The 100 Resilient Cities programme resembled a large-scale urban experiment, with the strategies that many of the cities produced offering a rich source of information for analysis. Over 80 final strategies have been published; although cities from North America are overrepresented, there is broad geographic coverage.
A few of the 80+ strategies published by city governments
As the previous iteration of the programme has ended, academic analyses of the strategies have continued to grow. For example, Taylor et al. (2020) use latent content analysis to assess how the resilience strategies of 14 cities in Europe, North America and Oceania conceptualise future uncertainty. Fitzgibbons and Mitchell (2019) examine the extent to which 31 resilience strategies focus on social equity and justice using content analysis; their sample included cities from the Global South and North.
I have compiled a spreadsheet of all the published strategies here (last updated July 2020). Please feel free to add any that I have missed. At the time of writing the 100 Resilient Cities website (home to most of the strategies) appears to be offline, so let me know if you would like access to the complete set of strategies, which I have both as PDFs and plain text files.
A new report published today explores how different sectors can work together to improve health outcomes at a regional level. I was delighted to be the lead author for this report with NHS Confederation, the Yorkshire & Humber Academic Health Science Network, and Yorkshire Universities.
Even before the pandemic, the government had given a clear commitment to âlevel upâ the regions, which means enabling regions to realise their full potential as part of an overall plan to narrow gaps in prosperity across the country. The economic aftershock of COVID-19 will hit communities hard â making the levelling up agenda more challenging but even more vital.
The report welcomes the growing focus nationally on both âhealthâ and âplaceâ â and sets out how we can align these with a bold ambition for improving quality of life and economic opportunities.
There is a particular focus on the tricky but vital mechanics of cross-sector collaboration, bringing together universities, local government, the health and care sector, business and communities. The traditional wisdom of carefully nurturing partnerships over time needs to be balanced by types of rapid response and new partnerships forged in the response to COVID-19. Read the full report here.
What follows is a simplified version of this workflow. Itâs great for rapid literature surveys, and Iâve done a few recently for non-academic projects. No reference managers or specialist software are required. I use Ulysses for Mac to do my writing in the workflow below, but any text editor on any platform will do.
1. Gather everything in one place
Save all the documents you will be reviewing in a folder. Optionally, split by type: in the example images below I have a folder for academic articles, and another for assorted reports, website pages and other publicity material.
Academic source documents
Number these sequentially, as in the images. As you work through them, you may wish to label them as read (Iâve used a green tag to remember which ones I have reviewed).
Non-academic source documents
(Skip to the bottom if youâre a Mac user and want to know how to find articles on Google Scholar incredibly quickly).
2. Create loose headers or categories (optional)
If it will save sorting time later, create headers in a text document corresponding to the final output. For example, in my latest project this was simply âintroductionâ, âdevelopmentâ, âoutcomesâ, âfutureâ.
3. Scan the documents
As you read each document, copy and paste the key information into your text file. The less you copy, the easier the final review becomes. Before each extract, put the document number or letter from step 1. Add comments if helpful.
Pasting extracts from source documents. ‘F’ and ‘6’ refer to difference sources
Ulysses offers advantages for taking notes: you can quickly navigate between headers using keyboard shortcuts, and you can easily distinguish comments from pasted text. But other programs will work fine.
4. Sort into sub-categories (optional)
In this example, after working through 19 documents I had over 7,000 words of notes, which was a little unwieldy. To speed things up later, I had identified themes and quickly moved text around within new sub-categories (two or three within each of the four main headers). This should be a quick and crude exercise; donât worry about missing things as the next stage will capture these.
Adding sub-categories. This should be a quick and crude process
5. Duplicate, write and delete
Create a copy of your notes. Name it something like âDELETABLEâ so you donât mix it up with your main notes.
You now begin writing. As you draw from your notes, cite the source with the number of the document, preceded by any unique character (in the image below, the footnote would contain the text â@3â to indicate source document number 3, for example, with the page number included if needed). The reason for the unique character will become clear in the next step.
Writing the final output
When youâve included content from your notes, delete it from the copy. If you decide you no longer want or need to use an extract, delete it. As you proceed, the copy of your notes will get shorter and shorter.
In Ulysses, I have a second editor open with the deletable notes on the left, and the final output being written on the right.
6. Tidy up references
When youâve finished writing, do a find and replace on each source reference (e.g. â@3â) with the full reference. Saving this until the end means you arenât distracted with referencing when you should be writing. And using the unique character before the source number (e.g. â@â) means you arenât searching through every number in the document.
As with the previous longer workflow, the flow in workflow is important. For effective results, do all of the above quickly. Any wait between collecting extracts from documents and writing means the broader context (information that you havenât copied and pasted, but will be in your mind), is likely to fade.
