Cities in Saudi Arabia need to expand rapidly due to the rapidly growing urban population. To develop smart sustainable cities (SSC), human, social, and environmental capital investments must be expanded beyond just focusing on technology. There have been several cities that have adopted smart city labels as recognition of the advantages of smart cities. Many countries acknowledge the value of citizens’ involvement in public urban planning and decision making, but it is difficult to evaluate their impact and compare it to other factors. This study aims to develop a citizens’ participation framework, identify any additional stakeholder’s management measures (SMM) (in addition to the ones previously developed by the authors), and explain the relationship with citizens’ participation level (CPL) for driving SSC. Three rounds of the Delphi method were conducted to structure and validate the framework by the decision maker in the field of urban planning and reach a consensus of understanding the drivers of SSC. The study group was limited to 25 participants because this study focuses on the perspective of decision makers toward CP. Mean score (MS) ranking and Kendall Coefficient were used to confirm the importance of these additional stakeholders’ management measures. The results suggest three main component structures of the conceptual framework, which are SMM, CPL, and Citizens’ Participation Recruitment (CPR), which are all necessary for smart sustainable city outcomes (SSCO) for achieving the Future Sustainable Cities Plan (FSCP) within the context of Vision 2030 and government policy in Saudi Arabia. Using the proposed framework will enable all the stakeholders to gain a deeper understanding of SSC and their complex natures from a conceptual and practical standpoint. The contribution to knowledge of this study is by developing a conceptual framework that can support the implementation of SSC, and by providing an understanding the CPR standards and the involvement of citizens in urban development, which eliminates any debate regarding SSC.

It is imperative to expand the concept of smart cities beyond merely focusing on technology to include human, social, and environmental capital investing to develop smart sustainable cities (SSC). In recognition of smart cities’ advantages, several cities have adopted smart city labels. Although citizens’ engagement in public urban development and decision-making has been acknowledged globally in many countries, evaluating the outcomes that allow citizens to contribute does not measure and compare with other factors. This study examines the impact between the citizens’ participation level (CPL) and the smart sustainable cities outcome (SSCO). Four factors were extracted from the literature review and interviews were conducted with 12 decision and policymakers to establish the importance of these factors and to suggest any other additional factors. In addition, a questionnaire survey was utilised to assess and validate the result by experts in the field of the built environment. The mean score (MS) ranking was used to confirm the importance of these predicted correlations with SSCO. Endogeneity tests and multivariate regression analysis were adopted to validate the causality between CLP and SSCO. The results suggest that a positive significant correlation exists between the CPL and SSCO. A higher CPL leads to a higher level of SSCO, but this does not apply the other way around. The four significant factors of CPL to engage and empower citizens are accountability and responsibility, transparency, participation, and inclusion. This paper contributes to knowledge by identifying the measures of CPL and SSCO that can support the implementation of SSC by understanding what can be expected from the government and decision-makers and what can be expected from the citizens.

Purpose: The smart sustainable cities (SSC) concept has a wide acknowledgement amongst governments and societies that deal with emerging technology and help in developing better urban communities. However, the fact that citizens' participation (CP) is not adherent to the current policies and governance often boosts their aspirations of decision-making to become smart cities. This paper aims to identify SSC variables and, more importantly, rank, categorise and discuss the factors towards implementing SSC by engaging, empowering and enabling citizens to participate in the urban development of SSC.Design/methodology/approach: A comprehensive literature review identified 38 factors in the CP process. Those factors were used to design an online questionnaire administered to the respondents. A total of 164 valid responses were collected. A two-stage statistical analysis was adopted. First, the Relative Importance Index (RII) was used to rank and prioritise the importance of the factors that affect the current policies and agenda. Second, factor analysis was utilised to categorise and group those factors.Findings: This study founds four significant factors that help in implanting SSC: “knowledge of smart sustainable cities”, “awareness of smart sustainable cities”, “willingness of the citizens to participate” and “opinion on the current agenda of the government's role”.Research limitations/implications: This study has a few limitations which can be considered in future studies. First, the response rate of the participant is relatively low (163), so sampling a larger segment will support the broader perception of the citizens.Practical implications: The outcome of this paper underlines the need for the successful implementation of smart cities by adopting CP in the process of impacting policies and governance. Particularly, it identifies factors that help cities and policymakers in engaging CP in developing new policies and revising existing policies for promoting SSC.Originality/value: There is a need to investigate the most critical factors that influence CP for implementing SSC. These factors have not been adequately examined in extant literature.

Purpose: Referring to “behavioural finance” and “normative model” theories, this study explores the relative significance of behavioural heuristic biases in the investment decisions of real estate investment trusts (REITs) when compared with the conventional normative decision factors, with an ultimate aim to identify the significant behavioural factors that should be avoided to ensure rational asset acquisitions and market efficiency.Design/methodology/approach: A triangulation approach was adopted. Qualitative multiple case studies were conducted, with four cases selected from Australian and New Zealand REITs across the industry, to identify what normative and behavioural finance factors are involved in investment decisions. This formed the basis for the subsequent expert review survey to explore how significant the behavioural factors were manifested in the judgement when compared with the normative factors.Findings: Three out of four theoretical behavioural factors manifested themselves in the investment decisions: investor sentiment, anchoring factors and overconfidence. The overall impact of these three behavioural factors was that they were as significant as normative factors in investment decisions. The heuristic availability of information was found to have no significant effect on experienced REIT fund managers.Research limitations/implications: The findings were based on four multiple cases and an expert review survey of six frontline fund managers, which form a baseline upon which further research can be conducted to widen the scope of research to cover all REITs in Australasia so that the results can become more robust to benefit the entire market in the region.Practical implications: As behavioural factors are significant in the decision-making process, REIT fund managers should raise awareness to avoid the significant behavioural factors identified, in particular investor sentiment, which was found to be the most significant one.Originality/value: This study confirms the relative significance of behavioural factors in property investment decisions within the context of Australasian REITs and alerts fund managers to the ways they should follow to ensure rational investments and market efficiency. It also extends the scale of existing studies to cover not only Australia but also New Zealand for the benefit of the entire Australasian market.

Purpose: Construction frameworks are recognised by the UK Government as an integrated procurement path to deliver efficiency, collaboration and sustainability. This research paper aims to develop a performance-driving model for framework procurement to align with the government construction policy objectives.Design/methodology/approach: A quantitative hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to examine the causal relationships between project outcomes and performance drivers. A successive qualitative multiple-case study involving eight typical construction framework projects was examined to further explain casual relationships.Findings: Conclusive results from the quantitative and qualitative analyses validated the performance-driving model, generalising a framework procurement principle that project outcomes of time, cost, quality, sustainability and closer relationships are significantly driven by supplier's task and contextual performance drivers, and client's organisational drivers.Research limitations/implications: The investigation followed two major public-sector organisations in the UK: infrastructure offices of local authorities and estate offices of universities. Further research should be extended to other public-sector situations to enhance the model further.Practical implications: Using this model, framework managers can drive project outcomes by applying task and contextual performance drivers in order to select the best suppliers at the procurement phase, and by adopting the client's organisational factors at both procurement and construction monitoring phases.Social implications: The empirical evidence supports the use of frameworks by public sector policymakers as a key strategy to develop the performance drivers further and improve efficiency and quality outcomes.Originality/value: The results will be of value to support the policy of public-sector works organisations contemplating using framework procurement for executing continuing construction activities.