Smart Cities is our opportunity to utilise

technological advancement to enhance

the way our citizens live, to enrich the

souls of our cities and to preserve the

environment for future generations.

Smart Cities Expo World Congress Study Tour Report

Ashlee Jesshope RPEQ RPEng MPM MIPWEAQ Principal Project Manager Toowoomba Regional Council

1 | P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Study Tour Outline .......................................................................................................................... 2

1.1 Delegation ............................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 Focus of Learning .................................................................................................................... 3

2 The Conference – Experience & Observation ................................................................................. 4

2.1 DOXA Visit ............................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Expo Preparation Workshop ................................................................................................... 6

2.3 Day one ................................................................................................................................... 6

2.3.1 EU Startup Prize Mobility Pitch Session .......................................................................... 6

2.3.2 Side Meeting with Cisco .................................................................................................. 6

2.3.3 Urban mobility in Eindhoven .......................................................................................... 7

2.3.4 Signify networking and presentation .............................................................................. 7

2.3.5 Sister Cities Networking Event ........................................................................................ 7

2.4 Day two ................................................................................................................................... 8

2.4.1 Smart Regional Strategies ............................................................................................... 8

2.4.2 Housing for Millennials ................................................................................................... 8

2.4.3 Smart Parking Technology .............................................................................................. 9

2.5 Day three ................................................................................................................................. 9

2.5.1 Sustainable Mobility Strategy (Albania) .......................................................................... 9

3 Key Learnings and Recommendations .......................................................................................... 10

3.1 Planning and governance ...................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Smart thinking not just smart tech ....................................................................................... 11

4 Concluding Remarks ...................................................................................................................... 12

2 | P a g e

1 STUDY TOUR OUTLINE

IPWEA Australasia arranged and lead a Study Tour Delegation to the Smart City Expo World Congress

Barcelona in November 2018. This was in conjunction with SCCANZ, ASCA, and Austrade. I was

fortunate to be awarded a scholarship from the IPWEA Queensland Foundation to take part in the

study tour. Herein this report outlines my objectives in attending, an account of the tour, discussion

of key learnings and recommendations which members of IPWEAQ, IPWEA Group and the wider public

engineering community can consider for enabling smart futures within their authority area.

1.1 DELEGATION The tour delegation was composed of eleven professionals across a diverse sector background.

Robert Fuller, Chief Executive Officer - IPWEA Australasia

Ashlee Jesshope, Principal Project Manager - Toowoomba Regional Council

Graham Mawer, Managing Director - Next Energy

Ian Duncan, Executive Manager - WA Local Government Association

Joanna Kraatz, Smart Shire Innovation Agent - Wollondilly Shire Council

Matt Schultz, President - Australian Smart Communities Association

Namoi Dougall, General Manager - Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Council

Nick Lund, Manager Health, Active Ageing and Disability Services - City of Boroondara

Raj Suppiah, Chief Financial Officer - Tararua District Council

Ray Borrie, Projects Specialist - Tararua District Council

Simon Hunter, Executive Director - Infrastructure NSW

Figure 1: Study tour Delegation Group

3 | P a g e

1.2 FOCUS OF LEARNING As my exposure to the Smart City concept and all that is related to it was relatively low prior to

attending, I chose not to narrow my focus of learning to any one field or aspect. Rather my aim was

to absorb as much information as possible, focusing on the bigger picture whilst viewing everything

thru a local government or public engineering lens. Essentially, I approached this as a ‘dipping a toe in

the water’ exercise to provide benefit for our many members. As a result of my taking part, and the

drafting of this report, I am able to:

• recommend key areas in which to invest or undertake further research;

• convey issues or concerns being faced globally which may also be applicable to our local areas;

• introduce new concepts to stimulate conversation and debate;

• Raise the profile of smart cities as a developing global field.

It is important to note that there is already a significant amount of work and development in this space

being undertaking by the likes of SCCANZ, ASCA, and Austrade. My report has been developed from

the presumption of the knowledge level of the IPWEAQ membership base which is not as far along

the journey as other industry groups across the country.

