Preprints202011 0487 v1

Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 18 November 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202011.0487.
v1
Type of the Paper (Review)
Sustainability and resilience in smart city planning: a

review
Leonardo Juan Ramirez Lopez1* and Angela Ivette Grijalba Castro2
1 Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, TIGUM research group; [email protected]
2 Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, PhD student in applied science; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +573114905014, Bogotá, Colombia. Address:
Carrera 11 #101-80. Bogotá, Colombia
Abstract: Urban planning is recognized as an interaction between the state and society, which aims
to articulate public policies in the territory, facilitating their administration in favor of greater
development and well-being of society. However, this interaction becomes complex because
consumption demands increase, and the needs of the community exceed the capacity of the urban
ecosystem to supply them, hindering its sustainable functionality. With this panorama, it becomes
relevant to study urban planning from a sustainable environmental planning perspective, based on
four topics: urban planning, sustainability, resilience and smart cities. The methodology used is
based on a bibliometric study through a PRISMA adjustment to 87 articles, supported by
VOSviewer® to construct and visualize the co-occurrence networks of important terms extracted
from a body of scientific literature. The main result is to consider cities with a complex systems
approach that works like a gear, that is, there is a connective element between inter- and intra-urban
processes. This relationship is the key factor that allows understanding their synchronization,
stating that the deepening of each of these topics is crucial to the ideal of a territorial administration
through time scales, by means of adaptive cycles, allowing to provide new tools to concepts such as
carrying capacity and the measurement of the environmental footprint.
Keywords: keyword 1. Planning; keyword 2. resilience, keyword 3. territory; keyword 4. Smart City;
keyword 5. Sustainability
1. Introduction
Planning a territory becomes complex to the extent that the needs of its community exceed its
capacity to supply them. One of the great challenges of the 21st century is to guarantee the
functionality of urban ecosystems in a sustainable way, overcoming challenges such as increasing
urban densification, the few natural resources to supply the basic elements like infrastructure,
sanitation, transport, energy, decent housing, security, employment, health, recreation and
education. The above factors are addressed from a sustainable environmental planning perspective,
based on four topics: urban planning, sustainability, resilience and smart cities.
i. Urban Planning
Urban planning is understood as a process of interaction between the government and society,
this relationship aims to articulate public policies and their implementation in the territory with local,
regional and country priorities in general, facilitating the administration in favor of a greater
development and well-being of society [1].
In Colombia, an example of the traditional urban planning instruments such as Development
Plans and Territorial Planning Programs - TPP, have been deficient, managed under a totalizing
approach, these promote the destruction of valuable natural resources in the peripheries, as well as
the urban expansion [2]. The latter with a rapid and disorderly trend, drastically reducing rural areas
with potential for agricultural use [3,4].
© 2020 by the author(s). Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY license.

Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 18 November 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202011.0487.v1
2 of 25
On the other hand, well-thought-out cities are decisive in the solution of sustainable urban
planning, because they are the most efficient way of living, tending to the optimization of resources
and a lower environmental impact per area [5,6]; Thus, the current urban planning must consider
environmental and socioeconomic variables associated with population densification in a combined
and symbiotic way [7]; allowing to build a model of territory that favors decision-making and that is
applicable to other environments, such as complex systems [8].
Nevertheless, urban planning has faced the imbalances caused by urban expansion,
overexploitation, and the Western consumer society; between 1900 and 2000 the number of
inhabitants increased by approximately 220 million [9]. This is how the importance of deepening
urban flows that include the cost of economic agents and the rate of depletion of natural resources,
guaranteeing an inventory of the latter so as not to use them beyond their regeneration capacity, takes
shape [10,11]; managing to generate indicators for the analysis of ecosystem urban planning that
allows us to capture an approximate panorama of the territory [3,12].
This leads to the need to change obsolete urban and regional planning models for innovative
smart and sustainable models, where an analysis of the transformation of the peripheries in tune with
environmental variables that minimize environmental deterioration, as well as the elements of risk
generated on an ecosystem, forcing the recognition and understanding of natural systems under
sustainability and resilience criteria that lead to smart city planning criteria.
II. Sustainability
The concept of sustainability is perceived from the understanding of urban ecological systems
and depends on environmental management in favor of improving the quality of life of its
beneficiaries [13]; being the environmental footprint an instrument to analyze consumption and
lifestyles, however, the results of this do not guarantee a decision-making oriented towards
sustainability [14,15]. In addition to this, the concept is perfected under the criteria that correspond
to the principle of habitability, from its environmental dimension, the criterion of physical well-being
that guarantees safety and comfort; and from its social dimension, the criterion of social welfare that
pursues the formation of senses of appropriation and belonging, and universal access to urban
services [16]; where it is clearly specified that this should not revolve around a principle of economic
growth and territorial expansion, but rather a sustainable development approach in search of the
balance of ecosystems [17] However, ISO 37101: 2016 proposes sustainability under an economic,
social and environmental context, supporting and evaluating its performance in this area, limiting
the analysis to the territory, promoting the development of a multi-stakeholder process [18,19].
To carry out a transformation process that allows obtaining levels of production and
sustainability, urban ecology focuses on the interaction between urban and ecological systems, that
is, coupled human-environmental systems [20], under the premise that systems must remain in
balance and need a permanent flow of energy, matter and information, manifested through a complex
and systemic holistic character [21]; thus creating an interest in developing urban interventions from
a comprehensive perspective, which takes into account the sustainable provision of ecosystem
services [22].
iii. Resilience
The concept of resilience in sustainable land planning for some academics’ demands clarification
from both theoretical and practical analysis of implementation in urban public policies. Thus, ISO
37123: 2019 takes the concept of "resilient city, which is capable of handling all the challenges of a
changing world, counting on a level of preparation for extreme events, as well as its capacity to
respond and rebuild in the face of they are creating innovative initiatives” [11,23,24].
In the same way, a concept approach towards adaptation to climate change also emphasizes the
new design and planning challenges, which must generate paradigm breaks including a resilient
vision [25]; Nonetheless, another analysis from the perspective of an urban ecosystem as a complex
system that is composed of three stages, change, adaptation and transformation, suggests how the
3 of 25
transformations can be expected or unexpected and that they return to their essential functions [26,27
].
It is necessary to consider that this adaptive cycle does not occur in a short-term period, because
although initially the environment enters a moment of catharsis, its response capacity occurs in the
long term [28]. More recently, the elements of resurgence and internal transformation that help to
situate the debate in the most current terms of evolutionary resilience are highlighted [29]; For this
reason, it is necessary to take advantage of the networking of this complex system to reorganize the
structures and available resources [30,31], and also integrate environmental services into the
assessment [32,33,34].
The resilience analysis lacks assessment tools that allow landing the adaptation capacity of a
complex system that evolves over time and is based on the relationship between the components of
the internal system, addressing it as the analysis of a process. In addition, it states that increasing a
city's resilience makes it more sustainable, but increasing a city's sustainability does not necessarily
make it more resilient, and this is where we can see how a process is given by stages that link the
effectiveness of its responses to the hand of intelligent cities. [21, 35].
iv. Smart Cities

The smart city concept is established as those "cities with an intelligent economic, institutional,
social and physical infrastructure, which ensure the centralization of their citizens in a sustainable
environment", this being a great challenge to be achieved [36,37].
Thus, ISO 37122:2019 "Sustainable Cities and Communities - Indicators for smart cities"
establishes a series of integrated and interconnected strategies and systems to provide better services
and increase the quality of life [38-40]; ensuring equal opportunities for all and protecting the
environment and including some development factors [41-43]; generating a great capacity for
learning, innovation and creativity alongside with institutionally, leading it towards an inclusive
model [38, 44]. This means placing the citizen at the center, giving him/her a role that supports
technological development and efficiency, which is achieved through a sustainable and participatory
system, strengthening the Collective Intelligence to information and communication technologies -
ICT [38, 45], and using governance to project a vision of the future with an intelligent combination of
endowments and activities of independent and conscientious citizen [46].
On the other hand, other considerations of a smart city in the measure of the integrated use of
ICT, among the most outstanding are internet networks -IP, mobile, in the cloud, Big Data and
Internet of Things -IoT, this last one promotes the transition towards the Intelligent City in a practical
way, because it is applicable in small sectors of a population and enhances the areas of development
of these [47].
2. Materials and Methods

To delve into the topics raised above, a systemic review of literature available in
multidisciplinary scientific journals was carried out. The objective of the review focuses on the
availability of information related to the conceptualization and the different approaches
used. Subsequently, we evaluate the progress made by different researchers around the world,
classifying and studying peer-reviewed journal articles accordingly as shown in Figure 1 whose
evaluation process is done in four phases:
a. For the compilation of the information, different search engines of scientific bases were used
(such as Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar), the above through the use of Boolean
operators "AND" and "OR", documents were included from 2010 to 2020 whose titles or abstracts
contain:
(TITLE-ABS-KEY ("Urban* Planning*") OR
TITLE-ABS-KEY ("urban ecosystems") AND
TITLE-ABS-KEY ("sustainability") OR
TITLE-ABS-KEY ("urban resilience") O
4 of 25
TITLE-ABS-KEY ("smart cities"))

The inclusion criteria used were: such as being an open data investigation and limited to areas of
interest such as social sciences, Engineering, Computer Science, Urbanism and Agricultural
Sciences, were considered; in addition, articles in the following languages were considered:
English, Portuguese and Spanish.
b. Identification of duplicates was required, as some articles appeared in more than one database.
c. For the quality evaluation, the PRISMA tool was used for each article, providing an objective
comparison between the articles and their classification.
d. Finally, grouping is applied through the use of VOSviewer®, applying in the latter a viewer of
keywords where they are correlated, giving each word a weight according to the number of times
it is mentioned in the selected information.
Figure 1. Methodology of analysis

With this approach, the common points and the differences between Urban Planning,
Sustainability, Resilience, Smart Cities were determined, to identify key elements that can be used
for their conceptualization.
2.1 Co-occurrence analysis

To better understand the approach of the four topics, we used the method stated above (in 103
articles from 1970 to 2020 that included the Boolean formulation), building networks of co-occurrence
of keywords. Figure 2 shows the dominant position using the VOSviewer® tool: more than 22 terms
out of 122 in total linked in these studied topics (Urban Planning, Sustainability, Resilience and Smart
Cities).
Only seven terms represent the approach domain of the formulation: city, smart city, sustainable
development, resilience, urban planning, urban planning and sustainability.
5 of 25
Figure 2. Co-occurrence analysis of terms

In the discourse of urban planning, those words that obtained higher weight were: urbanism,
sustainable development, city and smart city, perceiving the need of academics for articulate the three
classic dimensions: environmental, economic and social supported by technology, with a behavior
very similar to the cluster linked to sustainability, urban resilience, and smart city.
Additionally, it could be determined that the ideal path for the construction of territory will be
carried out only through sustainable development without giving sufficient importance to the
variables of resilience, urban resilience and risk management, which could not guarantee the
improvement of the quality of life that is ultimately one of the goals of land planning.
