ISO、IEC和ITU-T智慧城市定义分析（in English with Chinese abstract）

安小米 魏玮 闵京华

Analysis of Smart City Definitions from ISO， IEC， ITU-T

AN Xiaomi1-2 WEI Wei3 MIN Jinghua4

（1.Information Resource Management School， Renmin University of China，Beijing 100872; 2.Key Laboratory of Data Engineering and Knowledge Engineering （RUC）， Ministry of Education，Beijing 100872; 3.Smart City Research Centre （RUC）， Beijing 100872;4.China Electronic Cyberspace Great Wall Co.， Ltd，Beijing 100097）

Abstract： Smart city definition is the foundation for understanding its unit of knowledge and unique combination of characteristics for building shared understanding about smart city. Using ISO 704：2009 as theoretical support， we analyzed smart city definitions from ISO， IEC and ITU-T. Moreover， concepts in different definitions of smart city， and their characteristics in terms of smart city object， smart status of smart city， stakeholders concern about smart city， domains concern about smart city， visions and goals of smart city， approaches to and means of smart city are identified. Based on questionnaire survey about understandings about smart city concepts and their characteristics from 14 experts from ISO， IEC and ITU-T， we put forward unified definition for smart city from system of systems views and multi-dimensional meta-synthetic thinking about common or different characteristics. This paper provides an effective path for standardization collaboration and integration of smart city defined by the three standardization organizations.

Keywords： smart city definitions; standards collaboration; consensus building; ISO; IEC; ITU-T

摘 要：智慧城市定義是认识其知识单元和理解其本质特征、构建共识的基础。文章采用ISO 704：2009的理论框架，分析了ISO、IEC和ITU-T对智慧城市的定义，通过解构定义的智慧城市对象、利益相关方、涉及领域、智慧城市实现目标及愿景和实现路径，得出了三大国际标准化组织的智慧城市核心概念、概念关系和其认知视角，通过对三大标准化组织14位专家的问卷调查分析摸清了智慧城市核心概念的不同认知。基于系统方法和综合集成思想提出了多维度构建统一智慧城市定义的建议，为三大标准化组织智慧城市定义的标准化协同和融合提供了有效路径。

关键词：智慧城市定义;标准化协同;共识构建;ISO;IEC;ITU-T

中图分类号：TD213;TU984  文献标识码：A  DOI：10.12339/j.issn.1673-8578.2021.04.010

收稿日期：2021-02-27  修回日期：2021-06-06

基金项目：中国人民大学重大项目“政府大数据治理与综合利用的标准化协同管理体系构建与应用研究”（21XNL019）研究成果之一

1 Introduction

Definitions are conventional means for establishing the meaning of the lexical items and for connecting the concept with the word or term that represents it[1]. There are various definitions of “smart city” in literature， which reflect different concerns and understandings about “smart city” from different perspectives. A few researchers have tried to provide general definition of smart city from standards harmonization perspective. For instance， Song and A[2]have tried to build up a unified concept system for smart city based on an analysis of definitions of smart city from ISO， IEC and ITU-T in 2017， however， the sources are out of date and the analysis are limited to term analysis than characteristics of smart city concepts. Jamous and Hart[3] have tried to build integration concept of smart cities， and Ramaprasad and A Sánchez-Ortiz[4] have tried to build unified definition of smart city， however， they are not from standards perspective， sources of definitions from ISO， IEC and ITU-T are not involved.

This paper aims to review concepts about smart city in definitions of ISO， IEC and ITU-T standards， characteristics of smart city concepts are identified in terms of stakeholders concern about smart city， domains concern about smart city， object of smart city and smart status of smart city， visions and goals of smart city， approaches and means of smart city. Since “definition is representation of a concept by an expression that describes it and differentiates it from related concepts”[5]3.3.1. Definitions from deliverables of ISO， IEC and ITU-T and their terminology databases are regarded as authoritative sources for this study. There are four definitions relevant to smart city that are collected from the following databases.