4 | P a g e

2 THE CONFERENCE – EXPERIENCE & OBSERVATION

The Smart City Expo World Congress is the world’s leading annual gathering of public and private

sector industry. The 2018 conference saw 21,311 visitors from over 700 cities and 146 countries with

844 exhibitors, 400 speakers and 60 side events. This year the conference focused on five key areas,

Digital Transformation, Urban Environment, Mobility, Governance & Finance and Inclusive & Sharing

Cities.

It is impossible to see everything the conference has to offer in the 3 days. As mentioned previously,

I chose not to focus on any one area or technology, but rather to gain as much variety of experience

as possible to gain insight into the broad sector that is Smart Cities.

2.1 DOXA VISIT Our visit to DOXA included presentations by Josep Ramon Ferrer Escoda (International Business

Director) and Anna Grau (Smart Cities & Mobility Consultant). Josep is also the former CIO of Barcelona

City Council and CEO of Barcelona Institute of Technology. It was during his time in these roles that he

developed and implemented the Barcelona Smart City Plan and much of the discussion centred on

Barcelona’s smart city journey.

The presentation outlined a high-level stepped approach to developing a smart city. The first step

being developing a long-term vision with clear and visible leadership support behind it. The leadership

element is crucial, as without it, Councils will find it hard to gain momentum. I found Stockholm’s

vision to be a particularly good example.

“In 2030, Stockholm will be a versatile city, offering top-class education and business

opportunities, alongside unspoiled nature at your doorstep - a unique combination

that will continue to attract visitors from around the world”

The vision allows politicians and executive management to support the Smart City implementation by

promoting broad tangible benefits to its residents.

Figure 2 Josep Ramon Ferrer Escoda presenting to the delegation

Josep emphasised the importance of next step. Developing a Strategic Transformational Plan prior to

choosing and implementing any specific technologies or regimes gives council a framework to work

within. It should be a holistic model which breaks down the silos within an organisation to allow

5 | P a g e

maximum benefit and innovation. It should encompass all the business that Council undertakes, rather

then for example, focusing on civil infrastructure. Along with outlining objectives and KPIs, the plan

should detail alignment with state and federal schemes or policies, funding opportunities and

potential business models for key elements.

Prior to moving forward and implementing the plan, the residents should be engaged and ideally they

would provide input or feedback to the final plan. By undertaking this in an open, inclusive and

participatory manner, residents not only feel some ownership over the future direction of their city

but gain an understanding of what a smart city is or can look like for them. To paraphrase a key point

Josep made about this process, a smart city shouldn’t compromise the soul of a city, it’s identity, rather

it should enhance that. What better gauge for the soul of a city than its residents.

Following the presentations, the delegation was taken on a guided tour of Passeig de Gràcia. This is

one of the main streets of Barcelona in which several smart city technology deployments can be

viewed. These include electric vehicle charging stations, led lighting, in pavement vehicle monitors

and city Wi-Fi. Apart from the charging stations all the installation where not immediately obvious to

an untrained eye as being smart city technology. In particular, I’d like to mention the in-ground sensors

which are being used to monitor traffic volumes and speeds. These are simple, inexpensive and

unobtrusive. The data they collect can be utilised in various ways, such as to monitor congestion and

adjust traffic signal timings. Or used in conjunction with air quality monitors to adjust when electric or

hybrid only vehicles should be permitted in an area to reduce air pollution.

Figure 3: In ground traffic data sensors. So inconspicuous we all walked past without noticing them.

Apart from the static installations we also observed the bus and taxi fleet of Barcelona. The entire bus

fleet is now electric, and the taxi fleet is close behind. Barcelona has introduced restrictions on when

non-electric vehicles can access certain areas and has incentives for private vehicle owners to

purchase electric rather than petrol or even hybrid. This is of course not an overnight change but has

developed over the past 5 to 10 years.

In all, the DOXA visit was a very informative one and beneficial to have prior to attending the

conference. I found a lot of what I saw and heard over the three days of conference could be tied back

to the discussion had whilst at DOXA.

6 | P a g e

2.2 EXPO PREPARATION WORKSHOP By all reckoning, the Smart Cities Expo World Congress is so large, with such a full schedule of

presentations, that it can be a daunting prospect to plan how to make the most of the three days. On

the afternoon before the conference began the delegation gathered for an informal group chat. This

was an opportunity for everyone to share their area of interest and for those who had attended before

to give advice on how to approach the next three days in order to gain maximum benefit.

