Public trust and support for government technology: Survey insights about Singapore's smart city policies

被引:2
作者
Hartley, Kris [1 ]
Aldag, Austin [2 ]
机构
[1] Arizona State Univ, Sch Sustainabil, Tempe, AZ 85281 USA
[2] Cornell Univ, Dept City & Reg Planning, Ithaca, NY 14850 USA
关键词
Smart cities; Public trust; Political legitimacy; Government technology; Quality-of-life; CITIZEN TRUST; ARTIFICIAL-INTELLIGENCE; DEVELOPMENTAL STATE; ACCEPTANCE; DETERMINANTS; PRIVACY; CITIES; TAXES; PARTICIPATION; LEGITIMACY;
D O I
10.1016/j.cities.2024.105368
中图分类号
TU98 [区域规划、城乡规划];
学科分类号
0814 ; 082803 ; 0833 ;
摘要
The smart city concept is an increasingly popular urban policy framework, and recent advances in technologies like artificial intelligence are poised to shape this trend in unprecedented ways. As public sector investment in technology accelerates, it is prudent to consider how smart cities shape and are shaped by public trust in government - an issue about which there is a growing body of research but lingering questions. This study investigates determinants of public trust in government technology, including public awareness, government communication, personal ideals and aspirations, and personal perceptions and expectations. Data come from a 2021 survey (N N = 1500) about smart cities in Singapore, a country with high developmental ambitions and sufficient resources to pursue advanced smart city programs. This study seeks to deepen scholarly and practical understandings about the mutually necessary but often diverging forces of public trust in technology and public trust in government.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 150 条
[1]   Smart buildings features and key performance indicators: A review [J].
Al Dakheel, Joud ;
Del Pero, Claudio ;
Aste, Niccolo ;
Leonforte, Fabrizio .
SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND SOCIETY, 2020, 61
[2]   On big data, artificial intelligence and smart cities [J].
Allam, Zaheer ;
Dhunny, Zaynah A. .
CITIES, 2019, 89 :80-91
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2023, Freedom in the World 2023
[4]  
Baltagi BH., 2008, Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, DOI DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-53953-5
[5]   The legitimacy of experts in policy: navigating technocratic and political accountability in the case of global poverty governance [J].
Bandola-Gill, Justyna .
EVIDENCE & POLICY, 2021, 17 (04) :615-633
[6]  
Bannerman S., 2020, Institute of Urban Studies. University of Winnipeg, V29, P17
[7]   Determinants of multi-service smartcard success for smart cities. development: A study based on citizens' privacy and security perceptions [J].
Belanche, Daniel ;
Casalo-Arino, Luis V. ;
Perez-Rueda, Alfredo .
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION QUARTERLY, 2015, 32 (02) :154-163
[8]   Trust and risk in e-government adoption [J].
Belanger, France ;
Carter, Lemuria .
JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 2008, 17 (02) :165-176
[9]   Meta-analyses of fifteen determinants of public opinion about climate change taxes and laws [J].
Bergquist, Magnus ;
Nilsson, Andreas ;
Harring, Niklas ;
Jagers, Sverker C. .
NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE, 2022, 12 (03) :235-+
[10]   Acceptance of IoT-based and sustainability-oriented smart city services: A mixed methods study [J].
Bestepe, Firat ;
Yildirim, Sevgi Ozkan .
SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND SOCIETY, 2022, 80