That is, in the construction of territory under these four topics, a city is considered as something
static that is not perceived as a complex system, leaving aside internal processes or macro and micro,
as adaptive cycles, moving away from the implementation of a strategic planning of territory.
3. SUSTAINABILITY AND RESILIENCE IN SMART CITIES PLANNING

3.1. Temporary study of Urban Planning -UP
In some countries the delimitation of the territory is established by states or departments, cities,
provinces, municipalities and sidewalks. The municipalities are understood as a fundamental
territorial unit of the political-administrative organization of the state; where the population inhabits
and makes up the territories, giving the responsibility to urban planning of harmonize economic
growth, care environmental and social equity [48].
In Colombia, it is reported the case of the Municipal Development Plan –MDP, which it defines
as the navigation chart in the pursuit of objectives in favour of improving the quality of life of its
beneficiaries, while the Territorial Planning Program - TPP is a tool for the spatial expression of
development policies to be pursued, that is, it delimits land uses and occupations of space according
to the aptitudes and ecological and social limits, minimizing the conflicts of the use of the territory,
as well as the environmental impacts [49,50].
In this process it is essential to visualize the territory in a comprehensive manner, with a
consonant link between urban and rural areas [51], allowing to assertively propose the design of
strategies that guide the growth and potential of the region that enables the acceptance and
articulation between the political and governance levels [52,53]. Consequently, cities become a
common, dynamic space with the obligation to adapt to common needs, leading to continuous
evolution [54].
The conceptual evolution and perception from its origin to the present, goes through four
phases: Natural Planning, Empirical Planning, Functional Planning and Modern Planning.
6 of 25
a. Natural Urban Planning: Leaving behind their nomadic nature, human beings begin their
sedentary lifestyle by forming cities and building spaces for their group activities, where the basic
organizing element around water sources. It means, if there was a water well within the area to
be built, the growth of the settlement was distributed centrally, but if it was a river, it extended
parallel to its shore [54,55].
A clear example of the first sedentary groups occurred in Uruk (Mesopotamia, 4500 BC) where
temples of a length of 68 meters were built that being the first ceremonial centers, they convert a
structure of political and religious control, giving the beginnings and later development of
agriculture and livestock activities constituting as the first agricultural villages [56].
b. Empirical Urban Planning: Over time, man begins to accumulate experiences in the construction
of cities, generating the first environmental impacts when rethinking the spaces with the
particular characteristics and that supply the specific needs of the human population, what ended
up categorizing the land, it could be thought that it would be the beginning of the figure of land
uses [54].
Following the example given above, for the year 2500 - 1700 a. C in lower Mesopotamia, with the
emergence of a stratified society, with armies and an increasingly complex institutionalized
religion that demanded a greater effort from the worker in order to feed the growing population
and the demands of the high elites monopolizing urban and agricultural tasks. The
overexploitation of soil resources was such that the first salinization occurred as a result of
intensified agriculture, resulting in irreversible decline of agriculture by 900 BC. and as a
consequence generating the first forced displacements [56,57].
In the Middle Ages (476 to 1492 AD), the basis of the economy continued to depend on agriculture
and the clergy, this had become an administrative authority of the empire in the main towns,
giving way to feudalism, and later becoming centers of interregional commerce. However, this
era was characterized by the displacement of the urban population to the countryside, dispersing
it even more as a result of the change in the base of political power [58, 59].
In order to strengthen, the cities offered not only security and work, but also freedom from the
injustices of the countryside, creating a new category of common people who not only worked
as intermediaries or traders, but also provided a series of strictly urban services that make a city,
such as plumbing and carpentry, among others [58,60].
In the modern era between 1493 - 1789, the Catholic kings promoted ordinance policies, even
leaving aside the medieval privileges, which mainly sought the protection of public spaces,
classification of land use for agricultural and livestock exploitation and irrigation districts, in
turn, the beautification of the city took on special importance, promoting large construction
projects [60,61].
Thus, a connection is beginning to be woven between the phenomena of urbanization, social
stratification, demand for natural resources and ecological degradation for territory planning.
c. Functional Urban Planning: The arrival of the industrial revolution was the impetus for change
in agriculture, transport, communication, economy and society, as well as in territorial planning
from a purely utilitarian perspective. At this moment, the concept of functionalism is born,
leaving empiricism aside and visualizing territorial planning as an integrated whole that should
function effectively for the benefit of the territory's economic bases
From 1902 to 1930, the constant in the cities was the precariousness of public services, therefore,
even the urban expansion continued being around the water sources as in its natural stage. in
addition to this, the construction of houses emerges with force to supply the high offer of the
traditional families, creating in general terms the first formalizations of land use from basic norms
supported by instruments to grant construction licenses [62].
Between 1931 and 1960, the need to widen the roads was proposed in order to distribute traffic
less homogeneously, emphasizing the differences between streets with dominant vehicle or
pedestrian use. The concern for the provision of equipment such as schools, hospitals, more
7 of 25
modest housing and parks on a local scale with some meadow, satisfying mainly the needs of the
high-income sectors, acquiring special importance for professionals in the areas of engineering
and architecture [ 62-64].
Although by this time there was a legal framework to regulate the physical expansion of the city,
which was already disorderly, this policy still did not involve a citizen participation approach.
By the early 1960s, the levels of regional and urban political-administrative division were evident,
making poverty belts more noticeable by categorizing areas as good or bad [62,65].
