. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 31(1), 21–37. doi:10.1068/b12966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caperna, A. (2010). Integrating ICT into sustainable local policies. In C. N. Silva (Ed.), Handbook of research on e-planning—ICTs for urban development and monitoring (pp. 340–364). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (1992). The world has changed: Can planning change? Landscape and Urban Planning, 22(1), 73–78. doi:10.1016/0169-2046(92)90009-O.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, J. (2005). Wicked problems and social complexity. In J. Conklin (Ed.), Dialogue mapping: Building shared understanding of wicked problems (1st Edn., pp. 1–20). Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-01768-5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, W., Harris, T., & Weiner, D. (2002). Community Participation and geographic information systems. London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidoff, P. (1996). Advocacy and pluralism in planning. In R. LeGates & F. Stout (Eds.), The city reader (pp. 422–432). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Pascali, P. (2014). Technology for democracy in smart city planning. Italian Journal of Planning Practice (IJPP), IV(1), 3–28. ISSN: 2239-267X.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Roo, G., & Porter, G. (2007). Fuzzy planning: The role of actors in fuzzy governance environment. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duany, A., Speck, J., & Lydon, M. (2010). The smart growth manual. New York: McGrow-Hill. ISBN 978-0-07-137675-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duxbury, N., Garrett-Petts, W. F., & MacLennan, D. (2015). Cultural mapping as cultural inquiry—Introduction to an emerging field of practice. In N. Duxbury, W.F. Garrett-Petts, & D. MacLennan (Eds.), Cultural mapping as cultural inquiry (pp. 1–42). New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-138-82186-6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eshet-Alkai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union. (2011). Cities of tomorrow—Challenges, visions, ways forward. European Union Report. European Commission, Directorate General for Regional Policy. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/studies/pdf/citiesoftomorrow/citiesoftomorrow_final.pdf. Accessed May 17, 2014.

  • Ferraz de Abreu, P. M. B. (2002). New information technologies in public participation: a challenge to old decision-making institutional frameworks. Ph.D. Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, P. (2009). Geospatial information and geographic information systems (GIS): Current issues and future challenges. CRS Report for Congress. USA: Congressional Research Service. http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40625.pdf. Accessed October 13, 2014.

  • Friend, J., & Hickling, A. (2011). Planning under pressure: The strategic choice approach. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, C., Hofkirchner, W., Schafranek, M., Raffl, C., Sandoval, M., & Bichler, R. (2010). Theoretical foundations of the web: Cognition, communication, and co-operation. towards an understanding of web 1.0, 2.0, 3.0. Future Internet, 2, 41–59. doi:10.3390/fi2010041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A., & Wright, O. E. (2001). Deepening democracy: Institutional innovations in empowered participatory governance. Politics & Society, 29(1), 5–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geertman, S. (2002). Participatory planning and GIS: A PSS to bridge the gap. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 29(1), 21–35. doi:10.1068/b2760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghose, R., & Elwood, S. (2003). Public participation GIS and local political context: Propositions and research directions. Journal of Urban and Regional Information Systems Association, Special Issue on Access and Participatory Issues, 15(2), 17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghose, R. (2007). Politics of scale and networks of association in public participation GIS. Environment and Planning, A(39), 1961–1980. doi:10.1068/a38247.

  • Giaoutzi, M., & Stratigea, A. (2011). Regional planning: theory and practice. Athens: KRITIKI. (In Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild, M. F. (1992). Geographical data modeling. Computers & Geosciences, 18(4), 401–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild, M. F. (2000). The current status of GIS and spatial analysis. Journal of Geographical Systems, 2(1), 5–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodchild, M. F. (2007). Citizens as sensors: The world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal, 69(4), 211–221. doi:10.1007/s10708-007-9111-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackler, D. (2006). Cities in the technology economy. New York: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, H. S., & Prosperi, D. (2005). Citizen participation and internet GIS—Some recent advances. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 29, 617–629. doi:10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2005.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennen, L. (1999). Participatory technology assessment: A response to technical modernity? Science and Public Policy, 26(5), 303–312. doi:10.3152/147154399781782310,303-312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hines, A., & Bishop, P. (2006). Thinking about the future—Guidelines for strategic foresight. Washington DC: Social Technologies LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, J. (2006, June 1). The rise of crowdsourcing. Wired, Issue 14.06. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds.html. Accessed March 14, 2014.

