Watchdog details how to build community trust in smart cities

As tech increasingly becomes the future of local government innovation, cities across the U.S. are eager to roll out advanced systems to streamline data analytics and enhance service delivery to their constituents. 

“With a recent expansion in computing power and development in artificial intelligence, the underlying technology is there to enable these kinds of smart technologies,” said Brian Bothwell, director of Engineering and Technology Assessment at the U.S. Government Accountability Office. 

In Texas, for instance, Houston TranStar, the city’s transportation management authority, reported in 2023 that smart transportation technologies, such as sensors, cameras and Bluetooth technology, have helped reduce fuel consumption and other operation costs for the city. 

The smart traffic system has enabled officials to more quickly alert motorists of changing traffic conditions, such as road closures, to avoid an accident or to more quickly adjust traffic signals to help emergency vehicles reach incident scenes more efficiently. Data from the system also helps officials better direct public transit buses or control High Occupancy Vehicle and High Occupancy Toll lanes.

But a new report from GAO highlights the need for officials to consider a slow, cautious approach to building smart cities for long-term success, starting with the people and the data such cities are built on. 

To first identify what problems exist that tech can help solve, governments should consider how to evaluate their communities’ needs effectively. 

Collaboration among academics, governments and other stakeholders can help ensure that resources are “better targeted and results more widely shared, helping to avoid duplication, overlap or fragmentation of research efforts,” the report stated. 

Governments are often limited in available resources and expertise, so engaging with external partners can help facilitate more effective evaluation and review of smart technologies, according to the report. 

It can also help officials better prove to funding providers the return on investment on the adoption and implementation of smart city solutions, Bothwell said. 

Plus, government partners like academic institutions can help facilitate community feedback workshops, which can build trust toward new smart city solutions in their communities among residents, whose data and daily lives are likely to be most affected by such systems, said Takahiro Yabe, assistant professor at New York University’s School of Engineering. 

Residents know best what issues they face in their communities, so their input is crucial for governments to collect when determining what challenges they want to address and how with technological solutions, Yabe said. For instance, officials can work with delivery drivers in a community to consider how to leverage their GPS data to better inform safer working conditions, such as better routes to drive along. 

It’s also critical for governments to maintain transparency regarding the potential benefits and risks of new smart city tech, such as cameras that are installed on public streets for traffic monitoring, according to the report. 

Without clear communication about the tech’s scope of use, residents may raise concerns that the devices are also being used for surveillance purposes, which could disrupt the rollout of innovative solutions, Bothwell said.

Public communications, such as written content, may require multiple language translations to ensure community members are adequately informed. 

“Transparency may reduce the chance that use of the technologies will be disrupted due to misconceptions about their use,” the report stated. 

Officials should also consider establishing data governance and standards for how the government, academics, stakeholders and other partners will store, leverage and dispose of any personal data collected and used by smart city technologies. 

One way to do that, according to the report, is by requiring third parties to obtain the public’s consent to collect their data. City officials, particularly in procurement, should also consider including requirements in vendor contracts, like protective data ownership measures and compliance agreements, so officials can monitor and enforce any data management agreements. 

A contract could require, for instance, that any data collected within the city by a vendor is property of the jurisdiction to limit the selling or mining of residents’ information. Data retention limits are another method for governments to leverage to prevent the misuse of sensitive information. 

While it can be time consuming and costly to develop appropriate research methods, feedback opportunities and data agreements, delaying progress toward achieving a smart city status, failing to do so leaves “so much at stake,” Yabe said. 

Public trust and dollars are on the line with any major smart city project, he said, and that’s “something public agencies need to think about … so that we don’t plow through with uncertain and harmful technology.”