It is not surprising that at this point this approach does not yet build a real plan of the city to
which it is desired to reach, it emphasizes on setting guidelines to guide the daily actions of the
city, that is, the city planned on immediacy.
d. Modern Urban Planning: At the beginning of the 1970s, the economic growth registered in the
industrialized countries as a result of the post-war period produced the industrial reconversion
to mass production, mainly to the war industry. At the same time, in another part of the world
they faced acute crises food, serious deterioration of agricultural systems coupled with
population growth, with a common denominator: the depletion of resources, the excessive
increase in population and per capita consumption [66].
In 1972, at the Stockholm, Earth Summit, the United Nations Organization - UN laid the
foundations for interaction between the environment and socio-economic aspects, which allowed
to influence in the change of economic growth, since it was clear that the externalities produced
resulted in unwanted consequences in a process of environmental degradation, a fact that was
increasingly evident in the deterioration of air, water, soil and biodiversity quality. At this
stage, the rise of legal instruments for environmental monitoring called "end-of-pipe" or "end-of-
stack", so-called because it seeks to control pollution at the end of the process to treat for example,
the liquid effluents and gaseous emissions, but it did not contribute to the prevention of
environmental damage nor did it change the nature of the productive processes towards some
cleaner and more efficient ones, in terms of the use of material and energy resources [67].
However, in order to make the responsibility of the human being in the environmental
deterioration more evident, the idea of sustainable development was born in 1980 during the
declaration of the World Conservation Strategy elaborated by the International Union for the
Conservation of Nature -IUCN with the advice and financial support of the World Wildlife Fund
-WWF and the United Nations Environment Program -UNEP, supported by three main
objectives: to maintain essential ecological processes and vital systems, to preserve genetic
diversity and to ensure the sustainable use of species and ecosystems [68]. Years later, this opened
the way to the European Regional/Spatial Planning Charter (1983), where Spatial Planning -SP is
presented as a geographical expression of the economic, social, cultural and ecological policies of
every society (point 8), the balanced development of the territory (point 9), taking into account
the human being and his well-being, in his interaction with the environment (point 10), under an
interdisciplinary approach (point 9), constituting a prevailing instrument in the evolution of
Territorial Planning [69].
In 1988, the concept of "sustainable development" was coined, as one that meets the needs of
present generations, without compromising the opportunities of future generations to meet their
own needs, as stated in the World Commission on the Environment and Development,
Brundtland Report [70]. This concept articulates three classic dimensions: environmental,
economic and social, which must be economically livable, economically viable and socially
equitable [71].
Later at the Rio Summit, during the UN Conference on Environment and Development (1992), a
world declaration regulating the relationship between environment and development was
created. The key topics of this declaration were framed under the environmental principles of
cooperation between states, consumption and overpopulation, environmental control and
participation, the goal of this action plan proposed by the UN to achieve more sustainable
development in the 21st century. The document was approved and signed by 173 heads of state,
8 of 25
calling on local governments to assume the commitment to implement the agreements contained
in this initiative from their context. Figure 3 shows the evolution of the perspective of UP from a
natural vision that, as a result of the lessons learned, matured into a modern UP, in which they
are still proposed under an approach of biophysical analysis without transcending the
improvement of the ecosystem understood from biocentrism.
Figure 3. Milestones of Urban Planning Evolution
3.2. Approaches to Urban Planning in the 21st century
The 21st century begins with a constant left by previous century: the co-dependence of natural
resources, whose poor administration has resulted in crucial problems that would frame the new
needs of this century, for example the occupation and disparity of urban -rural areas, degradation of
natural resources and loss of biodiversity, high rates of poverty and marginalization and
vulnerability to natural phenomena. In 2000, this situation forced a new meeting called the
Millennium Conference, in which the member countries signed this agreement before the UN under
8 objectives that had as a goal the year 2015, as shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Sustainable Development Goals
This strengthens environmental demands in different parts of the world, calling for responsible
consumption, the exaggerated generation of waste and social inequality. Thus, in September 2015,
9 of 25
the great world representatives approved the 2030 sustainable development agenda, which created
17 sustainable development goals - SDG as shown in Figure 2, which are universally applicable but
not legally binding, in the hope that the different member governments will make them their own in
their national policies [73].
In addition to prioritizing poverty reduction, it suggests as a pressing and urgent need to place
sustainability at the core of public policy design with Goal 11 "Make cities and human settlements
inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable". According to the 2018 UN report, related to urban
population growth indicators, it was determined that by 2050 at least two-thirds of the world's
population will live in cities (Figure 5). This assumption is based on the variation in the percentage
of people who moved from rural to urban areas, from 29% in 1950 to 51% in 2010.
Figure 5. Evolution of urban population by regions
Throughout this study it has been agreed that the configuration of the territory depends on the
transformations given such as economic crises, depletion of resources originated from inadequate
management, causing economic, social and environmental collapses, which are repetitive over the
history and that in each new version generates a much greater impact that makes it difficult to
recover.
First, the UP must tend to include the perception of the actors involved that make up a territory
to what has been called social cohesion, which focuses on the integrated search for the development
of the territory, so that its inhabitants can take full advantage of its inherent characteristics, through
the possibilities of spaces of identification and citizen belonging, with territorial intelligence and
taking advantage of the diversity of factors existing in a region; as well as through the degree of
cooperation between territories that guarantees the sustainability of exchanges between them,
avoiding that the development of one is done at the expense of others, aimed at mitigating
inequalities or territorial polarization in terms of economy, employment opportunities, among others
[71,74].
Given that one of the objectives of the UP is to meet the needs of the population and improve
their standard of living by increasing employment and reducing poverty, it is necessary to promote
endogenous development by incorporating networks of businesses in the economic assessment of
the territory, promoting innovation as part of the evolutionary and strategic process, that is,
promoting capital accumulation and economic progress, based on local production systems, support
for technological change and innovation, and self-sustained development [71].
Involve the bioregional approach where a territory of water and soils is perceived, whose limits
are defined by geographical boundaries of ecological systems, which allows to sustain essential
environmental processes, satisfy territory requirements for key species; and include human
communities in the management, use and understanding of biological resources [71,75].
These new directions must be accompanied by strategic perspectives for the UP, since inherited
conflicts become susceptibility factors that are a great threat to guarantee the basic needs of the
communities and threaten the objective of sustainable development.
10 of 25
3.3. Environmental Sustainability and UP
Just as urban planning underwent a conceptual and practical evolution marked by key moments
in history, so did sustainability. The growing concern in the 1970s about global warming and its
devastating consequences was expressed at the first world climate conference in Geneva in 1979.
Years later, the report Brundtland, this report was prepared by different nations in 1987 for the
UN, originally called "Our Common Future," faces the position of current economic development in
contrast to environmental sustainability, which exposed the phenomenon of climate change,
recommending that CO2 emissions be reduced by 20% by the year 2005. This is demonstrated by the
scientific evidence identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - IPCC in 1988 [78].
Nevertheless, the response to this evidence lasted until 1992, when in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, the
Framework Convention on Climate Change was adopted, in which the member countries committed
to attempting to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by the year 2000, establishing guidelines
and strategies for the sustainable regulation of strategic ecosystems in the world, in order to preserve
their richness and extension [79].
At this time, the so-called "end-of-pipe" or "end-of-stack" technologies, which allowed the
treatment of liquid effluents and polluting gaseous emissions, became more popular. However, the
solution proposed to the problem was insufficient because this type of mitigation technology is
characterized by solving the problems once they are caused, but does not address the root cause from
the generation of the problem; this did not contribute to the prevention of environmental damage nor
did it change the nature of the productive processes to others that are cleaner and more efficient, in
terms of the use of material and energy resources [80].
In addition, it is important to develop individuals who are concerned about the environment, as
stated in the 1977 Declaration of Tbilisi in the USSR, where five objectives of Environmental Moral
Education were established [81-84]: "Awareness and sensitivity to the environment ; Knowledge and
understanding; Attitudes of interest; Techniques for identifying environmental challenges and
contributing to their solution; and Participation in activities to solve environmental challenges "[71,
80, 91].
This declaration promotes a comprehensive and proactive training regarding environmental
issues. Young university students have awareness, attitude and interest in caring for the
environment, therefore, spaces are required that allow them to discuss and propose alternatives, from
their area of study to provide solutions to problems that arouse their interest.
Later, in the year 2000, the eight-millennium goals were determined, which establish a clear
commitment to improve the situation of the citizens of the signatory countries before 2015, described
in figure 4. Two years later, the Johannesburg summit sought to reaffirm the previously established
commitment to the millennium goals and, in addition, to manage financial funds for sustainable
development projects in third world countries. This opened the door to the UN Conference on
Environment and Development Rio + 20, where special emphasis is placed on green economy issues,
the objectives of sustainable development and, through the document "The future we want", the aims
of Rio 1992 are retaken [84, 86].
Such is the empathy with the environment in this awakening of green consciousness, that the
concept of carrying capacity, understood as "the limit to which the population can extend, which can
be supported indefinitely by a given ecosystem, maintaining its productivity, adaptability and
capacity for renewal "[84], is deepened in academia. Therefore, it is urgent to implement
environmental footprint assessment models that allow giving a quantitative value to the services
provided by the environment for living beings, which allow them to improve their quality of life,
which is defined as environmental services. These services are adopted in the 2011-2020 Strategic
Plan for Biological Diversity and the Aichi Goals, and are defined in the 2005 UN Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment [86]. Figure 6 presents the millennium goals.
11 of 25
Figure 6. Millennium Goals.
In 2015, it was necessary to adopt new, more drastic measures to ensure compliance with the
sustainable development approach, so the SDG Agenda 2030, also known as the Global Goals, was
launched, which are a universal call for action to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure that all
people enjoy peace and prosperity [86].
In the timeline shown in Figure 7, it is evident that there are countless efforts of different global
organizations, to make more evident what is already impossible to hide, that we are a large number
of inhabitants on a planet that is becoming more limited to meet our demands.
Figure 7. Sustainability timeline.
However, to understand the approaches that have been given to the concept of sustainability, it
is worth noting that the Brundtland Summit, at the request of the UN, established the concept of
Sustainable Development that frames two particular premises, the first is "satisfying the needs of the
generations ", and the second element is implicit:" present and future generations", where the idea
of time is introduced: the temporal variable as a fundamental element of the concept of sustainability,
which explicitly shows us that the model of development must be considered in the short, medium
and long term [86, 87].
It is important to clarify the difference between sustainable development and sustainability:
sustainability could be called the goal to be achieved, the ideal state to be reached while sustainable
development is the path we must travel from the three dimensions: social, environmental and
economic, as presented in Figure 8.
12 of 25
The approach of sustainable development is difficult to engage and even more complicated to
fulfill its two premises. then is how the model of "green economy" or "sustainable economy" is reborn.
The UN Program called UNEP, launched in 2008 the “Green Economy Initiative -GEI”. From one of
its documents I take a literal phrase "The concept of green economy is not a substitute for sustainable
development, but there is growing recognition as "one that leads to improved human welfare and
social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcity". [85].