·ISO Online browsing platform： http：//www.iso.org/obp.

·IEC Electropedia： http：//www.electropedia.org.

·ITU Terms and Definitions： http：//www.itu.int/net/ITU-R/index.asp？redirect=true&category=information&rlink=terminology-database&lang=en#lang=en.

In addition， in the process of disposition of comments on the definitions of ‘smart city in the 4th CD of IEC 60050-831[6]， 2 more definitions of smart city are recommended by two national bodies， which are also collected for analysis， see Appendix A.

2 Methods for analysis of definitions of smart city from ISO， IEC， ITU-T

An analysis of “concept” and “characteristic” in the definitions of smart city is conducted in consistency with ISO 704：2009[7] and ISO 1087：2019[5].

Definition of “concept” is adopted from ISO 1087：2019[5]3.2.7， defined as “unit of knowledge created by a unique combination of characteristics”.

Definition of “characteristic” is adopted from ISO 1087：2019[5]3.2.1， defined as “abstraction of a property” with “Note 1 to entry： Characteristics are used to describing concepts”.

Definition of “object” is adopted from ISO 1087：2019[5]3.1.1， defined as “anything perceivable or conceivable” with “Note 1 to entry： Objects can be material （e.g. ‘engine， ‘sheet of paper， ‘diamond）， immaterial （e.g. ‘conversion ratio， ‘project plan） or imagined （e.g. ‘unicorn， ‘scientific hypothesis）”.

Definition of “property” is adopted from ISO 1087：2019[5]3.1.3， defined as “feature of an object” with “Note 1 entry： One or more objects can have the same property”. The relations between the above four concepts are shown in Figure 1 which is described in ISO 704：2009[7]5.4.1：

Concept formation plays a pivotal role in organizing human knowledge because it provides the means for recognizing objects and for grouping them into meaningful units in a particular field. In order to categorize an object for the purposes of concept formation， it is necessary to identify its properties （see the Figure 1）. Objects perceived as sharing the same properties are grouped into units. Once similar objects， or occasionally a single object， are viewed as a meaningful unit of knowledge within a branch of human knowledge， the properties of an object， or those common to a set of objects， are abstracted as characteristics that are combined as a set in the formation of a concept.

Thus， objects in the real world are identified by their properties. The objects are then abstracted as concepts and the properties are abstracted as characteristics making up the concepts. Abstraction is the process of recognizing some set of common features in an individual set of objects and， on that basis， forming a concept of that set of objects.

An identification of key terms used as unit of knowledge and the unique combination of characteristics in definitions of smart city is conducted and can be traced in Appendix B. An identification of essential characteristics in terms of visions and goals， approaches and means， stakeholders and domains concerns in definitions of smart city is conducted and can be traced in Appendix C.

3 Concepts in definitions of smart city from different SDOs and their perspectives

Table 1 shows that there is no unified definition on smart city from different SDOs， even within ISO there are two different definitions on smart city， then during the process of disposition of comments on definition of “smart city” of the 4th CD of IEC 60050-831[6]， there are three definitions of smart city. As a result， there are different perspectives on concepts of smart city from many views with various dimensions.

There are two types of stakeholders concerns on the six definitions of smart city， which are citizens from perspectives of ISO and IEC （D1， D3， D4， D5） and present and future generations from perspectives of ITU-T （D2）.

In terms of domains concern on smart city， ISO focuses on built environment （D1） and natural environment （D3）. While IEC focuses on city （D4）， characteristics of smart city involve city （D4， D5， D6）， international standards and digital transformation （D5） as well as electrotechnical systems and information technology（D6）. In ITU-T， economic， social， environmental as well as cultural （D2） characteristics are concerned as main characteristics of smart city. In terms of object about smart city， city （D2， D3， D4， D5， D6） is the most common concerns for the three SDOs. Furthermore， ISO and IEC also identified integration of physical， digital and human systems as main characteristic of the smart city concept.

In terms of smart city status， smart city is seen with features of “effective integration （D1）” and “increases the pace （D3）” from ISO definitions， while “improvements accelerated （D4）”， “self-organizing system （D5）”， “digital transformation as digitally coordinated systems with its own pace （D5）”，“improvements for services （D6）” are seen as features of smartness from IEC definitions and “innovative” is seen as feature of smartness from ITU-T definition.

There are different means and approaches to smart city from different SDOs， which include：“effective integration of physical， digital and human systems （D1）” and “engage collaborative leadership methods， works across disciplines and city systems， and uses data， information and modern technologies （D3）” from ISO definitions; “effective integration of many and various types of physical， digital and social systems and the transformative use of data and technology （D4）”，“internationally recognized metrics （D5）”， “electrotechnical systems and information technology （D6）” from IEC definitions; “information and communication technologies （ICTs） and other means （D2）” from ITU-T definition. On one hand， it could be observed that different SDOs have different focuses on their approaches and means. Specifically， ISO focuses on engagement with society through collaborative leadership; IEC focuses on transformative use of data and technology and ITU-T focuses on information and communication technologies. On the other hand， there are some common concerns on approaches and means to smart city from all the SDOs， which are using data， information and technologies （D2， D3， D4， D6）.

There are different expectations on visions and goals of smart city from different SDOs， which include： “a sustainable， prosperous and inclusive future （D1）”， “fundamentally improving （D3）” and “provides social， economic and environmental sustainability outcomes and responds to challenges such as climate change， rapid population growth， and political and economic instability， to deliver better services and quality of life （D3）” from ISO; “improvements in quality of life， services， sustainability and resilience （D4）”， “repeatability and scalability of digital solutions （D5）”， “systematically addressing concerns （D5）”， “city services（D6）” from IEC;“improve quality of life， efficiency of urban operation and services， and competitiveness （D2）” from ITU-T. Moreover， “improvement of quality of life （D1， D2， D3， D4）” are the general and essential characteristics and shared understandings for all the SDOs on smart city.

4 Survey of characteristics and concepts of smart city from views of experts

4.1 Characteristics of smart city

A questionnaire survey was conducted to investigate understandings about characteristics of smart city concepts from 29th of April to 14th of May via email. The questionnaire was designed to find the preference of experts on the six collected definitions of smart city and to investigate their understandings about characteristics of smart city concepts， eight questions including seven closed questions and one open question were set in the questionnaire based on the six collected definitions on smart city with identified characteristics （see Appendix C） from Table 1. The questionnaire was sent to experts from IEC SyC Smart Cities by IEC community platform and to experts of different SDOs such as ISO/TC 268/SC 1/WG 4， ISO/IEC JTC 1/WG 11 and ITU-T SG 20 by email. As a result， 14 feedbacks were collected and validated for analysis. By analysis of results of the survey （see Appendix D）， characteristics of smart city concepts are identified as shown in Table 2. A unified concept diagram on smart city from many views and various dimensions is built up and shown in Figure 2， which reflects the essential characteristics， general characteristics and necessary characteristics of smart city concepts and the preference of multiple stakeholders concerns on smart city.

As can be seen above， Figure 2 shows the core concepts in definitions of smart city from different SDOs and their relationships and the common characteristics of smart city concepts.

Characteristics on smart city involves stakeholders concern and domains concern. Citizen is the vital concern which receives 80% to 100% percent agreement from different SDOs in stakeholder concern. Therefore， smart city development might focus on present generation and future generation for its citizens. Stakeholders concern also refers to government and businesses， especially customers. In addition， domain concern refers to diverse features of city which can be divided into digital， environmental， economic， cultural and social aspects. Specifically， digital aspect may involve information technology， digital transformation， electronical systems， data and information. Moreover， environmental aspect includes two elements such as built environment and natural environment while social aspect refers to international standards and coordinated and reflexive system.

Means and approaches for smart city may use methods which refer to collaborative leadership， disciplines and city system， recognized metrics at society level and ICT， electrotechnical systems， use of data and information from modern technologies respectively.

