Smartness and Strategic Priority Assessment in Transition to Mobility 4.0 for Smart Cities

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 2, 113 - 126, 23.09.2021

Hakan İnaç Ercan Oztemel Mehmet Emin Aydın

https://doi.org/10.38016/jista.933005

Cited By: 1

Öz

Digital transformation of urban transportation services attracts significant attention within the scope of smart city studies. It is known as a strategic action with many investment opportunities for the future cities, therefore it attracts the attention of enterprises and institutions. A sound and sustainable digital transformation requires substantial decision support in order to customize the needs and priorities of cities, especially in developing countries, where a lack of knowledge and skills is the case. Mobility 4.0 is recognized as the most up-to-date state of art technology and vision for urban transportation in the age of smart cities. Mobility as a Service (MaAS) is one of the most prominent Mobility 4.0 components that needs to be developed with an integrated management approach, which is available for research and development investments that have defined conceptually yet. In this study, the smartness level of city transport services is identified with a four-level transition approach. The transition from Mobility 3.0 to Mobility 4.0 for cities has been carried out with conceptual integrated management design of MaAS and demonstrated with a case study. The study also adapted a series of new strategically targeted transformation priorities for cities with reference to research and development strategies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Digital Transformation, MaAS, Mobility 4.0, Transportation Management, Nominal Group Technique, Smart City.

Destekleyen Kurum

The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK)

Proje Numarası

Application Number: 1059B141900373

Akıllı Şehirler İçin Mobilite 4.0 Geçişinde Akıllılık ve Stratejik Öncelik Değerlendirmesi

Öz

Kentsel ulaşım hizmetlerinin dijital dönüşümü, akıllı şehir çalışmalarında öne çıkan ve büyük ilgi gören bir konudur. Bu dönüşüm geleceğin şehirleri için birçok yatırım fırsatı içeren stratejik bir eylem olarak bilinir, bu nedenle şirketlerin ve kurumların ilgisini çekmektedir. Güçlü ve sürdürülebilir bir dijital dönüşüm, özellikle bilgi ve beceri eksikliğinin söz konusu olduğu gelişmekte olan ülkelerde, şehirlerin ihtiyaçlarını ve önceliklerini özelleştirmek için etkin bir karar desteği gerektirir. Mobilite 4.0, akıllı şehirler çağında kentsel ulaşım için en güncel teknoloji ve vizyon olarak kabul edilmektedir. Bir hizmet olarak hareketlilik (MaAS), kavramsal olarak henüz tanımlanmış araştırma ve geliştirme yatırımları için mevcut olan entegre bir yönetim yaklaşımıyla geliştirilmesi gereken en önemli Mobilite 4.0 bileşenlerinden biridir. Bu çalışmada, şehir içi ulaşım hizmetlerinin akıllılık seviyesi dört aşamalı bir geçiş yaklaşımı ile belirlenmiştir. Şehirler için Mobilite 3.0'dan Mobilite 4.0'a geçiş, MaAS'ın kavramsal entegre yönetim tasarımı ile örneklenmiş ve bir vaka çalışması ile gösterilmiştir. Çalışma da ayrıca, araştırma ve geliştirme stratejilerine referansla şehirler için stratejik olarak hedeflenmiş bir dizi yeni dönüşüm önceliği ile ilgili önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dijital Dönüşüm, MaAS, Mobilite 4.0, Ulaşım Yönetimi, Nominal Grup Tekniği, Akıllı Şehir

Proje Numarası

Application Number: 1059B141900373

Kaynakça

• Akpınar, M., 2019. Smart City Applications in Digital Age: State-Of-Art Review and Critique. Journal of Information Systems and Management Research, 1(1), 37(42).
• Albino, V., Berardi, U., Dangelico, R. M. 2015. Smart cities: Definitions, dimensions, performance, and initiatives. Journal of urban technology, 22, 3-21.
• Angelidou, M., Psaltoglou, A., Komninos, N., Kakderi, C., Tsarchopoulos, P., Panori, A. 2018. Enhancing sustainable urban development through smart city applications. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management.
• Anttiroiko, A.V., Valkama, P., Bailey, S. J. 2014. Smart cities in the new service economy: building platforms for smart services. AI & society, 29, 323-334.
• Bagloee, S. A., Tavana, M., Asadi, M., Oliver, T. 2016. Autonomous vehicles: challenges, opportunities, and future implications for transportation policies. Journal of modern transportation, 24, 284-303.
• Bello, J. P., Silva, C., Nov, O., Dubois, R. L., Arora, A., Salamon, J., Mydlarz, C., Doraiswamy, H. 2019. Sonyc: A system for monitoring, analyzing, and mitigating urban noise pollution. Communications of the ACM, 62, 68-77.
• Butler, L., Yigitcanlar, T., Paz, A. 2020. Barriers and risks of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) adoption in cities: A systematic review of the literature. Cities, 103036.
• Clayton, W., Ben-Elia, E., Parkhurst, G., Ricci, M. 2014. Where to park? A behavioural comparison of bus Park and Ride and city centre car park usage in Bath, UK. Journal of Transport Geography, 36, 124-133.
• Colvile, R., Hutchinson, E. J., Mindell, J. & Warren, R. 2001. The transport sector as a source of air pollution. Atmospheric environment, 35, 1537-1565.
• Cottrill, C. D. 2020. MaaS surveillance: Privacy considerations in mobility as a service. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 131, 50-57.
• Crainic, T. G., Ricciardi, N., Storchi, G. 2009. Models for evaluating and planning city logistics systems. Transportation science, 43, 432-454.
• Fagnant, D. J., Kockelman, K. M. 2014. The travel and environmental implications of shared autonomous vehicles, using agent-based model scenarios. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 40, 1-13.
• Foltýnová, H. B., Attard, M., Melo, S. 2018. Topical collection on the role of planning towards sustainable urban mobility. Springer.
• Giffinger, R., Fertner, C., Kramar, H., Meijers, E. 2007. City-ranking of European medium-sized cities. Cent. Reg. Sci. Vienna UT, 1-12.
• Greenblatt, J. B., Shaheen, S. 2015. Automated Vehicles, On-Demand Mobility, and Environmental Impacts. Current Sustainable/Renewable Energy Reports, 2, 74-81.
• Halliday, S. 2013. Underground to everywhere: London's underground railway in the life of the capital, The History Press, ISBN 978 0 7524 9551 4.
• Hellinger, A., Seeger, H. 2011. Cyber-Physical Systems. Driving force for innovation in mobility, health, energy and production. Acatech Position Paper, National Academy of Science and Engineering, 1.
• İnaç, H., Dönmez, C. 2018. Evaluation of Value Capture Strategies for Public Private Partnership Projects in Railway System Projects to be Built in Istanbul City, International Journal of Advances in Engineering and Pure Sciences, 30(3), 286-298. DOI: 10.7240/marufbd.396649.
• Kaparias, I., Bell, M., Tomassini, M. 2011. Key performance indicators for traffic management and intelligent transport systems. ISIS, 14.
• Kemeny, T., Storper, M. 2015. Is specialization good for regional economic development? Regional Studies, 49, 1003-1018.
• Khayyat, N. T., Lee, J.D. 2015. A measure of technological capabilities for developing countries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 92, 210-223.
• Klingenberg, C., Antunes, J. 2017. Industry 4.0: what makes it a revolution. EurOMA 2017, 1-11.
• Kumar, P., Morawska, L., Martani, C., Biskos, G., Neophytou, M., Di Sabatino, S., Bell, M., Norford, L., Britter, R. 2015. The rise of low-cost sensing for managing air pollution in cities. Environment international, 75, 199-205.
• Lee, J., Bagheri, B., Kao, H.-A. 2015. A cyber-physical systems architecture for industry 4.0-based manufacturing systems. Manufacturing letters, 3, 18-23.
• Lytras, M. D., Visvizi, A. 2018. Who uses smart city services and what to make of it: Toward interdisciplinary smart cities research. Sustainability, 10, 1998.
• Ma, X., Xue, H. 2020. Intelligent smart city parking facility layout optimization based on intelligent IoT analysis. Computer Communications, 153, 145-151.
• Manville, C., Cochrane, G., Cave, J., Millard, J., Pederson, J. K., Thaarup, R. K., Liebe, A., Wissner, M., Massink, R., Kotterink, B. 2014. Mapping smart cities in the EU.
• Metz, D. 2018. Tackling urban traffic congestion: The experience of London, Stockholm and Singapore. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 6, 494-498.
• Morse, L.C., Babcock, D.L., Murthy, M. 2014. Managing engineering and technology, Pearson.
• Mouchili, M. N., Aljawarneh, S., Tchouati, W. Smart city data analysis. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Data Science, E-learning and Information Systems, 2018. 1-6.
• Müller, I. S., Liedtke, G. Understanding structural barriers of innovations towards sustainable transportation.
• Nagy, D.K. 2016. City location and economic development. Princeton University, mimeograph.
• Ngo, H. Q.T., Nguyen, T.P., Nguyen, H., 2019. H. Hardware Design for Intelligent IoT Approach to Optimize Parking Slots. 2019 International Conference on Advanced Computing and Applications (ACOMP), IEEE, 171-175.
• Pringle, P., 2011. AdaptME toolkit: Adaptation monitoring and evaluation. Oxford, UK: UKCIP. accessed 29, 03-21.
• Razaghi, M., Finger, M. 2018. Smart governance for smart cities. Proceedings of the IEEE, 106, 680-689.
• Redman, L., Friman, M., Gärling, T., Hartig, T. 2013. Quality attributes of public transport that attract car users: A research review. Transport policy, 25, 119-127.
• Sharifi, A. 2020. A typology of smart city assessment tools and indicator sets. Sustainable cities and society, 53, 101936.
• Smith, G., Sochor, J., Karlsson, I. M. 2018. Mobility as a Service: Development scenarios and implications for public transport. Research in Transportation Economics, 69, 592-599.
• Sochor, J., Strömberg, H., Karlsson, I. M. 2015. Implementing mobility as a service: challenges in integrating user, commercial, and societal perspectives. Transportation research record, 2536, 1-9.
• Şentürk, İ., Coulıbaly, S., 2020. Mobile Data Collection in Smart City Applications: The Impact of Precedence-based Route Planning on Data Latency. Journal of Innovative Science and Engineering, 4 (1), 22-34. DOI: 10.38088/jise.713809.
• Tay, K.C., Supangkat, S. H., CORNELIUS, G. & ARMAN, A. A. The SMART initiative and the Garuda smart city framework for the development of smart cities. 2018 International Conference on ICT for Smart Society (ICISS), 2018. IEEE, 1-10.
• Wolff, H., Perry, L. 2010. Policy monitor: trends in clean air legislation in Europe: particulate matter and low emission zones. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 4, 293-308.
• Yaman, O., Bayğın, M., 2020. UHF-RFID, Smart Cargo Management, Real Time Tracking. Journal of Intelligent Systems: Theory and Applications, 3 (2), 38-45. DOI: 10.38016/jista.762685
• Yang, W., Lee, S.P. 2019. Service Model Research of Bicycle-sharing based on Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS). Journal of Service Research and Studies, 9, 19-40.