Figure 8. Venn diagram sustainable development
Sustainability is a concept that we could intuitively identify, however, the ISO 37101: 2016
standard called “Sustainable development in communities” is created under the precepts of the 2030
Agenda of the sustainable development goals for SDG 11. Where "Sustainable Cities and
Communities", promotes the responsible use of resources, environment and the improvement of the
well-being of citizens that are the final goal
The above, supported by the ISO 37120:2018 standard called "Sustainable cities and
communities: indicators of urban services and quality of life" which provides indicators for services
and quality of cities that establish the indicators of quality and well-being of life. Within the general
principles of this standard, governance, empowerment, education, health and mobility are identified,
which will help to define the objectives and strategies of sustainable development; it is noteworthy
how it is gradually being associated with the territory. Figure 9 shows how ISO establishes standards
for each of the SDG.
Figure 9. ISO standards for SDG [22].
3.4. Resilience in Smart Cities Planning

13 of 25
As mentioned above, one of the great challenges facing cities is their exponential growth, which
is estimated that by 2050 more than 70% of the population will be concentrated in the main cities,
consuming large volumes of natural resources in their path and making their administration even
more complex. Another important challenge is to guarantee the minimum quality of life conditions
for their inhabitants, forcing decision-makers to seek new alternatives that provide proactive
responses to these dilemmas, allowing cities to evaluate, plan and act in order to prepare for and
respond to the new obstacles [37]. This is where the concept of resilience comes into play in urban
planning and how it must be adapted to the demands of sustainability.
This concept was born in 1973 with the Ecologist CS Holling, who establishes resilience as "a
measure of the persistence of systems and their ability to absorb changes and disturbances and
maintain the same relationships between populations or state variables", supported by two variables
fundamentals such as stability and regeneration [30]. C.S. Holling's theory was to move from the
laboratory as an experimental and analytical model of ecological interactions, to implementation in
an ecosystem as a population model. By studying the amount of disturbance a system can sustain
before its controls change to another set of variables, Holling then evaluated variability rather than
stability.
The first applications of these findings were made at Columbia University in 1978, with the
dynamics and management of grasslands and freshwater combining inductive science and field
experience, which in 1996 CS Holling himself designed models ecosystem-scale [89,90].
By 1998, Simon Levin at Cambridge University considered that the concept ceases to be merely
for ecological systems and argued that it is a "property of any complex, non-linear system, whether
ecological or socioeconomic, that does not lend itself to management protocols based on assumptions
of linear, globally stable, uniquely balanced systems ", evolving into a multidisciplinary concept,
linking it to different uses with very different meanings from the urban perspective [81,91].
Again in 2002, CS Holling reappears introducing a new vision of resilience from the conception
of the "panarchy", where the key element is the interactions between different adaptive cycles, that
is, it must be seen as an evolutionary nature of complex adaptive systems, where their functioning
and sustainability is given by the communication that exists between them, which they trigger in
stages of accumulation, restructuring and renewal [81].
By 2005, the consequences of climate change, sea-level rise, climate extremes, led to increased
disease, a long list of endangered species and the destruction of ecosystems, which were difficult to
hide, and forced world leaders to meet in the same year in Kobe, Hyogo, Japan at the World
Conference on Disaster Reduction, giving special emphasis on risk management and the
development of responses through adaptation and mitigation, generating the action framework for
2005 - 2015 called "Increasing the resilience of nations and communities to natural disasters, leading
to a reduction in losses in human lives, social, economic and environmental assets" [11,84].
In 2015 together with the SDG, the UN-Habitat report is published defining urban resilience as
"the capacity of urban systems to recover rapidly from any event caused by disruptive phenomena
of natural or human origin. Its purpose is to prevent an event from evolving into a disaster", again
under two variables of stability and regeneration, at this point, it is still not very clear whether the
disturbances are merely given by factors external to the complex systems or how much influence the
internal variables have [37].
As a result of the challenges generated for the fulfillment of the SDG, the UN guide to urban
resilience was created in 2016 for the member countries, which gives special importance to a new
concept of risk which shows the definition of risk from additional variables [37].
The terms hazard, exposure, and vulnerability are constantly used in risk management,
particularly the latter understood as a characteristic of the community that makes it susceptible to
harm from a hazard [71]. Risk assessment involves the analysis of the disruptive agents that can cause
damage to a system to the extent that it results in a disaster [84].
For this reason, the guide to resilient cities shows the classification of phenomena to which the
territory may be exposed and which significantly affect it, as shown below in Table 1, where each
14 of 25
phenomenon is categorized by a type of disturbance that may be of natural, anthropic or astronomical

order, listing 37 phenomena.
Table 1. Classification of phenomena [37]

TYPE PHENOMENA
Geological 1. Volcanism
2. Earthquakes
3. Tsunamis
4. Instability of slopes
5. Flows
6. Falls or collapses
7. Sinking
8. Subsidy
Hydro-meteorological 9. Cracking
10. Warm and cold waves
11. Droughts
12. Frost
13. Hail storms
14. Snowstorms
15. Tropical Cyclones
16. Tornadoes
17. Dust storms
18. Electrical storms
19. Extreme rains
Sanitary-ecological 25. Epidemics
26. Pests
27. Air pollution
28. Water Pollution
29. Soil contamination
30. Massive movements (marches, pilgrimages)
Socio-organizational 31. Large concentrations (sit-ins, political, social, cultural events)
32. Terrorism
33. Sabotage
34. Vandalism
35. Air accidents
36. Maritime accidents
37. Land accidents
Likewise, not only multiple edges are created from which resilience can be interpreted, but also
a new approach for governments to respond to their commitments in urban planning by moving
towards sustainability commitments as can be seen in Figure 11 showing its conceptual evolution.
More recently, research is focusing on finding proactive models that can be implemented to
measure a city's resilience. The International Organization for standardization -ISO and the UN
created the ISO 37123:2018 document "Communities of sustainable development: indicators for
resilient cities" where disturbances are defined only as natural or a man-made event that causes a
disaster, namely, floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, wildfires, chemical spills, power outages and a
resilient economy [30].
15 of 25
Figure 11. Evolution of resilience
Currently, multiple organizations of great global influence such as Resilience Alliance,

Community & Regional Resilience Institute or Resilient City, Network on Building Resilient Regions,
City Resilience Index, play an important role in building and spreading resilience, which, although
it is a widely used concept, is rarely well defined [86, 93,95].
For the City Resilience Index, in the context of cities, “resilience is focused on improving the
performance of a system in the face of multiple hazards, rather than preventing or mitigating the loss
of assets due to specific events” [25].
3.5 Smart city planning strategies
At the beginning of the 21st century, the excessive growth of the urban population surpassed
the rural population for the first time in 2011, multiplying the number of mega-cities, which are
understood to be those with more than 10 million inhabitants, increasing from 3 in 1975 to 31 cities
by 2016. In this context, the development of smart cities becomes a priority, where technology is put
at the service of citizens to manage the urban environment intelligently in order to improve their
quality of life [91].
The concept of the digital city, which was born in the 1990s as its precursor, was related to the
massive use of Information and Communication Technologies -ICT- taking advantage of the existing
infrastructure with the domain of the Internet, providing governmental, private and civil entities
with a set of information-type services that allowed them to break down barriers to share data from
one end of the world to the other [94].
By the end of the 1990s, it was evident that the new challenge was not to collect routine data but
rather to make it operable for the benefit of the community and the city, so it became necessary to
create technology centers to optimize planning, taking on a role as universal machines [94].
With the arrival of the 21st century, the concept was updated to smart cities based on three
fundamental pillars: Instrumentation, Interconnection and intelligence in data processing [95]. The
first one refers to the need for strengthening the sensors capable of collecting the maximum
information. The second pillar refers to support the maximum traffic of all information and that these
data can be transmitted to information centers. And the last and most important pillar, it is not only
about collecting and transmitting data but how these will be processed and analyzed [86].
In response to these needs, it was necessary to integrate the infrastructure associated with ICTs
with the policies of government agencies, in order to contribute to sustainability issues that were
mainly focused on energy efficiency and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. –GHG [96].
16 of 25
However, it is particularly important to create open data platforms that allow for citizen participation
[97].
Nevertheless, the concept lacks precise definitions, it is used with different synonyms: smart,
creative, digital, connected, cultural, all of them essentially empty since it requires definitions that
complement it [40]. In this sense, the researchers agree that a smart city contains the following six
dimensions, as shown in Figure 12.
Figure 12. Dimensions of smart cities [40].
• Smart economy: Cities must have a high level of productivity, supported by innovation and
flexibility in the labor market, characterized by innovative solutions and flexible adaptation
to changing conditions. The concept of smart industries, linked to Information and
Communication Technology -ICT, as well as business parks and technology parks, is applied
[98].
• Smart mobility: The infrastructure that supports ICT allows for high-speed connection
networks in a city, uniting all the resources, thus letting the use of existing infrastructure to
be rationalized [40].
• Smart environment: Energy consumption is optimized, using renewable energy sources,
reducing harmful emissions to ecosystems. Based on the concept of sustainable
development [40].
• Smart people: It establishes a society that is open to continuous learning promoted by its
inhabitants who, with the appropriate technical support, undertake actions that prevent
excessive energy consumption and environmental pollution, contributing to the
improvement of the quality of life [40].
• Smart living: Guarantees access to public services, technical and social infrastructure,
security, cultural and leisure offerings, as well as green spaces [40].
• Smart governance: In addition to optimal management and administration of the territory,
this supports shared management between government agencies, private entities and
citizens, taking advantage of technologies in the operation of the city, an intelligent public
administration, capacity to create knowledge and its use in practice [99].
These six dimensions are based on the theory of competitiveness of cities and regions, taking the
use of technologies as a differentiating element, also covering urban life and the functioning of public
administration. Thus, an intelligent city is a territory with a capacity for learning and innovation,
creativity, with the presence of institutions dedicated to research and development, higher education,
digital infrastructure and communication technologies, as well as high performance in management
and administration [41].
17 of 25
Thus, from this new dimension, indexes and indicators emerge with the purpose of developing
maturity models that allow monitoring and integrating operational conditions of a complex system,
which uses ICT to innovate in administrative management. Among the existing models is the ISO
37122 standard for smart cities, being a starting point to relate the main characteristics of the
perspective of the main domains of a smart city [100,101,102].
Therefore, one of the objectives that consists in the universalization of services for the
development of smart cities, is based on the "construction enabled by emerging technologies such as
the Internet of Things - IoT and machine-to-machine (M2M), social media, mobility and big data "
[100, 103]. The development of IoT allows to speed up and streamline the control of various processes
of daily life, from the control of areas of transport, health, energy, logistics, environment and others
[48].
On the other hand, it also becomes relevant to open public data, which allows processing by
citizens and requires constant renewal based on the data already obtained; this concept is ideal for
an open government that considers maintaining credibility in its citizens and exercising good
governance [41].
4. Discussion
4.1 Planning
As it has been stated throughout the document, planning is as old as man's presence on earth,
that is, it is almost in the human being's DNA and it was evidenced when, through common sense,
the need to reorganize its territory for a common good; with the passing of time, this became a
discipline of knowledge and political instruments as a mechanism in favour of an economic system.
