Introduction

Smart cities and smart mobility have recently dominated the urban planning discourse. It appears like the majority of cities the world over are in a race to become smart yet there is little or no consensus on what constitutes a smart city (Angelidou 2015; Caragliu et al. 2009). There are four key components or concepts that are commonly used to define and identify a smart city and these include (1) “smart machines” and informated organizations, (2) engaging communities, technology providers and research institutions (3) (re)-learning and adaptation, and (4) investing for the future (Ching and Ferreira 2015). Ostensibly, for a city to be smart, there is need for the adoption and implementation of information communication technologies (ICTs), hence smart cities are often equated with highly technological cities. According to Caragliu and Del Bo (2015) ICTs enable cities to foster urban development, economize time, improve individual mobility, improve access to information and services, save energy and resources as well as improving citizenry participation in urban decision making processes. Although smart and informated machines are the most well known aspects of smart cities, it is important to note that for a city to be smart, ICTs are not the only essential cogs since ingredients such as collaboration between community, technology providers and research institutes are also key to the realisation of smart cities. Similarly, continuous (re)-learning and adaptation are crucial to sustain smart cities. (Re)-Learning can be from other cities for example; the European smart cities network (Giffinger et al. 2007; Neirotti et al.

2014) . The (re)-learning and adapting is the ability to assess performance using measurable metrics or performance indicators (Giffinger and Gudrun 2010). In developing counties cities are often hesitant to assess performance as a result of political pressure and fear of public outcry. Lastly smart cities invest in the future if they are to continually survive.

An important component and topical issue in the smart cities debate is transportation, that is often referred to as smart mobility (Calabrese 2013). Chun and Lee (2015) note that smart mobility is a concept of comprehensive and smarter future traffic service in combination with smart technology. Similarly, transferring demand from private cars to public transport is an integral part of smart mobility (Siemens

2015) . However, the level of smartness depends on the transport mode that is in use, for example, combustion buses or taxis and or electric trains differ in their levels of smartness. The lack of or absence of smart transport modes that lead to a deplorable commuting experience has resulted in the general public shunning public transport and this is particularly so in developing countries such as South Africa (Allen 2013). Papa and Lauwers (2015) argue that smart mobility has evolved to being more than the technology used to optimize transport planning to more about improving the consumer and or customer experiences. Such innovations and the realisation of improved commuter conveniences emanating from smart transport systems have resulted in the shift in mind-sets within local, provincial and national governments in South Africa’s approaches to infrastructure provision for public transit purposes.

This chapter focuses on the concept of smart cities, applying the urban planning discourse and perspective to the current debates, consequently extending the frontiers of knowledge in this domain. The paper determines the level of smartness of the relatively new public transport infrastructure in Johannesburg against the backdrop of a myriad of policies and legislation that have been formulated and enacted to support the innovative developments. The chapter starts by reviewing and discussing the policy and legislative frameworks around smart transport planning and provision. It then focuses on the methodology that was adopted in collecting, analysing and reporting the research results. The chapter discusses the level of smartness of public transport systems within the study area and then it ends by proffering conclusions and recommendations on the best way to achieve smart mobility within South Africa and other developing countries in general.

 
Source
< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >