This subcategory includes research papers that discuss high-mobility issues in smart cities (Delponte and Ugolini, 2011; van Geenhuizen and Nijkamp, 2009). The stability quotient would be low, and people would live nomadic lives. There would be more footloose firms and businesses with an amoebic operational style (Carli et al., 2013; Roscia et al., 2013).
This category discusses citizen engagement, participation, cognitive, and perception issues (Veeckman and van der Graaf, 2014). Citizens in a smart city could easily come across all facts and figures, but sometimes too much information is also dangerous (Mainka et al., 2015). The decision-making process in smart cities would not be too easy, as generating citizens' interest in public policies and government activities would be a challenging task (Syvajarvi et al., 2015). Furthermore, people may have mixed perceptions about smart cities (Cano et al., 2014; Gil-Garcia, 2013). They may be unable to adjust to the changes (Khan et al., 2014) if they carry the horn effect (Chadwick and May, 2003).
This category articulates that the inherent nature of human beings is to resist changes that are outside their comfort zone (Nam and Pardo, 2013). Therefore, it would be a challenge to change their views and style of living (Thomas et al., 2010). Furthermore, if there is a misalignment between government's mission and vision, a conflicting situation may arise (Sandoval-Almazan et al., 2015). This would pose a challenge in aligning the individuals' goals with the goals of the smart city (Gil-Garcia, 2013).