The impact of smart city construction on resident well-being: the mediating role of technology acceptance
Vol 9, Issue 8, 2024, Article identifier:
VIEWS - 38 (Abstract) 25 (PDF)
Abstract
This study investigates the relationships between smart city construction, technology acceptance, and resident well-being, integrating the Technology Acceptance Model with smart city research. Using structural equation modeling and data from 2,187 residents across five smart cities, we examine how smart city initiatives influence technology acceptance and, consequently, resident well-being. Results indicate that smart city construction positively affects perceived usefulness and ease of use of smart technologies, which in turn drive technology acceptance. Technology acceptance significantly mediates the relationship between smart city initiatives and resident well-being, highlighting its crucial role in translating urban innovations into quality of life improvements. The indirect effect of smart city construction on resident well-being through technology acceptance was significant (β = 0.183, p < 0.001), accounting for 37.1% of the total effect. Additionally, a direct positive effect of smart city construction on well-being was observed (β = 0.31, p < 0.001), suggesting benefits beyond active technology engagement. The study contributes to smart city literature by providing empirical evidence for the often-assumed link between smart city development and resident well-being, while also extending the application of the Technology Acceptance Model to urban contexts. These findings have important implications for urban planners and policymakers, emphasizing the need for user-centered design and inclusive development strategies in smart city projects to maximize positive impacts on urban populations.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Albino, V., Berardi, U., & Dangelico, R. M. (2015). Smart cities: Definitions, dimensions, performance, and initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(1), 3-21.
2. Yigitcanlar, T., Kamruzzaman, M., Buys, L., Ioppolo, G., Sabatini-Marques, J., da Costa, E. M., & Yun, J. J. (2018). Understanding 'smart cities': Intertwining development drivers with desired outcomes in a multidimensional framework. Cities, 81, 145-160.
3. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
4. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276-302.
5. Ballas, D. (2013). What makes a 'happy city'? Cities, 32, S39-S50.
6. Belanche-Gracia, D., Casaló-Ariño, L. V., & Pérez-Rueda, A. (2015). Determinants of multi-service smartcard success for smart cities development: A study based on citizens' privacy and security perceptions. Government Information Quarterly, 32(2), 154-163.
7. Kitchin, R. (2015). Making sense of smart cities: addressing present shortcomings. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 8(1), 131-136.
8. Nam, T., & Pardo, T. A. (2011). Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions. In Proceedings of the 12th annual international digital government research conference: digital government innovation in challenging times (pp. 282-291).
9. Hashem, I. A. T., Chang, V., Anuar, N. B., Adewole, K., Yaqoob, I., Gani, A., Ahmed, E., & Chiroma, H. (2016). The role of big data in smart city. International Journal of Information Management, 36(5), 748-758.
10. Cardullo, P., & Kitchin, R. (2019). Being a 'citizen' in the smart city: Up and down the scaffold of smart citizen participation in Dublin, Ireland. GeoJournal, 84(1), 1-13.
11. Yigitcanlar, T., & Kamruzzaman, M. (2018). Does smart city policy lead to sustainability of cities? Land Use Policy, 73, 49-58.
12. Kitchin, R. (2014). The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal, 79(1), 1-14.
13. Hollands, R. G. (2015). Critical interventions into the corporate smart city. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 8(1), 61-77.
14. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 141-166.
15. Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. H. (2008). Know thyself and become what you are: A eudaimonic approach to psychological well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(1), 13-39.
16. Marans, R. W., & Stimson, R. J. (Eds.). (2011). Investigating quality of urban life: Theory, methods, and empirical research. Springer Science & Business Media.
17. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press.
18. Nussbaum, M. C. (2011). Creating capabilities: The human development approach. Harvard University Press.
19. Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2017). The experienced psychological benefits of place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51, 256-269.
20. Spreitzer, G., Sutcliffe, K., Dutton, J., Sonenshein, S., & Grant, A. M. (2005). A socially embedded model of thriving at work. Organization Science, 16(5), 537-549.
21. Zhang, L., Liu, Y., & Chen, X. (2022). The impact of thermal comfort on residents' well-being in smart cities: A systematic review. Sustainable Cities and Society, 76, 103508.
22. Li, J., & Wang, H. (2023). Smart home technologies for enhancing thermal comfort and energy efficiency: A case study in cold climate regions. Energy and Buildings, 277, 112645.
23. Brown, M., Johnson, C., & Smith, A. (2021). Thermal comfort and aging: Challenges and opportunities for smart city development. Journal of Housing for the Elderly, 35(3), 300-318.
24. Park, J. Y., & Nagy, Z. (2022). Adaptive thermal comfort in smart buildings: A comprehensive review and future research directions. Energy and Buildings, 269, 112239.
25. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
26. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
27. Chourabi, H., Nam, T., Walker, S., Gil-Garcia, J. R., Mellouli, S., Nahon, K., Pardo, T. A., & Scholl, H. J. (2012). Understanding smart cities: An integrative framework. In 2012 45th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (pp. 2289-2297). IEEE.
28. Yeh, H. (2017). The effects of successful ICT-based smart city services: From citizens' perspectives. Government Information Quarterly, 34(3), 556-565.
29. Muller, A., Correia, A., & de Brito, P. (2020). Citizen's acceptance of smart city initiatives: A Lisbon case study. Sustainability, 12(21), 9317.
30. Chugan, P. K., Mehta, N., & Prasad, M. (2021). Factors influencing citizens' adoption of smart city services in Indian context. International Journal of Technology Management & Sustainable Development, 20(1), 77-99.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v9i8.2990
(38 Abstract Views, 25 PDF Downloads)
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Wenbin Lu1, Xiaotong Liang
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.