  • Hudson-Smith, A., Evans, S., Batty, M., & Batty, S. (2002). Online participation: The Woodberry down experiment. Working Paper 60. Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis—CASA. London, UK: University College London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Innes, J., & Booher, D. (2004). Reframing public participation: Strategies for the 21st century. Planning Theory and Practice, 5(4), 419–436. doi:10.1080/1464935042000293170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, B., & Li, Z. (2005). Geovisualization: Design, enhanced visual tools and applications. The Cartographic Journal, 42(1), 3–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanji, N., & Greenwood, L. (2001). Participatory approaches to research and development in IIΕD: Learning from experience. London: IIED. ISBN 978-1-899825-81-3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keßler, C., Wilde, M., & Raubal, M. (2005). Using SDI-based public participation for conflict resolution. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 11th EC-GI & GIS Workshop, Alghero, Sardinia, June 29–July 1, 2005. http://carsten.io/EC-GI_2005.pdf. Accessed October 8, 2014.

  • Khakee, A. (1998). Evaluation and planning: Inseparable concepts. Town Planning Review, 69(4), 359–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingston, R., Carver, S., Evans, A., & Turton, I. (2000). Web-based public participation geographical information systems: An aid to local environmental decision making. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 24(2), 109–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komninos, N. (2006). The architecture of intelligent cities. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Intelligent Environments, Athens, Greece, July 5–6, 2006 (pp. 13–20). Institution of Engineering and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komninos, N. (2009). Intelligent cities: Towards interactive and global innovation environments. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development, 1(4), 337–355. doi:10.1504/IJIRD.2009.022726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubicek, H., & Westholm, H. (2005). Scenarios for future use of e-democracy tools in Europe. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 1(3), 33–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubicek, H., Millard, J., & Westholm, H. (2007). Back-Office integration for online services between organizations. In A.-V. Anttiroiko & M. Malkia (Eds.), Encyclopedia of digital government (pp. 123–130). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. L., & Sheppard, S. R. J. (2006). Culture and communication: can landscape visualization improve forest management consultation with indigenous communities? Landscape and Urban Planning, 77(3), 291–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macintosh, A. (2006). Evaluating how e-participation changes local democracy. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the e-Government Workshop ’06 (eGOV06). Brunel University, West London, September 11, 2006. http://www.gov2u.org/publications/Evaluating_eParticipation.pdf. Accessed April 17, 2015.

  • Manville, C., Cochrane, G., Cave, J., Millard, J., Pederson, J. K., Thaarup, R. K., et al. (2014). Mapping smart cities in the EU. Report. European Parliament, Directorate General for Internal Policies, Policy Department A: Economic and Scientific Policy. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2014/507480/IPOL-ITRE_ET(2014)507480_EN.pdf. Accessed March 29, 2014.

  • Mare Nostrum Project. (2015). PPGIS practical guide. Document Prepared as Part of the Mare Nostrum Project: Bridging the Implementation Gap in Coastal Management around the Mediterranean. Integrated Resources Management Co Ltd (IRMCo Ltd), Malta, January 2015. http://marenostrumproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Mare_Nostrum_Project_PPGIS_Practical_Guide.pdf. Accessed March 22, 2016.

  • McGinn, M. (2001). Getting involved in planning. Edinburgh, UK: Scottish Executive Development Department.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mostert, E. (2003). The challenge of public participation. Paper presented at the Participatory Methods Conference, Maastricht, The Netherlands, February 11–12, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oracle. (2011). Oracle’s solutions for smart cities: Delivering 21st century services. Oracle White Paper. http://www.oracle.com/us/industries/public-sector/032422.pdf. Accessed April 13, 2014.

  • Panagiotopoulou, M., Somarakis, G., & Stratigea, A. (2016). Broadening cultural planning perspectives in the smart city context by enhancing stakeholders’ engagement. Paper presented at the 1st Euro-Mediterranean Conference and Exhibition on Smart Urban Development and Blue Growth Opportunities for Cities, Communities and Islands in the Mediterranean Basin, Limassol, Cyprus, April 14–16, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papadopoulou, Ch.-A., & Stratigea, A. (2014). Traditional vs. web-based participatory tools in support of spatial planning in ‘lagging-behind’ peripheral regions. In G. Korres, E. Kourliouros, G. Tsobanoglou, & A. Kokkinou (Eds.), Socio-economic sustainability, regional development and spatial planning: European and international dimensions and perspectives (pp. 164–170). University of the Aegean, Department of Geography. ISBN: 978-960-93-6040-1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, A. G., & Quintana, S. C. (2002). From technocratic to participatory decision support systems: Responding to the new governance initiatives. Journal of Geographic Information and Decision Analysis, 6(2), 95–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettit, C. J., Cartwright, W., & Berry, M. (2007). Geographical visualization: A participatory planning support tool for imagining landscape futures. Applied GIS, 2(3), 22.1–22.17. doi:10.2104/ag060022.

  • Puglisi, M., & Marvin, S. (2002). Developing urban and regional foresight: Exploring capacities and identifying needs in the North West. Futures, 34(8), 761–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quan, J., Oudwater, N., Pender, J., & Martin, A. (2001). GIS and participatory approaches in natural resources research. In Socio-economic methodologies for natural resources research. best practice guidelines. Chatham, UK: Natural Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabari, C., & Storper, M. (2014). The digital skin of cities: Urban theory and research in the age of the sensored and metered city—Ubiquitous computing, and big data. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 8(1), 27–42. doi:10.1093/cjres/rsu021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramasubramanian, L. (2010). Geographic information science and public participation. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rambaldi, G., McCall, M., Kwaku Kyem, P. A., & Weiner, R. (2006). Participatory spatial information management and communication in developing countries. The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, 25(1), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinner, C. (2001). Argumentation maps: GIS-based discussion support for online planning. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28(6), 847–863. doi:10.1068/b2748t.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roch, S., Mericskay, B., Batita, W., Bach, M., & Rondeau, M. (2012). WikiGIS basic concepts: Web 2.0 for geospatial collaboration. Future Internet, 4, 265–284. doi:10.3390/fi4010265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seltzer, E., & Mahmoudi, D. (2013). Citizen participation, open innovation and crowdsourcing: Challenges and opportunities for planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 28(3), 3–18. doi:10.1177/08854412212469112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiffer, M. J. (1995). Interactive multimedia planning support: Moving from stand-alone systems to the world wide web. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 22(6), 649–664. doi:10.1068/b220649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiode, N. (2000). Urban planning, information technology, and cyberspace. Journal of Urban Technology, 7(2), 105–126. doi:10.1080/713684111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, C. N. (2010). The e-planning paradigm—Theory, methods and tools: an overview. In C. N. Silva (Ed.), Handbook of research on e-planning—ICTs for urban development and monitoring (pp. 1–14). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Steiniger, S., Poorazizi, M. E., & Hunter, A. (2016). Planning with citizens: Implementation of an e-planning platform and analysis of research needs. Urban Planning, 1(2), 49–64. doi:10.17645/up.v1i2.607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinitz, C. (2010). Landscape architecture into the 21st century—Methods for digital techniques. In E. Buhmann, M. Pietsch, & E. Kretzler (Eds.), Digital landscape architecture 2010 (pp. 2–26). Berlin and Offenbach, Germany: Wichmann Verlag, VDE Verlag GmbH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmann, R., Krek, A., & Blaschke, T. (2004). Analysis of online public participatory GIS applications with respect to the differences between the US and Europe. Paper presented at the 24th Urban Data Management Symposium (UDMS), Chioggia, October 27–29, 2004. http://geog.sdsu.edu/People/Pages/jankowski/public_html/web780/Steinmann_et_all_2004.pdf. Accessed June 14, 2015.

  • Stratigea, A. (2015). Theory and methods of participatory planning. Greece, Athens: Hellenic Academic Electronic Books, Kallipos. (In Greek).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stratigea, Α., Papadopoulou, Ch-A, & Panagiotopoulou, M. (2015). Tools and technologies for planning the development of smart cities: A participatory methodological framework. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(2), 43–62. doi:10.1080/10630732.2015.1018725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies, and nations. New York, USA: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugumaran, V., & Sugumaran, R. (2007). Web-based spatial decision support systems (WebSDSS): Evolution, architecture, examples and challenges. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 19, 844–875.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talen, E. (2000). Bottom-up GIS: A new tool for individual and group expression in participatory planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 66(3), 279–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, T., Zhao, J., & Coleman, D. J. (2005). Design of a GIS-enabled online discussion forum for participatory planning. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 4th Annual Public Participation GIS Conference, Cleveland, Ohio, USA, July 31–August 2, 2005. http://downloads2.esri.com/campus/uploads/library/pdfs/55426.pdf. Accessed September 21, 2014.

  • Tress, B., & Tress, G. (2003). Scenario visualization for participatory landscape planning: A study from Denmark. Landscape and Urban Planning, 64(3), 161–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tulloch, D. (2008). Public Participation GIS (PPGIS). In K. Kemp (Ed.), Encyclopedia of geographic information science (pp. 351–353). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turiera, T., & Cros, S. (2013). CO business: 50 examples of business collaboration. Barcelona: Zero Factory S.L.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Asselt, M. B. A., & Rijkens-Klomp, N. (2002). A look in the mirror: Reflection on participation in integrated assessment from a methodological perspective. Global Environmental Change, 12(3), 167–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E. (1986). Lead users: A source of novel product concepts. Management Science, 32, 791–805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallin, S., Horelli, L., & Saad-Sulonen, J. (2010). Introduction—ICTs changing the research and practice of participatory urban planning. In S. Wallin, L. Horelli, & J. Saad-Sulonen (Eds.), Digital tools in participatory planning (pp. 7–12). Espoo: Centre for Urban and Regional Studies Publications. Aalto University, School of Science and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren-Kretzschmar, B., & Von Haaren, C. (2014). Communicating spatial planning decisions at the landscape and farm level with landscape visualization. iForest—Biogeosciences and Forestry, 7, 434–442. doi:10.3832/ifor1175-007

  • Wilson, J. (2008). Web 2.0 for urban designers and planners. Master Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Urban Studies and Planning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, J., & Coleman, D. J. (2006). GeoDF: Towards an SDI PPGIS application for e-governance. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the GSDI-9 Conference, Santiago, Chile, November 6–10, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwirner, W., & Berger, G. (2008). Participatory mechanisms in the development, implementation and review of national sustainable development strategies. European Sustainable Development Network – ESDN Quarterly Report, September 2008. http://www.sd-network.eu/quarterly%20reports/report%20files/pdf/2008-September-Participatory_Mechanisms_in_the_Development,_Implementation_and_Review_of_NSDS.pdf. Accessed October 12, 2013.

Websites

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography and Regional Planning, School of Rural and Surveying Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, 9 Heroon Polytechniou Str., Zographou Campus, Athens, 157 80, Greece

    Maria Panagiotopoulou & Anastasia Stratigea

Authors
  1. Maria Panagiotopoulou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anastasia Stratigea
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Panagiotopoulou .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept of Geography and Regional Planning, National Technical University of Athens, Department of Geography and Regional Planning, Athens, Greece

    Anastasia Stratigea

  2. KIOS Research Center, University of Cyprus, KIOS Research Center, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Elias Kyriakides

  3. CNE Business Development Ltd. , Limassol, Cyprus

    Chrysses Nicolaides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Panagiotopoulou, M., Stratigea, A. (2017). Spatial Data Management and Visualization Tools and Technologies for Enhancing Participatory e-Planning in Smart Cities. In: Stratigea, A., Kyriakides, E., Nicolaides, C. (eds) Smart Cities in the Mediterranean. Progress in IS. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54558-5_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation