CITIZENET0 PROJECT

WELCOME TO THE PROJECT

Dr. Jonas Gomes Laboratory Eureka UFAM

CITIZENET0

START

agenda

CRITERIA TO SELECT five top CITIES

welcome

human global challenges

THE LEADING EUROPEAN CITIES

RESEARCH IMPORTANCE

opportunities

INTERNATIONAL COOPETATION

logo+QUESTIONNAIRE

publications

SMART & sUST.CITIES

RESEARCH PLAN

GLOSSARY

goal, question and target audience

main REFERENCES

WELCOMEThis is a Project developed by Dr. Jonas Gomes da Silva (UFAM) under the guidance of Dr. Michael Hodson (The University of Manchester). All investments are financed by the personal savings of Professor Jonas Gomes.

HUMAN GLOBAL CHALLENGES - IPPC Report (2022) Risks (2021 - 2040; 2041 a 2100)

See level rise(Strauss et al., 2021)

More Infectious diseases (The Lancet, 2021)

Extreme Weather Events (Map with multiple authors)

Nine Frontiers of the Planet Stability and Resilience (Rockstrom et al., 2009)

% of People living at Urban Cities: (UN, 2018) 2018=55% 2050=68%

Crossed 7 Frontiers (Rockstrom et al., 2023) Criticals: Climate Change (CC) and Biosphere Integrity (BI)

The point of no return: 2035 A 2042 (Aengenheyster et al., 2018)

Climate Change 171 years: 2500 bi ton CO2 (Evans, 2021)

2) Smart Cities

1) Agenda GovTech

4) NetZero Cities

3) Global SC Partners and Programs

OPPORTUNITIES

6) IDB Emerging and SCP

5) Global Platform for SC

8) Plataform with Courses: GBM/OLC

7) United 4 SSC (UN)

9) Paris Agreement, COP26

10) OCDE Program on SC

11) ITU-T Standards

12) ABNT Certifications

13) Internacional Cooperation

14) Net Zero Cities

15) Amazônia 4.0

CALL FOR INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION Key Sectors Agriculture, Steel, Energy, Road Transport and Hydrogen 60% GEE Global emission (IEA, 2022)

POPULARITY OF SMART AND SUSTAINABLE CITIES IN PUBLICATIONS

Source: Author (2023)

EXAMPLE OF Smart Cities GOVERNMENTSEDEN STRATEGY INSTITUTE REPORT 2021

MAIN GOAL Identify approaches employed by leading European smart and sustainable cities to engage citizens in achieving decarbonization by 2030.

MAIN QUESTIONS 1) Which are the top five European smart and sustainable (Leading) cities? 2) How leading cities are engaging citizens to reach net-zero emissions by 2030?

MAIN PUBLIC TARGET Academics, Researchers, Living Labs Managers Policy Makers and Urban Planners

CRITERIA USED TO SELECT THE LEADING SMART and SUSTAINABLE CITIES

c1) sources: global evaluation ranking of at least 20 cities c2) ranking: available and published within the last three years (2021-2023) c3) 51 finalists from 235 cities: be in at least four ranking c4) five leading cities: determined by taking the average of all ranking score (in ascending order).

CRITERIA USED TO SELECT THE LEADING SMART and SUSTAINABLE CITIES

seven international ranking used

Rank1 - The Top 50 Smart Governments 2020/2021

Rank5 - IMD Smart City Index 2023

Rank2 - IESE Cities in Motion Index 2022

Rank6 - Global Smart City 2022

Rank7 - The Arcadis Sustainable Cities Index 2022

Rank3 - 2022 Smart Cities Index Report

Rank4 - Digital Cities Index 2022

THE FIVE LEADING EUROPEAN CITIES

5) HELSINKI

3) OSLO

2) AMSTERDAM

4) COPENHAGEN

1) LONDON

RESEARCH IMPORTANCE FOR POLICY MAKERSWill receive publication(s) on the general results of the research Will provide the documents (policies, plans, strategies, roadmap etc) developed by top smart and sustainable cities to tackle climate change issues overtime. Can use these information to create, adopt, and change policies in their own areas to reach their targets. Provide feedback to policy makers in the top smart and sustainable cities on their citizens environmental concerns, awareness, participation, barries and incentives to reduce carbon emissions.

LOGO + SURVEY INSTRUMENT

QUESTIONNAIRE HERE

PUBLICATIONS

from second semester/2024

COMING SOON

MAIN REFERENCES (citizen engagement models)

Arnstein, S.R. (1969). A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, [online] 35(4), pp.216–224. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225.

Belausteguigoitia, J., Alonso, I., Ane Chueca, Ane Elizegi, Hierro, S., Lucía Olavarri and Sanz, E. (2021). MEASURING PARTICIPATION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT PROCESSES IN URBAN PLANNING. In: The Sustainable City XV. [online] Sustainable City 2022. Rome: WIT Transactions on Ecology and The Environment, pp.279–291. doi:https://doi.org/10.2495/sc210241.

UN-Habitat (2007). A guide for Municipalities: Inclusive and Sustainable Urban Development Planning , Volume 1 | UN-Habitat. [online] unhabitat.org. Kenya: United Nations Human Settlements Programme. Available at: https://unhabitat.org/a-guide-for-municipalities-inclusive-and-sustainable-urban-development-planning-volume-1.

IAP2 (n.d.). Core Values, Ethics, Spectrum – The 3 Pillars of Public Participation - International Association for Public Participation. [online] www.iap2.org. Available at: https://www.iap2.org/page/pillars [Accessed 30 Jun. 2023].

Macdonald, B., Thrift, C., Swanson, D.A. and Thrift, C. (2012). Measuring the Performance and Impact of Community Indicators Systems: Insights on frameworks and examples of key performance indicators. [online] International Institute for Sustainable Development, Canada: International Institute for Sustainable Development, pp.1–15. Available at: https://www.iisd.org/publications/report/measuring-performance-and-impact-community-indicators-systems-insights [Accessed 30 Jun. 2023].

Parés, M. and March, H. (2013). Guide to Evaluating Participatory Processes. [online] Barcelona: Government of Catalonia Department of Governance and Institutional Relations Innovation and Democratic Quality Programme. Available at: http://www.gencat.cat/governacio/pub/sum/qdem/guiesbreus_3_ang.pdf.

Scottish Government (2016). National Standards for Community Engagement. [online] SCDC - We believe communities matter. Scotland: Scottish Government. Available at: https://www.scdc.org.uk/what/national-standards.

OGP (2017). Participation & Co-Creation Standards. [online] Washington DC, USA: Open Government Partnership. Available at: https://www.opengovpartnership.org/ogp-participation-co-creation-standards-2017/.

MAIN REFERENCES (uNDER UPDATING)

Cegarra-Navarro, J.-G., Garcia-Perez, A. and Moreno-Cegarra, J.L. (2014). Technology knowledge and governance: Empowering citizen engagement and participation. Government Information Quarterly, [online] 31(4), pp.660–668. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.07.001.

Choo, M., Yeon Woo Choi, Yoon, H., Sung Bin Bae and Dong Keun Yoon (2023). Citizen Engagement in Smart City Planning: The Case of Living Labs in South Korea. Urban Planning, [online] 8(2), pp.32–43. doi:https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v8i2.6416.

Dameri, R.P. (2013). Searching fo r Smart City definition: a comprehensive proposal. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPUTERS & TECHNOLOGY, 11(5), pp.2544–2551. Doi:10.24297/ijct.v11i5.1142.

Denhardt, J., Terry, L., Delacruz, E.R. and Andonoska, L. (2009). Barriers to Citizen Engagement in Developing Countries. International Journal of Public Administration, [online] 32(14), pp.1268–1288. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690903344726.

Falco, E. and Kleinhans, R. (2018). Beyond technology: Identifying local government challenges for using digital platforms for citizen engagement. International Journal of Information Management, [online] 40, pp.17–20. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.01.007.

Hanif, A., Khakpoor, B.A., Kharazmi, O.A. and Loodin, N. (2022). Identifying barriers affecting citizen participation in community‐driven development projects in Afghanistan: A case study of Herat city. International Social Science Journal, 72, pp.561–576. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/issj.12347.

IEA, IRENA and UN Climate Change High-Level Champions, (2022). Breakthrough Agenda Report 2022 – Analysis. [online] IEA, pp.1–183. Available at: https://www.iea.org/reports/breakthrough-agenda-report-2022 [Accessed 20 Apr. 2023].

IPCC (2022) Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. IPCC. 27 February. Cambridge University Press. Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/ (accessed 14 March 2022).

Jasińska-Biliczak, A. (2022). Smart-City Citizen Engagement: The Answer to Energy Savings in an Economic Crisis? Energies, [online] 15(23), p.8828. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/en15238828.

OCDE (2023). Government at a Glance 2023. [online] OCDE iLibrary, Paris: OCDE, pp.1–234. Available at: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/government-at-a-glance-2023_3d5c5d31-en.

Persson, L., Carney Almroth, B.M., Collins, C.D., Cornell, S., de Wit, C.A., Diamond, M.L., Fantke, P., Hassellöv, M., MacLeod, M., Ryberg, M.W., Søgaard Jørgensen, P., Villarrubia-Gómez, P., Wang, Z. and Hauschild, M.Z. (2022). Outside the Safe Operating Space of the Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities. Environmental Science & Technology, 56(3). doi:https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c04158.

Wagenet, L.P. and Pfeffer, M.J. (2007). Organizing Citizen Engagement for Democratic Environmental Planning. Society & Natural Resources, [online] 20(9), pp.801–813. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920701216578.

Wamsler, C., Alkan-Olsson, J., Björn, H., Falck, H., Hanson, H., Oskarsson, T., Simonsson, E. and Zelmerlow, F. (2019). Beyond participation: when citizen engagement leads to undesirable outcomes for nature-based solutions and climate change adaptation. Climatic Change, [online] 158, pp.235–254. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02557-9.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH dr. jonas gomes DA SILVA ufam/UoM/AMBS/MIOIR/SCI JGSILVA@UFAM.EDU.BR JGSILVA.ORG