Smart cities: a microcosm of the EU aspirations and challenges

Posledná aktualizácia streda, 04/02/2026

From Santander to Copenhagen, the notion of smart cities seems to be thriving in the European Union. However, are they simply local, hopeful projects? Or do they go beyond, telling us something about the Union itself?

When one thinks about smart cities, their mind might picture flying cars, automated services, and bots roaming around in a very remote future. The reality is that smart cities, if less flashy, are already a key element of our global order, and their role in policy-making and governance will only increase in the next decades. Is this something to look forward to or to be wary about? First, we need to grasp exactly what we are talking about.

What are smart cities?

As digitalisation and innovation have become entrenched in every aspect of our lives, some terms have entered our ordinary vocabulary: digital transformation, cloud computing, and, of course, AI are some of them. ‘Smart cities’ is another one; often mentioned but rarely defined. IBM refers to them as an urban area where technology and data are used to improve sustainability, efficiency and the quality of life of its citizens, whereas the European Commission refers to the combination of traditional networks and digital solutions for the benefit of its inhabitants. In other words, smart cities offer a space where sustainability, digitalisation, and urban innovation come together to ameliorate the lives of their inhabitants. However, what does this actually look like in practice?

A quick review of the history of smart cities offers some clarity. Although the origins of this idea can be traced back to attempts to collect and use data for policy purposes back in the seventies in the US, the first imprints of a smart city in Europe appeared in the 1990s, in the Dutch capital of Amsterdam. With the establishment of a network making Internet connection accessible to its inhabitants and, in this way, facilitating communication between the government and its citizens (De Digital Stad or The Digital City), Amsterdam became a pioneer in the smart city transformation. Although the initiative ended in 2001, the smart cities movement progressively gained momentum, both in the academic and governance spheres. The historic number of participants to the 2025 Smart City Expo World Congress this November in Barcelona, over 27.000, can be seen as proof of this “smart city fever”, although most likely not as its climax.

Ugo Valenti, Director of this Congress for the past 12 years, explains how the development of this event throughout the years reflects the evolution in the “smart city” concept: from the early conceptual stage where smart cities and their importance began to be talked about, to the later shift in emphasis towards deploying the necessary technology, to the current focus on the human component. “Far from losing excitement”, he explains, “the concept has matured into a practical, people-first movement that is more relevant than ever”.

Today, over a hundred cities in the European Union are considered to be smart cities or are in the process of becoming one. These include Vienna, Grenoble, Bratislava, Sofia and many more.  “Europe has a clear, distinctive approach: collaborative, citizen-centric, and sustainability-driven”, points Valenti. Despite the deeply local nature of smart cities, he argues that EU-level action allows for scalability and shared standards whilst local identity is preserved.  Projects, both publicly and privately financed, touch upon a wide range of issues such as clean energy, smart mobility, and market efficiency. Indeed, smart cities tackle many of the EU’s main policy and social priorities. Does this mean that they are condemned to face the same hurdles and limitations?

Common threads in Smart cities and the Union: autonomy, social inclusion and youth representation

It is no secret that, during the last few years, the Union has faced some major policy challenges, closely related to its digital and sustainability strategy, many of which are still currently present. Profoundly versed in its Twin Transition plan (both digital and environmental), policy-makers in Brussels are constrained by obstacles in the areas of innovation, sustainability and autonomy, whose seriousness has worsened as international relations grow tenser. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine or Trump’s tariff war are some of these elements.

In many senses, smart cities and the ambitions they bring with them mirror the very tensions the Union is confronted with on a larger scale. If we think about the EU’s strategic autonomy priority, contradictions appear from the outset. Whilst the Union takes pride in working towards reducing external dependencies and reliance on third-party technologies and resources, the reality remains that most elements on the digital chain are still sourced from foreign countries, mostly China and the United States. These include cloud services, critical minerals or AI systems. How can this be reconciled with the dependence on technology for smart cities' infrastructures to work? “It is indeed a delicate balance”, admits Valenti; the EU simply cannot lead in every innovation field. In this context, regulation and Union-level initiatives to foster local innovation ecosystems, such as the EIT KICs or the New European Innovation Agenda,  become fundamental to give an answer to this dilemma at both the local and European levels.

Furthermore, social inclusion remains a point of contestation. For all that the Union emphasises the social dimension of the transition (the motto for the green transition being “a transformation that leaves no one behind”), questions arise as to the social effects of the smart city movement. Indeed,  the development of smart cities across member states has been clearly unequal, with countries in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe struggling to keep up due to investment and infrastructure capabilities. In this sense, may these urban innovation projects actually be furthering national disparities? How about differences within countries? Are smart cities aggravating the urban and rural divide? The lack of an equivalent “smart village” concept appears to be telling in this sense. According to Valenti, we need policies and funding mechanisms capable of extending solutions in cities to the territory as a whole. “This might be a topic to explore in future editions of Smart City Expo”, he adds.

Finally, youth participation or rather, the difficulties around ensuring it, presents a point of convergence in both the urban and European spheres. Valenti seems to have no doubts on this issue: “Young Europeans must be at the heart of urban transformation”, he affirms. Not only will they live in the cities we are designing, he goes on, but they also provide the smart city movement with the necessary creativity and digital skills and with a firm emphasis on sustainability. Smart cities call for youth involvement in participatory processes just as EU policy and decision-making do.

With all their ambitions, smart cities show some important shadows as well. According to Valenti, smart cities symbolise both the strengths and uncertainties of the Union: "Strength, because cities are leading in global sustainability and inclusion efforts; uncertainty, because they reflect the same tension Europe faces”.

The symmetry between local and European dilemmas becomes more striking every day. Finding answers, then, becomes an increasingly urgent task for both citizens and policy-makers at all government levels. Perhaps, the answers to big issues are waiting at our very doorsteps.

Young Journalists in Europe - Meet the author

Ángela Garrido Rivera

“As I finish my EU Competition Law Master's, I see the European Youth Portal as the perfect scenario to combine my fascination for EU affairs with my biggest passion: storytelling.”

This article reflects the views of the authors only. The European Commission and Eurodesk cannot be held responsible for it.