ua ru en

3 (31) 2017

Demography and social economy, 2017, 3(31):76-88
doi: https://doi.org/10.15407/dse2017.03.076
UDC 330.3 +364

V.P. Zvonar
PhD (Economics), senior researcher, senior staff scientist
Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
01032, Ukraine, Kyiv, blvd. Taras Shevchenko, 60
E-mail: viktorzvonar@yahoo.com

Language: Ukrainian
Abstract: The paper explores the practice of functioning of a smart-community as a model of communication and constructive cooperation of economic entities. The specific visions of the implementation of the given model are systematized. The criteria that reveal the actual socio-economic characteristics (socio-economic profile) of the model are proposed. The first such criterion appears to be a type of residence area (urban vs non-urban). In accordance with this criterion, the urban and the convergent visions of a smart-community are identified in the paper. The first one absolutizes the needs of urban areas and contributes to the development of the well-known concept of smart-city. The paper argues that from a socio-economic point of view, limiting of the scope of the smart community model to urban spaces is unnecessary, although such limiting is often actually the case. Therefore, the alternative vision of a smart-community is called for. This vision can be addressed as the convergent one. It does not contrast urban areas with non-urban ones, but consolidates them. The second criterion is the degree of social orientation of the functional components of the smart-community model. Such components include but are not limited to basic stakeholders in a community, algorithms for their interaction, etc. The extent to which these components can be perceived as socialized sets ground for distinguishing between the engineer (with a primary focus on the new information technologies deployment ) and the humanistic vision (with a primary focus on human and social capital issues) of a smart-community. The paper argues that the humanistic and the convergent visions are most appropriate for the socio-economic profile of the smart community model. This profile enables the implementation of social policy in a smart-community and promotes the social responsibility of economic entities. The paper also dwell on the directions of innovative activity of social policy agents in a smart community. An algorithm for implementing of the socio-economic role of this model is formulated. The self-organization of local population is viewed as an integral part of this algorithm. The paper concluded that practice of the functioning of smart communities in Ukraine does not yet sufficiently take into account their socio-economic potential.
Key words: smart community, e-communication, criterion, social policy, entity, self-organization, social responsibility.
1. Oliveira, A. (2015). From Smart Cities to Human Smart Cities. Washington. DC: IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2015.281
2. Veeckman, C. (2015). The City as Living Laboratory: Empowering Citizens with the Citadel Toolkit. Technology Innovation Management Review, 6-17.
3. Kunanets’, N. (2016). Dosvid realizatsiyi proektiv klasu «rozumne misto» na osnovi informatsiynykh i telekomunikatsiynykh tekhnolohiy [Experience in implementing «smart city» projects based on ICT]. Visnyk LDU BZhD – Herald of LDU BZhD, 14, 17-37 [in Ukrainian].
4. Smart City Model. (n.d.). smart-cities.eu. Retrieved from http://www.smart-cities.eu/model.html.
5. Gurstein, M. (2014). Smart Cities vs. Smart Communities: Empowering Citizens not Market Economics. The Journal of Community Informatics, 10, 3. ci-journal.net. Retrieved from http://ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej/article/view/1172/1117.
6. Lindskog, H. (2014). Smart communities initiatives. researchgate.net. Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Helena_Lindskog/publication/228371789_Smart_communities_initiatives/links/549812230cf 2519f5a1db56d.pdf.
7. Smart cities Ranking of European medium-sized cities (2007). Final report. Vienna : Centre of Regional Science, Vienna University of Technology.
8. Ward, J. (2012). The smart rural community. Arlington. VA : National Telecommunications Cooperative Association.
9. Kupriyanovskiy, V.P., Bulancha, S.A., & Kononov, V.V. ets. (2016) Umnyie goroda kak «stolitsyi» tsifrovoy ekonomiki [Smart cities as the «capitals» of the digital economy]. International Journal of Open Information Technologies, 4, 2, 41-52. [in Russian].
10. Lara, A. ,Da Costa, E., Furlani, Th., & Yigitcanlar ,T. (2016). Smartness that matters: towards a comprehensive and human-centred characterisation of smart cities. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market and Complexity, 2, 1-13.
11. Musa, S. (2016). Smart ities – a roadmap for development. Journal of Telecommunications System & Management, 5, iss. 3. omicsgroup.org. Retrieved from https://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/smartcities--a-roadmap-for-development-2167-0919-1000144.pdf.
12. MyNeighbourhood Project. MyNeighbourhood in Mouraria. (n.d.). vimeo.com. Retrieved from http://vimeo.com/75226308. [in English]
13. Makarova, O.V. (2015). Sotsial’na polityka v Ukrayini [Social policy in Ukraine]. Kyiv, Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine [in Ukrainian].
14. Umnyie i esche umney: kakimi innovatsiyami mogut pohvastatsya ukrainskie goroda [Smart and even smarter: what innovations can boast Ukrainian cities about]. (2016). Delo.UA. delo.ua. Retrieved from https://delo.ua/ukraine/umnye-i-esche-umnej-kakimi-innovacijami-mogut-pohvastatsja-ukrai-326-548/?supdated_new=1496091753 [in Russian].

» pdf