AVALIAÇÃO DE CIDADES INTELIGENTES E SUSTENTÁVEIS: COMPARAÇÃO DOS INDICADORES BRASILEIROS À LUZ DA LITERATURA

ASSESSMENT OF SMART AND SUSTAINABLE CITIES: COMPARISON OF BRAZILIAN INDICATORS BASED ON LITERATURE

Autores

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33362/visao.v12i1.2942

Resumo

As cidades inteligentes têm se mostrado capazes de superar diversos problemas urbanos, como demonstrado na literatura. Porém, os princípios da cidade inteligente devem ser analisados em longo prazo de forma a contribuir com o desenvolvimento sustentável. Neste sentido, a literatura tem apresentado diversas metodologias de avaliação de cidades inteligentes e sustentáveis. Porém, no Brasil, até este presente estudo, não foi identificada uma avaliação que se proponha a medir os dois aspectos conjuntamente – inteligentes e sustentáveis. O ranking brasileiro de cidades inteligentes, Connected Smart Cities (CSC), apesar de citar o desenvolvimento sustentável, apresentou resultados divergentes do ranking do Índice de Desenvolvimento Sustentável das Cidades - Brasil (IDSC-BR). Assim, o objetivo deste estudo foi identificar na literatura as principais dimensões de avaliação de cidades inteligentes e sustentáveis, e comparar as dimensões encontradas com os indicadores dos rankings CSC e IDSC-BR. Como resultado, em relação aos indicadores, percebeu-se um predomínio do uso da Triple Bottom Line (TBL) como dimensões principais na literatura. Quanto aos indicadores utilizados nos rankings, verificou-se grande diferença entre eles, tendo apenas dez indicadores em comum. Os resultados da análise mostram que o ranking CSC está distribuído de forma equilibrada entre os eixos, já o IDSC-BR há um predomínio de indicadores sociais. A comparação dos rankings com a literatura é importante para a elaboração de uma metodologia de avaliação de cidades inteligentes e sustentáveis para que possam ser aplicadas em países como o Brasil.

Palavras-Chave: Cidades inteligentes. Desenvolvimento sustentável. Gestão urbana. Indicadores. Rankings.

 

Abstract: Smart cities have shown themselves capable of overcoming several urban problems, as shown in the literature. Nevertheless, the principles of smart city must be analyzed in the long term as to contribute to sustainable development. In this sense, the literature presents methodologies for evaluating smart and sustainable cities. Although in Brazil, up until now, no evaluation that proposes to measure the two aspects together – smart and intelligent - was found in the extant literature. The Connected Smart Cities (CSC) ranking, which is a Brazilian index, despite citing sustainable development, presents divergent results from the ranking of the Sustainable Development Index of Cities - Brazil (IDSC-BR). Thus, the main purpose of this study was to identify in the literature the main dimensions of evaluation of smart and sustainable cities and compare the dimensions found in the indicators of the CSC and IDSC-BR rankings. As a result, concerning the indicators, a predominance of the use of the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) as the main dimension in the literature was noticed. As for the indicators used in the rankings, it was possible to spot a considerable difference between them, having only ten indicators in common. The results show that the CSC ranking is evenly distributed among the axes of the TBL, while the IDSC-BR has a predominance of social indicators. The comparison of the rankings with the literature is relevant for a preparation of an evaluation methodology for smart and sustainable cities so that it can be applied in countries like Brazil by me.

Keywords: Smart cities. Sustainable development. Urban management. Smart Cities Indicators. Smart Cities Rankings.

Referências

AHVENNIEMI, H., HUOVILA, A., PINTO-SEPPÄ, I., e AIRAKSINEN, M. What are the differences between sustainable and smart cities? Cities, 2017, 60, 234-245. doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.09.009

AKANDE, A., CABRAL, P., GOMES, P., e CASTELEYN, S. The lisbon ranking for smart sustainable cities in Europe. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2019, 44, 475-487. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2018.10.009.

ANAND, A., WINFRED RUFUSS, D. D., RAJKUMAR, V., e SUGANTHI, L. Evaluation of sustainability indicators in smart cities for india using MCDM approach. Paper presented at the Energy Procedia, 2017, 141 211-215. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.11.094.

BHATTACHARYA, T. R., BHATTACHARYA, A., MCLELLAN, B., e TEZUKA, T. Sustainable smart city development framework for developing countries. Urban Research and Practice, 2020, 13(2), 180-212. doi:10.1080/17535069.2018.1537003.

BOGDANOV, O., JEREMIĆ, V., JEDNAK, S., e ČUDANOV, M. Scrutinizing the smart city index: A multivariate statistical approach. Zbornik Radova Ekonomskog Fakultet Au Rijeci, 2019, 37(2), 777-799. doi:10.18045/zbefri.2019.2.777.

CAO, Y., ZHANG, G., e OU, C. Application of financial cloud in the sustainable development of smart cities. Complexity, 2020 doi:10.1155/2020/8882253.

CASTANHO, M. S., FERREIRA, F. A. F., CARAYANNIS, E. G., e FERREIRA, J. J. M. SMART-C: Developing a 'smart city' assessment system using cognitive mapping and the choquet integral. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 2021, 68(2), 562-573. doi:10.1109/TEM.2019.2909668.

CEPELOVÁ, A., e DOUSA, M. Slovakia and the czech republic on the path towards sustainable development. Bulletin of Geography.Socio-Economic Series, 2020, 47(47), 7-25. doi:10.2478/bog-2020-0001.

CSCM DX - 20. Ranking Connected Smart Cities. Disponível em: https://ranking.connectedsmartcities.com.br/sobre-o-ranking.php. Acesso em: 08 jul. 2021.

ELKINGTON, J. Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century. Capstone, Oxford, UK. ISBN: 1-900961-27-X, 1997.

GIFFINGER, R. Smart cities ranking: an effective instrument for the positioning of the cities?", ACE: Architecture, City and Environment, 2010, n. February 2010. DOI: 10.5821/ace.v4i12.2483.

GIL, A. C. Como elaborar projetos de pesquisa. 6ª Edição, São Paulo: Atlas, 2017.

GIRARDI, P., e TEMPORELLI, A. Smartainability: A methodology for assessing the sustainability of the smart city. Paper presented at the Energy Procedia, 2017, 111 810-816. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.243.

HAJDUK, S. Using multivariate statistical methods to assess the urban smartness on the example of selected european cities. PLoS ONE, 2020, 15(12 December) doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0240260.

HARA, M., NAGAO, T., HANNOE, S., e NAKAMURA, J. New key performance indicators for a smart sustainable city. Sustainability (Switzerland), 2016, 8(3) doi:10.3390/su8030206.

IBGE - Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. IBGE Cidades. Disponível em: https://cidades.ibge.gov.br/>, Acesso em: 1 jul. 2021.

IDSC – BR Índice de Desenvolvimento Sustentável das Cidades - Brasil. https://idsc.cidadessustentaveis.org.br/ Acesso em: 15 jul. 2021.

IFDM. Índice FIRJAN de Desenvolvimento Municipal (IFDM). 2022. Disponível em: https://firjan.com.br/ifdm/. Acesso em: 14 dez. 2022.KANKAALA, K., VEHILÄINEN, M., MATILAINEN, P., e VÄLIMÄKI, P. Smart city actions to support sustainable city development. TECHNE, SpecialSeries1, 2018, 108-114. doi:10.13128/Techne-23569.

KIM, N., e YANG, S. Characteristics of conceptually related smart cities (crscs) services from the perspective of sustainability. Sustainability (Switzerland), 2021, 13(6) doi:10.3390/su13063334.

LIU, Y., DU, W., CHEN, N., e WANG, X. Construction and evaluation of the integrated perception ecological environment indicator (IPEEI) based on the DPSIR framework for smart sustainable cities. Sustainability (Switzerland), 2020, 12(17) doi:10.3390/su12177112.

LIU, Y., WANG, H., e TZENG, G. From measure to guidance: Galactic model and sustainable development planning toward the best smart city. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 2018, 144(4) doi:10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000478.

MARCHETTI, D., OLIVEIRA, R., e FIGUEIRA, A. R. Are global north smart city models capable to assess latin american cities? A model and indicators for a new context. Cities, 2019, 92, 197-207. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2019.04.001.

MILOŠEVIĆ, M. R., MILOŠEVIĆ, D. M., STEVIĆ, D. M., e STANOJEVIĆ, A. D. Smart city: Modeling key indicators in serbia using IT2FS. Sustainability (Switzerland), 2019, 11(13) doi:10.3390/su11133536.

MISRA, M., e KUMAR, D. A hybrid indexing approach for sustainable smart cities development. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 2020, 48(11), 1639-1643. doi:10.1007/s12524-020-01171-y.

OGRODNIK, K. Multi-criteria analysis of smart cities in poland. Geographia Polonica, 2020, 93(2), 163-181. doi:10.7163/GPol.0168.

OZKAYA, G., e ERDIN, C. Evaluation of smart and sustainable cities through a hybrid MCDM approach based on ANP and TOPSIS technique. Heliyon, 2020, 6(10) doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05052.

ONU. Plataforma Agenda 2030: Acelerando as transformações para a Agenda 2030 no Brasil, 2015. Em: http://www.agenda2030.com.br/. Acesso em: 04 de julho de 2021.

PAGANI, R.N., KOVALESKI, J.L., e RESENDE, L.M. Methodi Ordinatio: a proposed methodology to select and rank relevant scientific papers encompassing the impact factor, number of citations, and year of publication. Scientometrics, 2015. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1744-x.

PAGANI, R.N., KOVALESKI, J.L., e RESENDE, L.M.M. Avanços na composição da Methodi Ordinatio para revisão sistemática de literatura. Ciência da Informação, 2017, v. 46, n. 2, maio/ago. 2017. DOI: 10.18225/ci.inf..v47i1.1886.

RAHMANI MOKARRARI, K., e TORABI, S. A. Ranking cities based on their smartness level using MADM methods. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2021, 72 doi:10.1016/j.scs.2021.103030.

RANDHAWA, A., e KUMAR, A. Exploring sustainability of smart development initiatives in india. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 2017, 6(2), 701-710. doi:10.1016/j.ijsbe.2017.08.002.

ROCON, C. S., e DE ALVAREZ, C. E. Smart cities: Selection of indicators for vitória. International. Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development, 2017, 8(2), 135-143. doi:10.12972/susb.20170011.

SALVIA, M., CORNACCHIA, C., DI RENZO, G. C., BRACCIO, G., ANNUNZIATO, M., COLANGELO, A., e LAPENNA, V. Promoting smartness among local areas in a southern italian region: The smart basilicata project. Indoor and Built Environment, 2016, 25(7), 1024-1038. doi:10.1177/1420326X16659328.

SHAO, Q., WENG, S., LIOU, J. J. H., LO, H., e JIANG, H. Developing A sustainable urban-environmental quality evaluation system in china based on A hybrid model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2019, 16(8) doi:10.3390/ijerph16081434.

SHARIFI, A. A critical review of selected smart city assessment tools and indicator sets. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 233, 1269-1283. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.172.

SHARIFI, A. A typology of smart city assessment tools and indicator sets. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2020, 53 doi:10.1016/j.scs.2019.101936

SHEHATA, H. M., BAKR, A. F., e HASSAN, A. H-seed: Vision for smart city. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 2020, 241, 105-112. doi:10.2495/SDP200091.

SHMELEV, S. E., e SHMELEVA, I. A. Global urban sustainability assessment: A multidimensional approach. Sustainable Development, 2018, 26(6), 904-920. doi:10.1002/sd.1887.

SHMELEV, S. E., e SHMELEVA, I. A. (2019). Multidimensional sustainability benchmarking for smart megacities. Cities, 92, 134-163. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2019.03.015.

SMART CITIES GOVERNMENTS. 2020/21 Top 50 Smart City Government Rankings. Available in: https://www.smartcitygovt.com/. Access in: 08 jul. 20221.

SINGH, P. K., SHRUTI, e OHRI, A. Selecting environmental indicators for sustainable smart cities mission in india. Nature Environment and Pollution Technology, 2020, 19(1), 201-210.

STRATIGEA, A., LEKA, A., e PANAGIOTOPOULOU, M. In search of indicators for assessing smart and sustainable cities and communities' performance. International Journal of E-Planning Research, 2017, 6(1), 43-73. doi:10.4018/IJEPR.2017010103.

SUGANTHI, L. Multi expert and multi criteria evaluation of sectoral investments for sustainable development: An integrated fuzzy AHP, VIKOR / DEA methodology. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2018, 43, 144-156. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2018.08.022.

THE GOVERNMENT SUMMIT. Smart Cities: Regional Perspectives, United Nations. Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia. Dubai, 2015.

URBAN SYSTEMS. Ranking Connected Smart Cities 2021. Disponível em: https://www.urbansystems.com.br/rankingconnectedsmartcities. Acesso em: 29 maio 2022.

WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). Our common future. Oxford University Press, 1987.

WENDLING, L. A., HUOVILA, A., ZU CASTELL-RÜDENHAUSEN, M., HUKKALAINEN, M., e AIRAKSINEN, M. Benchmarking nature-based solution and smart city assessment schemes against the sustainable development goal indicator framework. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 2018, 6(JUL) doi:10.3389/fenvs.2018.00069.

YIGITCANLAR, T., KAMRUZZAMAN, M., FOTH, M., SABATINI-MARQUES, J., DA COSTA, E., e IOPPOLO, G. Can cities become smart without being sustainable? A systematic review of the literature. Sustainable cities and society, 2019, 45, 348-365. 10.1016/j.scs.2018.11.033.

Downloads

Publicado

2023-01-11

Como Citar

DUARTE LIMA, A.; REGINA TRAGE, D. .; SOARES DE CARVALHO, T. .; CORSI, A.; MORO PIEKARSKI, C. .; NEGRI PAGANI, R. AVALIAÇÃO DE CIDADES INTELIGENTES E SUSTENTÁVEIS: COMPARAÇÃO DOS INDICADORES BRASILEIROS À LUZ DA LITERATURA: ASSESSMENT OF SMART AND SUSTAINABLE CITIES: COMPARISON OF BRAZILIAN INDICATORS BASED ON LITERATURE. Revista Visão: Gestão Organizacional, Caçador (SC), Brasil, v. 12, n. 1, p. 1-22, 2023. DOI: 10.33362/visao.v12i1.2942. Disponível em: https://periodicos.uniarp.edu.br/index.php/visao/article/view/2942. Acesso em: 28 jan. 2023.

Edição

Seção

Artigos