In terms of smart object， integration of physical， digital and social system could be the most important feature of smart city which could provide better understandings and benefits for decision makers， development of sustainability and community. Moreover， effective integration is also essential for smart status. Therefore， it needs digital coordinated system to fulfill pace increase， learning and reflexive then to achieve innovation， improvement accelerated especially services improvement， self organizing system. Finally， in visions and goals of smart city， what smart city is intending to achieve are not only to fulfill competitiveness， instability， liveability， sustainability and resilience， and repeatability and scalability， but also to acquire fundamental improvements of efficiency， concerns addressing， quality of life and better services， especially city services.

4.2 Recommendations for system of systems view to smart city

Figure 3 recommends a system of systems view for smart city and smart city system， IEC SRD 63235：2021[8] has the following recommendations for this：

A system of systems view （see Figure 2） considers the smart city as a complex system， made up of many vertical domains such as transport， health， education， employment and so on. Each of these vertical domains are interconnect by three cross cutting systems that includes views of social system， digital system and physical system of a city and system approach， which work together as a complementary whole in responding to the concerns and interests of different stakeholders[9]2.14. Each of these， in turn， can be subdivided into other horizontal， cross-cutting domains.

Taking this system of systems view enables the total capability of a city to be enhanced in a way to an extent that none of the constituent system can accomplish on its own. Each constituent system is a useful system by itself， having its own management， goals and resources， but when coordinated within the smart city system （SCS） contributes to providing the unique capability of the SCS.

The social system provides a multi-dimensional governance framework[10]3.1 for coordinating arrangements of strategies， policies， decision-making structures and accountabilities to multiple stakeholders concerns in social space and convergence.

A digital system provides a multi-domain architecture framework[11]3.7 for cooperating activities of conventions， principles and practices for individual domain architecture and enable digital transformation.

A physical system provides a multi-layer application framework[12]3.177 to connect artefacts in each subsystem and enable interfaces between systems in physical space to support all necessary interactions.

An integration of the three systems supports the convergence of multi-dimensional， multi-domain and multi-layer concerns and interests of multiple stakeholders as well as enhancing the adaptive capacity of a city as an ecosystem to deliver a sustainable， prosperous and inclusive future for its citizens.

4.3 Recommendations for a methodology framework to smart city system concept

Figure 4 recommends a methodology framework for smart city and smart city system， and the IEC SRD 63235：2021[8] has the following recommendations for this：

A methodology framework refers to a way， or structure， that supports a number of different methods and languages to be used together when developing a system.

Note：This definition of methodology framework is taken from ISO/IEC 16500-8：1999[13]， “different” is added， 3.15.

The methodology framework for a smart city system concept system refers to a system of systems way of thinking that supports multi-dimensional， multi-domain and multi-layer， lifecycle and use case analysis approaches to be used together as a complementary whole in developing a smart city system.

4.4 Recommendation for a unified definition for smart city

Based on the above recommended system of system views and the methodology framework for building the smart city concept in IEC SRD 63235：2021[8]， this paper proposes a inclusive definition of “Smart Cities”. A unified definition for smart city with multi-dimensional and multi-domain views with essential characteristics of smart city based on identified common concerns about smart city from different SDOs is recommended. However， to respect different stakeholders concerns from different domains or subject fields， “note to entry” could be added for the specific concern and the characteristics of the subject field.

That following common understandings about smart city are recommended： （1） seeing the city from a system of systems view from multi-dimension （including human space， physical space and digital space）， multi-domain （including culture， economic， environmental， political， social， etc.） and multi-stakeholders concerns （including citizen， residents， visitors， business， society， future generation， etc. ）; （2） shared visions and goals on improvements of city in sustainability （competitiveness， prosperous， sustainability and resilience） and good quality of life of people and service; （3） shared approaches to city by effective integration of human system， digital system and physical system via transformative use of data， information and technology; （4） shared understanding about the smart status of city as effective， inclusive， innovative， transformative and sustainable; （5） a unified definition for smart city would include the above unit of knowledge and unique combination of the above characteristics， thus following unified definition for smart city is recommended.

A unified definition for smart city is suggested as below：

city （D2，D3，D4，D5，D6） where improvements （D2，D3，D4，D6） in quality of life and， services （D2，D3，D4，D6） for citizen （D1，D3，D4，D5） and sustainability （D1，D2，D3，D4） of society （D1，D3） and the resilience （D4） are facilitated by the effective integration of various types of human （D1，D3，D4）， digital （D1，D2，D3，D4，D5，D6） and physical systems （D1，D3，D4） and the transformation use of data （D1，D4）， information （D3，D4，D5，D6） and technology （D2，D3，D4，D6）

Note 1 to entry： The ISO looks at these aspects from a collaborative leadership perspective.

Note 2 to entry： The IEC looks at these aspects from an electrotechnical perspective.

Note 3 to entry： The ITU-T looks at these aspects from a sustainable development perspective.

5 Conclusion

In conclusion， this paper identifies many and various characteristics of smart city concepts from available definitions from ISO， IEC and ITU-T and justifies them by surveys of fourteen experts from different SDOs. This paper recommends a system of system views and a methodology framework for smart city system concept building and a unified concept diagram for better understanding of different preferences of multi-stakeholders. The above recommendations have been validated and agreed at meetings of IEC SyC Smart Cities. This paper has contributed to effective approaches to cross-domain concept building， which has wide implications to census building in the development of terminology standards and its collaboration and harmonization.

Appendix D A survey of shared understandings on smart city

1. What definition of smart city you prefer that reflects the concerns and interests of a wide group of SDOs？  [Multiple choice]

2. Do you agree the following characteristics in terms of stakeholders concern about smart city？ [Multiple choice]

3. Do you agree the following characteristics in terms of domains aspect about smart city？  [Multiple choice]

4. Do you agree the following characteristics in terms of smart object of smart city？  [Multiple choice]

5. Do you agree the following characteristics in terms of smart status about smart city？  [Multiple choice]

6. Do you agree the following characteristics in terms of visions and goals of smart city？  [Multiple choice]

7. Do you agree the following characteristics in terms of approaches to and means of smart city？ [Multiple choice]

8. Besides above the understandings about smart city， do you have any recommendations about smart city and its characteristics？  [Note fulfillment]（Details are omitted.）

References

[1] SAGER J C. Essays on Definition[D]. Philadelphia： John Benjamins Publishing Co. 2000.

[2] SONG Y， AN X M. Analysis on the concepts and conceptual systems of smart city in International standards based on terminology definitions of ISO， ITU-T and IEC[J]. Standard Science， 2018 （1）： 127-132.

[3] JAMOUS N， HART S W. Towards an Integration Concept of Smart Cities[C]// 2019 2nd International Conference on new Trends in Computing Sciences （ICTCS）. IEEE， 2019.

[4] RAMAPRASAD A，SNCHEZ-ORTIZ A， SYN T. A Unified Definition of a Smart City[C]//JANSSEN M， AXELSSON K， GLASSEY O， et al. International Conference on Electronic Government. Springer， Cham， 2017：13-24.

[5] ISO 1087：2019， Terminology work and terminology science—Vocabulary[S].Switzerland，2019.

[6] IEC 60050-831 ED1， International Electrotechnical Vocabulary （IEV）—Part 831： Smart city systems，6， November 2020 （SyCSmartCities/164/CD）

[7] ISO 704：2009， Terminology work—Principles and methods[S].Switzerland，2009.

[8] IEC SRD 63235：2021， Smart city system—Methodology for concepts building

[9] ISO/IEC 30182：2017，Smart city concept model—Guidance for establishing a model for data interoperability[S].Switzerland，2017.

[10] ISO/IEC TR 38502：2017，（en）Information technology—Governance of IT—Framework and model[S].Switzerland，2017.

[11] ISO/IEC/IEEE 24748-1：2018 Systems and software engineering—Life cycle management—Part 1： Guidelines for life cycle management[S].Switzerland，2018.

[12] ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765：2017， Systems and software engineering—Vocabulary[S].Switzerland，2017.

[13] ISO/IEC 16500-8：1999， Information technology—Generic digital audio-visual systems—Part 8： Management architecture and protocols[S].Switzerland，1999.

[14] PAS 180：2014， Smart cities. Vocabulary[S].Switzerland，2014.

[15] ISO/IEC TS 27570：2021， Privacy protection—Privacy guidelines for smart cities[S].Switzerland，2021.

[16] ITU-T FG-DPM， Technical Specification D0.1 Data processing and management for IoT and smart cities and communities： Vocabulary[S].Switzerland，2019.

[17] IEC/ISO/ITU， Smart City Coordination Task Group： 2019 Draft White Paper： Suggested priority terms in need of common definitions to support standards activities for smart city[S].Switzerland，2019.

[18] ITU-T Y.4900/L.1600 （06/2016） Overview of key performance indicators in smart sustainable cities[S].Switzerland，2016.

[19] ITU-T Y.4501（07/2019） Vocabulary for smart cities and communities[S].Switzerland，2019.

[20] ISO 37122：2019， Sustainable cities and communities—Indicators for smart cities[S].Switzerland，2019.

[21] ISO/IEC 30145-2：2020， Information technology—Smart city ICT reference framework—Part 2： Smart city knowledge management framework[S].Switzerland，2020.

First Author and Correspondence Author：

AN Xiaomi （1965—）， Female， Professor， Convener of IEC SyC Smart Cities/WG 1; Convener of Data Use in Smart City Task Force in ISO/IEC JTC 1/WG 11; Member of ISO TC 268/SC 1/WG 4 on Data Exchange and Sharing; Member of Chair Advisor Group of ISO TC 46/SC 11 and chair of its Terminology Task Force;Member of IEC-ISO-ITU Joint Smart Cities Task Force （J-SCTF）; Co-project leader of IEC TC1/JPT 3 （IEV part terminology relating to systems， smart and digita）.E-mail：anxiaomi@ruc.edu.cn.

第一作者與通讯作者：

安小米（1965—），女，教授，IEC智慧城市系统委员会术语工作组召集人及其主席顾问组委员，ISO/IEC JTC 1/WG 11智慧城市工作组注册专家及其智慧城市的数据利用任务组召集人，IEC-ISO-ITU-T智慧城市通用任务联合工作组委员，IEC/TC 1/JPT 3（系统、智慧和数字转型）术语标准联合项目负责人之一，ISO/TC 46/SC 11主席顾问组委员及其术语任务负责人，ISO/TC 268/SC 1/WG 4智慧城市基础设施数据共享与交换工作组注册专家。通信方式：anxiaomi@ruc.edu.cn。

WEI Wei（1988—）， Male， Ph.D. Student of Renmin University of China，  Member of IEC SyC Smart Cities WG 1， Member of ISO/TC 268/SC 1/WG 4.

魏玮（1988—），男，中国人民大学信息资源管理学院博士研究生，IEC智慧城市系统委员会术语工作组注册专家，ISO/TC 268/SC 1/WG 4智慧城市基础设施数据共享与交换工作组注册专家。

MIN Jinghua（1961—）， Male， Professor of engineering， Member of IEC SyC Smart Cities/WG 1; Member of ISO/IEC JTC 1/WG 11 and its Data Use in Smart City Task Force; Member of ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27， SC 42， WG 13 and AG 8; Member of ITU-T SG 17.

闵京华（1961—），男，教授级高级工程师，IEC智慧城市系统委员会术语工作组注册专家，ISO/IEC JTC 1/WG 11智慧城市工作组注册专家及其智慧城市数据利用任务组成员，ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27信息安全和网络空间安全与隐私保护分委员会、SC 42人工智能分委员会、WG 13可信赖工作组和AG 8系统集成的元参考架构和参考架构咨询组注册专家，ITU-T SG 17安全研究组注册专家。