Governing Smart Cities: Policy Benchmarks for Ethical and Responsible Smart City Development

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The report reveals significant governance gaps in smart cities, with most 'Pioneer Cities' lacking written and implemented policies for ICT accessibility, privacy impact assessments, cybersecurity accountability, and digital infrastructure, although open data policies are more widespread.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • There is a widespread lack of foundational policies across the 36 Pioneer Cities; only two cities have written guidelines for all five assessed policies, and only one has successfully implemented all five.
  • ICT accessibility in public procurement is poorly addressed, with less than 20% of Pioneer Cities regularly using accessibility standards in procurement and less than half having policies to embed these requirements into ICT procurement.
  • While 80% of cities acknowledge legal obligations for privacy and data protection, there is a significant implementation gap, as less than 25% (6 out of 27) conduct privacy impact assessments (PIAs) for all new technology deployments.
  • Cybersecurity governance is lacking in senior leadership; less than half of Pioneer Cities (13 out of 28) have a designated senior official accountable for cybersecurity and a plan regularly reviewed by senior executives.
  • Digital infrastructure roll-out is hindered by a lack of 'Dig Once' policies; less than half of Pioneer Cities (12 out of 30) have a written Dig Once policy, and only one-third have the governance processes required to drive connectivity roll-out.
  • Open data is the most implemented of the five policy areas, with 26 of 34 cities implementing a programme and 20 having a written policy, yet only 15% have integrated open data portals with wider city data infrastructure.
  • Cities identify lack of capacity, leadership, and stakeholder coordination as primary reasons for policy gaps, often relying on national policies that may lack local detail or implementation protocols.

Cite the original document

APA
World Economic Forum (2021). Governing Smart Cities: Policy Benchmarks for Ethical and Responsible Smart City Development. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Governing_Smart_Cities_2021.pdf
Chicago
World Economic Forum. Governing Smart Cities: Policy Benchmarks for Ethical and Responsible Smart City Development. 2021. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Governing_Smart_Cities_2021.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=World Economic Forum |title=Governing Smart Cities: Policy Benchmarks for Ethical and Responsible Smart City Development |date=July 2021 |url=http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Governing_Smart_Cities_2021.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{worldeconomicforum2021governing, author = {{World Economic Forum}}, title = {{Governing Smart Cities: Policy Benchmarks for Ethical and Responsible Smart City Development}}, institution = {World Economic Forum}, year = {2021}, month = jul, url = {http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Governing_Smart_Cities_2021.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated