Smart City: is technology in step with the culture?

Roberto Saracco


Figure 2
Download the app, if you really need it!
Credit: Seychelles Tourist Office

“There is no doubt that we have amazing technologies available today that are increasing or might increase the liveability of our cities. And yet, sometimes one has to wonder if they are really a good fit on our way of life.” In this article, Roberto Saracco shares his reflections about how appropriately are ICTs designed to take into account cultural aspects and potential behavioural shifts among people using them.


There is no doubt that we have amazing technologies available today that are increasing or might increase the liveability of our cities. And yet, sometimes one has to wonder if they are really a good fit on our way of life.

There are several analyses showing the well-being and happiness of a community, like the one of a city, does not relates to the availability of technology and clearly this begs the question if we are deploying the right technology, since the final goal should be to improve the well-being of people.

I am reminded of a vacation I took in the islands of Seychelles, in the middle of the Indian Ocean.

Once I landed at the tiny airport of Mahe and was lining up for passport control among fragrant flowers, I saw several ads on the beauties of the islands waiting for me. There was also an ad of the Seychelles tourist office inviting to download an app on my phone to have all information in the palm of my hand (QR code provided). Wow! An isolated spot like that had an app for my phone. ICT (Information and Communications Technologies) have reached this heavenly place.

Next morning our party went to the bus stop after having checked the timetable on the phone. We were not alone waiting for the bus. Other tourists were there basking in the sun under palm trees with the waves slapping the white sand just a few meters away.

The time was right, according to the information provided on our smart phones, but the bus was not there. No problem, a bit of delay, not a big deal. Time passed, and the bus was still nowhere to be seen.

We were not the only ones waiting. A few local people were there as well. And you could see that as time went by the tourists became restless, the locals remained completely at ease. We kept checking our phones they kept talking to one another.

After a while, that is half an hour waiting and no bus on the horizon, I turned to one of the local in my French and asked what was going on and if I had the right bus schedule on the phone to go to the beach on the other side of the island.

The answer was somewhat enlightening: “Yes, you got the right schedule but the bus does not run according to a schedule. Maybe the bus driver found a friend and stopped to chat with him, or he might have felt hungry and went to have lunch.” And then he added “You are already on a beach, enjoying the nice weather and surrounding. There’s no need to be in a hurry. The bus will come eventually. What is the problem?”

The problem, as an Australian aboriginal once said, is that we, Westerners, have the watch, they have the time.

This little personal experience made me reflect that a technology is not good per sé, it is good only to the extent that it mingles seamlessly with the way of living of the people that are supposed to use it.

There is of course also another twist, the use of technology is bound to change the way people interact and step by step lead to a change in expectation and culture.

Most of the times, these changes are not uniformly distributed among a population, that is the adoption rate varies, and frictions are likely to arise because of these differences. Frictions may turn out to be positive factors (oh, how I wish I can use it!) or a negative one (I am bothered by being forced to use it, it bothers me that others are using it).

Seldom are these aspects taken into account by planners and even less by engineers. This may explain why the diagrams representing the penetration of technologies in a city do not necessarily match with diagrams representing the perception of happiness in living there by its citizens.

Of course this is not good. The ultimate goal of technology, as I stated in the beginning, should be to increase the well-being and happiness of the citizens. It might be a direct consequence of the adoption of a technology (like something decreasing the experiencing of traffic jams) or an indirect consequence (decreasing the cost of road maintenance is leading to better road maintenance).

This is becoming even more important as the trends in smart cities are towards a greater involvement of citizens that become one of the key city infrastructures. As an example, citizens can become sensors to report anomalies thus feeding the overall city monitoring.

In this sense it is interesting the report prepared by Ericsson, “Networked Society Index 2014” [1], where one of the points made is about the use of technology to create a networked society, where the network nodes (and aware sensors) are the citizens.

Figure 1

Credit: Ericsson Report on Networked Society City Index

In this report it is stated that collaboration will change the way organisations (like a city) work and to a certain extent this also changes the organisations as such. ICT provides new means to support communication, share information and in the process it leads to behavioural changes. In that report, however, it is not clarified how such behavioural changes might clash with the prevailing culture and the fallout from differences induced by uneven adoption of technology use.

Personally I have no doubt that technology can improve our well-being and the overall city behavioural landscape, but city planners have to solve the big challenge of managing the transition and making sure local culture is taken into account.

I am looking forward to my next trip to Seychelles and hope to see they have removed all QR pointers to apps with just one line saying: “relax, no wrist watch in Paradise!”


[1] Ericsson, 2014. Networked Society City Index 2014. Ericsson Report, [Online] (Last accessed on Dec. 7, 2014)



Roberto SaraccoRoberto Saracco is the President of EIT ICT LABS Italy and Italy Node Director (European Institute of Innovation and Technology). His background is in math and computer science. Up to December 2011 he was the Director of the Telecom Italia Future Centre in Venice, looking at the interplay of technology evolution, economics and society. At the turn of the century he has led a World Bank-Infodev project to stimulate entrepreneurship in Latin America. He is a senior member of IEEE where he leads the Future Direction Committee. He has published over 100 papers in journals and magazines and 11 books. Follow his blog:


Subscribe to the News Bulletin

Join our free Smart Cities Technical Community and receive our News Bulletin.

Subscribe Now

Current Issue

Past Issues

May/June 2015

March/April 2015

January/February 2015

December 2014