We were fortunate to also be joined by Adam Beck – Executive Director at Smart Cities Council

Australia New Zealand and Katherine Caruana-McManus – Founder of Giant Ideas Pty Ltd. They were

able to give the delegation recommendations on which presentations would be beneficial and which

exhibitors shouldn’t be missed.

2.3 DAY ONE Upon arrival at the Fira Barcelona, I had a moment of, where do I start, this is huge. There was a main

hall with exhibitors and side event spaces, a second hall with the International Integrated Water Cycle

Show and a third area with the main presentation rooms.

2.3.1 EU Startup Prize Mobility Pitch Session

After a quicker wander around the main exhibition floor I chose to start day one with the EU Startup

Prize Mobility Pitch Session. Whilst most pitches were centred on app technology to aid public

transport take up, I found the first presentation on AddSeat the most interesting and innovative. It is

a wheelchair designed with Segway technology, allowing the user to access more difficult terrain

which a normal wheelchair cannot. Arguably this may not add the greatest overall benefit to a smart

city, and possibly is why it was not the winner of the prize. I do consider though that the thinking

behind it is the type of thinking we need to adopt in developing our own smart cities. We need to look

at what technologies are already in existence, which may have been used for quite some years, and

see they can be applied to different situations.

Figure 4: Personal mobility focused start up pitch by AddSeat

2.3.2 Side Meeting with Cisco

This meeting was an opportunity for the delegation to discuss CISCO operations in the Australian

market. It was acknowledged that there are a great many tools that CISCO has to offer which would

be of benefit our Councils and utility operators. There is however uncertainty in the ability for the user

to access the back-end data or to integrate the systems with existing ones. The added constraint of

7 | P a g e

government procurement policy means that once a system is purchased and implemented, effectively

the Council is then locked into having to use that provider moving forward. This is not a problem

unique to CISCO or smart city technologies, however, could be a hindrance in the rate of

implementation of smart technologies. An interesting meeting, with good discussion and debate.

2.3.3 Urban mobility in Eindhoven

Our visit to the Dutch Pavilion for their presentation on mobility started off poorly for me. There was

a game of trivia, crowd participation, to commence the presentation. The style in which you are read

a multiple-choice question, those who get it right stay standing, the rest sit down. The last two people

standing were both from the IPWEA delegation, but alas I lost, and to a Kiwi.

The presentation which followed focused on the City of Eindhoven’s approach to urban mobility and

their autonomous shuttle bus project. The big cities of The Netherlands have chosen to work together

on developing smart futures. Eindhoven’s focus is mobility whereas Utrect is security for example.

With each City working on developments in their focus area and sharing those with others, the pace

of development would be faster than if each worked on all aspects in isolation. It was also

acknowledged that a smart city cannot be smart in isolation. This is a viewpoint which was discussed

at the DOXA meeting the day before, that a smart city has both a national and global place to fit.

Interestingly, Eindhoven has had an autonomous shuttle bus (Rivium) in operation since 1997. This

shuttle has its own dedicated path however and does not interact with other vehicular traffic. The

current project, Rivium 3.0 is in testing phase and will be released in 2020. This will be the world’s first

autonomous public transport vehicle operational on a public road.

2.3.4 Signify networking and presentation

I found I got a little less from this side event than I was expecting. It was a good summary of the

products which Signify have on offer. For example, collecting sound data via connected street lighting

to allow for incident detection. There were two points which I thought to be worth noting in this

report. The first being that on average 50% of a city’s energy consumption is in lighting. As small

change per unit in this case, when implemented city wide can have big impact. The second was a

statement, which I agree with as I think it rings true. That is ‘citizen and visitor experience is what

matters, more than the technology itself’.

2.3.5 Sister Cities Networking Event

Whilst the majority of our delegation attended the Conversities panel in the evening, I took advantage

of an invitation to attend the inaugural Women in Smart Cities Global gathering. This is a group which

has been formed by Meredith Hodgman, Johanna Pittman and Margaret Maile Petty. Its aim is to

provide a platform for women to network, empowering them to bring greater diversity to the shaping

of our city’s futures. I met many talented and successful women from all over the globe.

Figure 5: Sister Cities gathering. Too much conversation being had to get everyone looking at the camera

8 | P a g e

2.4 DAY TWO

2.4.1 Smart Regional Strategies

I had not originally planned to attend this particular presentation, however I met Natalia Olson at the

Sister Cities event the evening before and was impressed with her career and her passion for her

business. The presentation did not talk too much about regional strategies in themselves, but about

the ways in which policies can be utilised to stimulate smart city growth. One of the key messages is

that governments cannot solve everything themselves and nor should they. Through the adoption of

certain specific policies, governments can enable smart city development and growth via private

sector innovation. Nurturing the start-up community, advocating diversity and supporting local

businesses all contribute to this.

2.4.2 Housing for Millennials

As a millennial myself, the title of this side event had me curious from the outset. It was a panel style

discussion, which, for balance, was facilitated by a non-millennial. The panellists were either students

or new graduates in the fields of planning, environment, engineering or architecture. Questions posed

to the panel were related to housing (ownership, configuration etc), working lifestyle and the very

topical affordability question.

With respect to the housing discussion, the panel was unanimous in that the white picket fence, house

in the suburbs dream is no longer relevant to their generation. Rather, the availability of options is

more important. Instead of living in one house or one location for most of their adult life, the panellists

want to have flexibility to move about instead. This combined with the affordability of housing

ownership in many cities is seeing a trend towards renting for longer, or even, for life.

It was suggested that a rental model, like commercial models for retail or office space, would be

suitable. The tenant rents a space for a fixed or rolling term and for the duration of that tenancy, the

space is theirs to fit out as they wish. Co-living was also discussed. Essentially your purchase or rent a

room & bathroom, with the main living spaces being communal. Housing as a service rather than a

commodity, an interesting proposition.

This could be extended to assets other than housing as well. For example, shared car ownership. A

pay per use scheme as opposed to owning and maintaining that asset yourself.

Figure 6: Panel of millennials discussing what the future of work and home could look like.

9 | P a g e

2.4.3 Smart Parking Technology

During our visit to the Israel stand, I came across ParKam, a smart parking solution. What impressed

me about this particular system is that the specification requirements for the program to work are

actually quite low. This means that it can utilise cameras which are already installed and being used

by Councils. Any gaps in coverage can be filled inexpensively too.

The program analyses available spaces in real time, allowing users to access parking availability

through a mobile app. The spaces can be categorised by size and permit type to allow users to make

informed selections. Further, the system can also be used for parking enforcement, alerting

enforcement officers of overstays, illegal or unsafe parking etc.

Whilst the app technology isn’t unique or ground breaking, the most advantageous aspect of ParKam

is that it can utilise such low-resolution cameras and still function accurately. This makes it a good toe

in the water for Councils who cannot invest great sums of money into a smart parking system.

Figure 7: Model of Parkum smart parking technology.

2.5 DAY THREE

2.5.1 Sustainable Mobility Strategy (Albania)

The first thing to note about this presentation is that it was delivered by the Mayor of Tirana, Erion

Veliaj. Not only was it very well delivered, it showed that he as Mayor, knew his cities smart

developments inside out, furthermore he showed a passion and pride in his city and his people.

Albania is not a rich country and Tirana, it’s capital city, has limited budget available to undertake

smart city projects. The city has taken the viewpoint that smart cities do not necessarily mean large

dollars. Similarly, smart should not always equate to technology. Smart can also mean new ways of

thinking, smarter ways of tackling problems.

An example given was that families were spending the highest percentage per year on vehicles and

transportation than any other aspect of raising their children. Upon further research, it was found that

families were travelling large distances just to get their children to school or to access services such as

childcare. This was due to services within their own neighbourhoods not being suitable or adequate

for their needs. A modest investment toward upgrading childcare facilities in several neighbourhoods

saw a dramatic reduction in traffic congestion as people reverted to facilities within walking distance

of their homes. The total investment was a fraction of what would have been spent to upgrade the

road network to account for the traffic volumes.

10 | P a g e

3 KEY LEARNINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Whilst I did cast my net far and wide in terms of the topics and experiences at the conference, I have

come to two main topics which I would like to discuss further. These are

• Planning and governance

• Smart thinking, not just smart tech

The side events I attended, discussions I was a part of, and the lessons learned presented by various

cities could all be categorised into one of these three. To reiterate, this is from a newcomer, not

already greatly involved in the smart city industry, perspective. There are a great many more topics

which could be discussed here in detail, however my aim is to enable our member’s and their Councils

to commence their smart city journey in a way in which increases their likelihood of success.

3.1 PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE From the outset, at the visit to DOXA, it became apparent to me that considered planning and an

accountable governance model are essential to the success of implementing a smart city undertaking.

As with any project, it should be planned before being commenced. The team should be clear on the

vision, what the outcome is they want to achieve. That is the whole team, from the political level all

the way to those who are implementing and/or using the resulting changes. I heard so many people

talk about having jumped on the smart city ‘band wagon’, bought a piece of tech, implemented it with

relatively little benefit and then nothing further has happened.

The trouble is most people cannot envisage what a smart city would look like. The Stockholm vision I

mentioned earlier is broad, it allows great scope for definition of projects and initiatives. I do not think

our Councils will struggle in formulating a vision. I think that the next step, developing a strategy, will

prove much more of a hurdle. Added to that, the temptation to jump straight into implementing

projects could be strong. In this, I think it best we learn from others. Below I have included a diagram

from the DOXA presentation.

Figure 8: Example of a Program Canvas developed for Barcelona City

Our tendency as engineers is to define and scope a strategy to very specific deliverable elements.

However, the program canvas model shown to us by DOXA demonstrates a holistic approach. The 22

categories cover all of council’s business and each can be given an objective, a narrative and KPIs. This

11 | P a g e

is what sits within the strategy. It is after this is adopted that specific projects can be planned. As you

can see by the categories above, engineering is only part of the equation.

Once the strategy is in place and projects commence, it is important to measure progress against the

established KPIs. A level of accountability is required in order to ensure that the strategy works, that

progress takes place. It is equally important to acknowledge when something isn’t working or isn’t

contributing in the way it was intended to and to make changes rather than shelve that aspect of the

plan and move the focus elsewhere.

RECOMMENDATION

Start the planning process now. Research what has been done globally, what is being done by other

councils locally. Have the discussion within your own Council about vision and develop a timeline for

drawing up and adopting a strategy. It is only after that is done that the true development of a smart

city commences. Without this front-end work, Councils run the risk of owning a whole lot of tech

without sustainable long-term benefit or even experiencing a stop start type of smart city growth.

3.2 SMART THINKING NOT JUST SMART TECH Smart Cities in my opinion is too often associated with technology. So far as I see it, technology is

merely one of the tools which can be utilised to enable a city to function ‘smartly’. The term smart

may also be synonymised with efficient, user friendly, sustainable. In the context of our city’s futures

it is used to describe a multitude of aspects which form an enhanced way of living.

Here I’d like to reiterate the point made by the Mayor or Tirana. Smart City’s do not equate to tech

driven cities. The example given in the presentation about childcare would be a case of a person or a

team within Council looking at a problem in a different way. Innovation, new ways of viewing

problems, a holistic approach to solving issues does not mean significant investment or mass rollout

or tech. It is essentially a shift in mindset or culture, to be questioning, how can we do this better,

smarter. How can we make small changes which have great benefit?

As leaders within our respective Councils, we can foster innovation. By empowering our staff to think

outside of the square, to question the business as usual and to develop ideas for delivering the same

work in smarter more efficient ways, we can create a smart ecosystem within our own business. When

our Council then comes to implementing a strategy and the associated projects, the culture has

already shifted towards one which will undertake that journey more readily.

RECOMMENDATION

For our members, for local government, I think that the more we observe and learn from others, be it

their use of certain technologies, implementation of various policies or unique ways of solving civic

problems, the better equipped we will be to undertake our own smart city projects.

12 | P a g e

4 CONCLUDING REMARKS

I would like to thank IPWEA Queensland Foundation for awarding me the scholarship to be a part of

this study tour. Thanks also to IPWEA Australasia for arranging and facilitating the tour. It was a

privilege to attend with the delegate group. Aside from the learnings I took away from the conference

and the side events, I learned a great deal just in conversation with my fellow delegates.

Prior to attending the study tour, my knowledge of Smart Cities was very limited. I will admit, I related

the term to technology. As I have learned and hopefully have conveyed through this report, it is so

much more than that. Smart Cities is our opportunity to utilise technological advancement to enhance

the way our citizens live, to enrich the souls of our cities and to preserve the environment for future

generations.