• Journal of the Korean Association of Geographic Information Studies
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.12-28
• /
• 2021

Based on the global smart city promotion trend, in 2018, the "Fourth Industrial Revolution Committee" selected "sustainability" and "people-centered" as keywords in relation to the direction of domestic smart city policy. Accordingly, the Living Lab program, which is an active citizen-centered innovation methodology, is applied to each stage of the domestic smart city construction project. Through the Living Lab program, and in collaboration with the public and experts, the smart city discovers local issues as it focuses on citizens, devises solutions to sustainable urban problems, and formulates a regional development plan that reflects the needs of citizens. However, compared to citizen participation in urban regeneration projects that have been operated for a relatively long time, participation in smart city projects was found to significantly differ in level and sustainability. Therefore, this study conducted a comparative analysis of the characteristics of citizen participation at each stage of an urban regeneration project and, based on Arnstein's "Participation Ladder" model, examined the level of citizen participation activities in the Living Lab program carried out in a smart city commercial area from 2018 to 2019. The results indicated that citizen participation activities in the Living Lab conducted in the smart city project had a great influence on selecting smart city services, which fit the needs of local residents, and on determining the technological level of services appropriate to the region based on a relatively high level of authority, such as selection of smart city services or composition of solutions. However, most of the citizen participation activities were halted after the project's completion due to the one-off recruitment of citizen participation groups for the smart city construction project only. On the other hand, citizens' participation activities in the field of urban regeneration were focused on local communities, and continuous operation and management measures were being drawn from the project planning stage to the operation stage after the project was completed. This study presented a plan to revitalize citizen participation for the realization of a more sustainable smart city through a comparison of the characteristics and an examination of the level of citizen participation in such urban regeneration and smart city projects.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.47 no.4
• /
• pp.50-60
• /
• 2019

In the late 1980s, a financial crisis and Compulsory Competitive Tendering (CCT) in green space services brought with it a profound impact on the quality of parks in the UK. Such government projects, e.g. Urban Task Force (1999) and Public Parks Assessment (2001), aimed to raise the awareness of the severity of the declining standards of urban parks. Since the late 1990s, the UK governments (The New Labour (1997-2010) and The Conservative Government (2010-2019)), have often adopted community-led governance schemes to enhance the quality of parks and address problems derived from the financial crisis. Accordingly, community groups, notably 'Friends of', enlarged their involvement in the decision-making process of park management. However, there is little empirical evidence concerning the impact of community-led governance on park management, in particular, the effect on the users' perceptions of park use. This study explored the context of community-led park management to reclassify the level of build-up of governance underlined by 'A Ladder of Citizen Participation'. In addition, questionnaire surveys were conducted around two Sheffield district parks, which are located in deprived areas. As a result, community involvement in the status quo of UK urban park management has changed its form of governance based on the extent of involvement in the decision-making process. The forms of governance could be categorised in three levels: general, active, and predominant governance, where the extents of decision-making and sharing responsibility vary. The results obtained through the questionnaires show that one park (active governance), which has a stronger tendency of sharing responsibility to get involved in park management, had better contribution to park management and positive impacts on users' satisfaction than the other park (general governance). The findings highlight that stronger governance in partnerships with the non-public sectors can shed light on current and future park management through a shift in sharing responsibility for park management.