Urban performance currently depends not only on a city's endowment of hard infrastructure (physical capital), but also, and increasingly so, on the availability and quality of knowledge communication and social infrastructure (human and social capital). The latter form of capital is decisive for urban competitiveness. Against this background, the concept of the “smart city” has recently been introduced as a strategic device to encompass modern urban production factors in a common framework and, in particular, to highlight the importance of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in the last 20 years for enhancing the competitive profile of a city. The present paper aims to shed light on the often elusive definition of the concept of the “smart city.” We provide a focused and operational definition of this construct and present consistent evidence on the geography of smart cities in the EU27. Our statistical and graphical analyses exploit in depth, for the first time to our knowledge, the most recent version of the Urban Audit data set in order to analyze the factors determining the performance of smart cities. We find that the presence of a creative class, the quality of and dedicated attention to the urban environment, the level of education, and the accessibility to and use of ICTs for public administration are all positively correlated with urban wealth. This result prompts the formulation of a new strategic agenda for European cities that will allow them to achieve sustainable urban development and a better urban landscape.

This paper addresses the distinction between integrated assessment and sustainability assessment (SA), and, using a systemic approach, outlines how to move from integrated assessment to SA. The fundamental differences may be identified at three levels: ontological, methodological and epistemological. We present a novel methodological framework for SA, based on a literature meta-review of multi-scale and multi-purpose appraisal methodologies and related methods, models, and indicators. SA is considered as a structured procedure encompassing different field-specific analytical methods and models, depending on the specific application and decision context. External inputs to the methodology are the “values” to be considered in the analysis and the (political) boundaries defined for them, including also the sustainability framework in which the analysis is carried out . Internal elements of the methodology comprise the choice of the approach (e.g. “what-if” vs. “what-to”), the scenario settings and the possible analytical tools and indicators for the numerical analysis. Uncertainty quantification tools are then key elements of the assessment framework. We discuss the relevance of and challenges for the development of SA, with a specific focus on applicability in specific decision contexts, highlighted.JRC.H.8-Sustainability Assessmen

This article presents a meta-analysis of variations in price and income elasticities of residential water demand. Meta-analysis constitutes an adequate tool to synthesize research results by means of an analysis of the variation in empirical estimates reported in the literature. We link the variation in estimated elasticities to differences in theoretical microeconomic choice approaches, differences in spatial and temporal dynamics, as well as differences in research design of the underlying studies. The occurrence of increasing or decreasing block rate systems turns out to be important. With respect to price elasticities, the use of the discrete-continuous choice approach is relevant in explaining observed differences. (JEL H31, Q25)