Bonus: searching Google Scholar from your Mac
I use the excellent Alfred application for quick keyboard control of my computer. A custom search allows me to search Google Scholar from Alfred, by typing âscholarâ followed by the search term.
Custom search for Google Scholar using the Alfred MacOS application
Here is how custom searches work, and here is my custom search (if you have Alfred installed, clicking this should import to your library).
The 2019 NCEE leadership survey report was launched last night in London, capturing the views of over 50 senior higher education leaders.
The report sits alongside, but has a different focus to, other snapshot surveys of UK higher education: PAâs annual look at the views of vice chancellors on funding and policy, and Wonkheâs survey of university staff working in policy.
I provided the analysis and wrote the report. Read my blog on 10 key findings here, coverage in Times Higher Educationhere, and the full report (PDF) here.
A final quick post on my recent British Council research before we resume our usual programming: todayâs i newspaper (23 July 2019) has a short piece from myself covering universities and smart cities in Nottingham, on page 18.
You can read the full report here, a summary on The Conversation here, and a podcast of the smart cities session at Going Global 2019 in Berlin here.
An abandoned mine shaft beneath the town of Mansfield, England is an unlikely place to shape the future of cities. But here, researchers from the nearby University of Nottingham are planning to launch a âdeep farmâ that could produce ten times as much food as farms above ground. Deep farms are an example of what the latest wave of smart cities look like: putting people first by focusing on solving urban problems and improving existing infrastructure, rather than opening shiny new buildings.
These smart cities look nothing like science fiction. In fact, the sleek, futuristic visions often used to promote smart cities tend to alienate residents. Isolated high-tech buildings, streets or cities can foster social inequality, and even free WiFi and bike-sharing schemes mainly benefit the affluent.
So instead of chasing ribbon-cutting opportunities in city centres, planners, community leaders and researchers are coming together to tackle mundane but serious issues, such as improving poor quality housing, safeguarding local food supplies and transitioning to renewable energy.
In my own research, commissioned by the British Council, I looked at how new projects and partnerships with universities in eight European cities are making life better for residents, through the clever use of technology. You may already be living in a smart city â hereâs what to look out for.
More voices
Students bridging the divide. AndrĂŠs Gerlotti/Unsplash.FAL.
These new smart cities are getting communities and universities involved, alongside big companies and city authorities. This has helped shift the focus of smart city projects onto the needs of residents. During my interviews in cities across Europe â from Bucharest, Romania to Warsaw, Poland and Zaragoza, Spain â I found that university students and researchers have played an active role in this, consulting with residents and working with city hall to promote cooperation between citizens and local institutions.
Universities produce a wealth of knowledge about the kinds of problems facing cities, and there is often a need to make more people aware of new research, so they can shape it, use it and build on it. In Milan, the City School initiative brings together the Municipality of Milan and six local universities to discuss issues facing the city. Universities take turns to showcase research and activities, and city officials test urban policy ideas with experts.
But above all, communities are now part of the conversation. The EU-funded Sharing Cities programme, led by city halls and universities in London, Lisbon and Milan, has the audacious goal of proving that at least half of the 15,000 locals affected by improvements have actively participated in the process. As such, city authorities have worked with residents to design and implement smart city technologies including smart lampposts, energy management and e-mobility (smart parking, car sharing, electric charging points and so on) â but also to ensure these changes actually improve their lives.
More complexity
Successful smart city projects blend disciplines, bringing together experts in behavioural change alongside specialists in artificial intelligence and information technologies. Interdisciplinary work can be messy and difficult, it can take longer and may not always work â but when it does, it can bring real benefits to cities.
For instance, Nottingham City Council and Nottingham Trent University have been part of the Remourban regeneration programme, working across sectors with cities around Europe. Homes in the Nottingham suburb of Sneinton have been upgraded with new outside walls and windows, a solar roof and a state of the art heating system – a process that takes just a few days.
The result is improved insulation and reduced energy bills for residents, but also better public health: calculations suggest that bad housing costs the UKâs National Health Service (NHS) ÂŁ1.4 billion a year, and improving the quality of homes can cut visits to local doctors almost by half.
The German city of Darmstadt has worked with citizens, universities, museums and businesses to plan for the future. For smart city projects to be embraced by residents, the benefits of new technologies need to be balanced against the need to manage privacy and security concerns. Darmstadt has set up an ethics advisory committee and has a strong focus on cyber security.
The city was recently crowned winner of the German Digital City competition, and the municipal government is now working with other German cities to share what has worked.
More places
The new wave of smart cities spreads improvements beyond the city centre, with universities from France to Ireland running initiatives to bring residents from surrounding areas onto campus, and take their expertise into local communities.
For instance, when Technological University Dublin and Dublin City Council came together to develop a new campus in the deprived district of Grangegorman, they opened it up to the rest of the city. The community eat with the students in the canteen, new buildings reuse material from the old site, renewable energy is stored locally, with excess power released onto the grid, and signage throughout the campus is the same as the rest of the city, blurring the edges between the university and the city.
Technology can play an important and often decisive role in tackling urban problems. But the smart city of the future is more likely to be defined by quieter upgrades to existing infrastructure and new partnerships that better represent residents, than flashy new developments that resemble visions from science fiction.
James Ransom, PhD candidate, international higher education, UCL. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. (Main image: Grangegorman campus, Technological University Dublin. Technological University Dublin, Author provided)
My latest report for the British Council was launched in Berlin at Going Global a few hours ago. The report draws on interviews with nearly 50 university staff and city officials in eight cities from Bucharest to Zaragoza. It sets out how universities can help build successful âsmart citiesâ, but also the dangers faced if they donât get it right. Read it here (link to report at bottom of page).
Hereâs the intro:
A simple message runs through this report: universities are needed to help tackle the serious challenges faced by towns and cities across Europe. Climate change and changing job markets are complex problems needing a wide-ranging response. Poor quality housing and pollution have plagued cities for centuries and progress will require new partnerships.
City leaders should include universities in the fight against these challenges, and in the push to build better societies. Cities need to upgrade universities from advisory roles to actively shaping and delivering projects. But the real onus lies with universities themselves. Universities need to align themselves with the priorities of the city, to be proactive in building partnerships, and to make sometimes difficult internal changes to better meet local needs.
Thousands of partnerships, projects and pilots are being delivered across Europe – from multi-city programmes to neighbourhood initiatives, some in places at the top of smart city league tables and renowned for their research and innovation, and others in regions grappling with economic uncertainty. Yet leaders and planners across the continent share common challenges. Budgets are tight, populations are growing, and new threats and challenges are appearing. City leaders are required to think beyond their city centre to the broader metropolitan area, balancing regional and national relationships whilst forging new international links. They shoulder growing responsibilities for their city to tick the latest urban policy boxes – to be resilient, sustainable and smart.
Universities are also under financial strain, and often juggle teaching and research with the mantle of being civic institutions. Whilst many university leaders understand that this civic role – to help coordinate social and economic activity, to be a good neighbour and positively shape the place they are in – strengthens their teaching and research, challenges remain. Universities are being called to seek tighter integration with their environment, to form stronger bonds with local communities, and deliver more effective projects with longer term impact whilst growing national and international networks, all within a complex political arena. Even in places with a track record of local partners effectively working together, new thinking and new ideas are required.
This report takes you on a tour of eight European cities. It explores how universities and city hall are working together to tackle the challenges faced in each city. Each city has a unique configuration of institutions and a different history of collaboration between the city hall and local universities. In some cities, both sides are building on decades of close working, in others universities are balancing a history of state control whilst exploring new opportunities to work with city officials. All eight cities, however, illustrate a broader trend – the emergence of a new wave of smart cities, placing universities at the heart of a more inclusive, human-focused movement to build better places and societies.
Smart cities redefined
In 1975 NASA drew up plans for a colony in outer space. Called Stanford Torus, the colony would resemble a small city – housing up to 140,000 residents, drawing on the latest technology, and designed to be completely self-sufficient. Stanford Torus is worth considering for two reasons. The first is a reminder that we have been thinking about âsmartâ cities, and how the latest technology can meet our needs, for a long time (the expansion of Barcelona 150 years ago was designed around the telegraph and railroad). The second is the close resemblance between the artist impressions of Stanford Torus in 1975 and promotional visions of the future city when the hype around smart cities hit around the year 2013.
Discussion around smart cities in 2013 was focused on issues of technology, control, efficiency gains and large infrastructure upgrades, and was driven in part by multinational companies. In his excellent book Smart Cities, published around this period, Anthony Townsend described a vacuum between the top-down, technology-heavy solutions for cities promoted by big companies, and the bottom-up but limited-scale grassroots work of community activists.
The smart city of 2019 looks quite different to that of 2013. The utopian visions have mostly gone (as we will see, they tended to alienate citizens). Movements towards âsmart governanceâ and âsmart citizenshipâ have grown, embodied in initiatives such as open data platforms. This âsecond waveâ of smart cities favours incremental improvements to existing infrastructure rather than entirely new systems. The spotlight is on the needs of residents rather than on glamorous new buildings. Technology may play an important part in solving problems, but it doesnât look like science fiction. And culture and politics have joined the party – the path to the future city may now be a little messier and a bit noisier, but it is also more realistic and more achievable. Accordingly, this report uses a new definition of smart cities: using new ideas and innovations (which might include technology) to improve cities for the people who live, work and visit there.
Townsend predicted that mayors would step into the vacuum between industry and activists and design the smart city of the future. He was right – but mayors and their teams have company. Organisations such as universities can bolster the work of city hall by drawing on the vast amount of research and innovation they deliver, but also working in closer partnership with city hall. This requires universities to concentrate on where they can really add the most value, and for both university and city leaders to pay attention to developing strong processes and structures for collaboration. Universities also work closely with large and small businesses who continue to be an essential part of this partnership. And their work with communities can help ensure a constant focus on inclusivity and participation. This report shows how eight European cities are doing just that.
Did you just land on this site for the first time? đ After this you might like to read the other posts in this series on processes and workflows. Last updated July 2020.
Hereâs my academic writing workflow: it allows me to quickly pull together information from dozens of articles into a structured format that allows new ideas and connections to form. It wonât work for everyone, although there is plenty of scope for customisation.
1. Pulling everything together
I wonât go into great detail here, but I collect all my research materials together first. For me, this is PDFs of articles, reports, and book chapters. In the past I used version 3 of Papers for Mac, but I have recently switched to Zotero, a powerful open source, cross-platform alternative. I group everything by project into smart folders using tags. Google Scholar is invaluable for sourcing articles (Papers allows you to search Google Scholar and import articles from within the application; Zotero has browser integrations to allow one-click importing).
Example screenshot of Papers for Mac: note the highlighted PDF
2. Highlighting and commenting
I now read through everything in rough order of how important I think the article will be. This means later articles can be skim read (when concentration levels are lower) to pick up additional insight or nuance. Whilst reading I highlight relevant paragraphs or sentences â as less is better try to avoid highlighting entire pages â and I add comments with any thoughts or ideas. Papers has this function built in; applications like Skim (open source for Mac) and Highlights (a commercial alternative for Mac and iOS) can also do this, and both play nicely with Zotfile (a Zotero PDF management plugin â great if youâre a fan of keeping everything open source).
All highlights are now exported as plain text files â one per article or report, or a single file with all highlights across all readings. The beauty of highlighting in an application like Skim or Papers is the automatic inclusion of page numbers and other bibliographic information in the exported file.
Depending on the complexity of the project, I may just export all the notes as one giant text file, print this, and start writing. However, in more advanced literature reviews, an extra step is helpful. In this case, I export each reading as an individual file and import these into TAMS Analyzer, an excellent open-source Mac application for qualitative text analysis. Effective use of TAMS Analyzer is a post in itself, but the documentation is fairly solid. (Sadly the application is not 64-bit and hence not compatible with macOS Catalina â but a new version is under development.)
I then work through my imported highlights, and tag them. Usually this will be within 4-5 headings that will naturally emerge from the initial reading: for a recent review of universities and cities, for example, I had the headings âleadershipâ, âinternationalâ, âregionalâ, âurbanâ and âconclusionsâ. Finally, with a couple of clicks, TAMS Analyzer can generate a table with headings at the top, and all of the highlights below â one box per highlight. The source name â drawn from the plain text export of your initial highlights â is appended (usually Author-Year).
The great benefit of this extra step is a single file that can easily contain insight and analysis from twenty or thirty articles (or more). Instead of thirty print outs, you have one â admittedly quite big â file with several thematic groupings, each with a mixture of authors and sources. This makes writing much, much easier.
HTML output from TAMS Analyzer: you can reformat so it’s easier to print (and read)
4. Writing
Again, I wonât go into this too much, as most people have their own tools and preferred way of working. I use the fantastic Ulysses for Mac for nearly all of my writing. Citations are easily managed via your research manager, which sorts all the references and bibliographic information once the final text is exported into Word (or LibraOffice). Ulysses integrates well with Papers (more here) by using the Magic Citations tool to insert references as you write (the source name, Author-Year, is in your table from step three). The process can be replicated very smoothly using open source plugins for Zotero by following this excellent workflow.
I work through the table of notes as I write, often sequentially by thematic heading. This has two main benefits: youâre drawing on notes ordered by theme not author, so you naturally avoid paragraphs with multiple citations from just one source. Second, with excerpts from many sources sitting next to each other in the table, you make new connections between different authors and ideas. Any notes or comments you made on the initial read through are also included.
Papers’ Magic Citations tool used in Ulysses
Concluding comments
This workflow mimics a paper method I used years ago, which took a lot more time (and used a lot more paper). Some may prefer to read from paper copies â I tend to print just the most important articles. Others prefer to write as they read.
For those working outside the social sciences this workflow may not work so well â but Iâd be interested to test this. It doesnât work so well with books unless you have a PDF version, although these are often cumbersome. I tend to take separate notes on books in a plain text file to be used in step three.
Lastly, the flow in workflow is important. If you wait too long between the first few stages and stage four (writing) you begin to lose the connections you form when you make the initial highlights. The wider context of selected sentences is lost, and you forget why you highlighted certain sections in the first place.