It is evident that urban planning has an exponential dependence on existing natural resources,
especially water resources, because the guarantee of the well-being of human settlements is focused
on the environmental services that this resource provides [8], coupled with historical urban
expansion, socio-economic conditions of territory leading to increased demand for natural resources
with negative impacts on the ecosystem.
On the other hand, the creation of political structures and organizations were important for the
initiation of territorial planning instruments such as stratifications, categorization and land use; the
latter two gave the guidelines for the emergence of equipment, influencing, in turn, cadastral
valuations [3-15]. For this reason, these investments in development were initially exclusive to the
upper elites, highlighting the territorial imbalance, framing the poverty belts and reinforcing the
phenomena of disorderly growth in the peripheries.
Although eco-development aims to revolutionize urban planning, under its vision of sustainable
development, in which it seeks to change the view of territory from anthropocentrism to bioregion
[20,25], it seems that its implementation is becoming even more complex due to the growing demand
of a consumer society, which expects to reach a representative level of development, even at the cost
of the evident environmental sacrifice that we carry on our backs and which has been a protagonist
in the construction of corrective measures.
It is important to recover the focus of environmental principles such as cooperation, precaution,
prevention, biodiversity and sustainable development discussed at the Rio Summit in 1992 [31],
which marked a real legal obligation in the instruments of territorial planning, providing important
support for the implementation of public policies aimed at sustainability.
Questions arise such as what is the difference between ancient cities, that is, BC to those of today? Today
the world is very different from that of the industrial revolution, with new economic realities,
geopolitical tensions, technological advances, new actors involved, and innovative ways of waging
wars that globalization has led us to.
In other words, one of the main causes of transformation in the cities is due to population
growth, that is, while today we have more than 50 megacities with approximately 10 million
inhabitants, in ancient times only 7 reached a million. Mesoamerican cities have shown growth
18 of 25
patterns very similar to those of today, according to the urban scaling model, that is, as they grow,
the community tends to inhabit smaller and more concentrated spaces [102].
On the other hand, for ancient cities the walls and fortifications that could be seen from a
distance were synonymous with power and authority, something that is not far away today where
modern skyscrapers equipped with the latest technology reflect the fashion for sustainability
[102]. However, it can be said that cities governed with a view to equitable distribution showed
greater long-term prosperity and competitiveness compared to those governed in an authoritarian
manner [103].
4.2 Sustainability
The Brundtland Summit established the concept of sustainable development as "development that
meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs"
[88], identifying two notions, the first framed in the environmental footprint and the second in the
carrying capacity by assigning a time variable.
Sustainable development is based on a territorial approach aimed at the bioregion, in which the
maintenance of essential ecological processes and life support systems, the preservation of genetics,
and the sustainable use of species in accordance with their carrying capacity are seen as vitally
important [22,27]. In other words, it pursues a bio-centric vision where the human being is no longer
the centre and forces Urban Planning to reevaluate the ordinance of the territory as an instrument
that harmonizes with the dynamics of an ecosystem and allows evaluating its carrying capacity and
thus guaranteeing long-term planning.
Thus, the declaration of Tbilisi becomes important, establishing the five objectives of
environmental moral education [33-34]; This is because it is useless to establish public policies of a
police order in the pursuit of compliance with environmental duties if the community is not educated
with a vision of roots in its territory.
The millennium goals allowed the establishment of 8 objectives strengthening the
environmentalist demands and opening the doors so that in the UN Conference - Environment and
Development -Rio +20, special emphasis was made on green economy issues [89], strengthening as a
determining evaluation tool for sustainability, the measurement of the footprint and the economic
valuation of environmental services, which allow establishing a consumption quantification.
However, the implementation does not guarantee sustainability, because, in addition to a diagnosis,
the Conference does not have a robust legal framework that requires corrective measures.
4.3 Resilience
Territorial planners relate urban resilience to intra-urban processes that are mainly associated
with natural disasters [72], perceiving it as an isolated unit and therefore focusing mainly on internal
interactions, without giving importance to the fact that the dynamics of these interactions must also
be associated at a macro level, which are the relations with other cities.
This allows us to consider cities with a complex systems approach that functions as a network
of relationships composed between their internal components and external networks [88]. This
works like a gear, that is, each component of its extension fulfills a function and, to the extent that it
harmonizes with this internal and external network, it is magnified with a common objective to make
this complex system work effectively; these interactions at the local and regional level allow the city
to develop further in a multilevel approach.
Hence, a city is seen as a connective element between inter- and intra-urban processes that allows
resilience to be raised as a result of their interactions [30]. In these multi-level interactions "new
properties emerge and characterize the city as a collective entity" [89]; it is clear that relationships are the
key factor in understanding resilience, but how can each level be measured? Can an analysis of
interactions between them be carried out? This will only be possible when the point of
interconnection and synchronization is understood.
19 of 25
The concept of "panarchy" is postulated as one of the tools to explain the multilevel
synchronization of complex systems, as proposed by Hollings in his most recent speech [82]. Thus,
urban resilience could be analyzed in its long-term interactions from its key formation factors
(exploitation, conservation, liberation or reorganization), the analysis of these interactions will allow
to contribute new tools to concepts such as carrying capacity and the measurement of the
environmental footprint.
It is important to emphasize that the adoption of measures aimed at implementing resilience
was related to risk management from a natural disaster perspective in order to improve the quality
of life of citizens [84]. Nevertheless, it would seem that resilience is a magic formula for reducing
the vulnerability to which cities are exposed, without considering that this is a concept that is still
under construction and is still in search of its key training factors.
Sustainability and resilience are two concepts that will allow a strategic functionality in urban
planning, because while the first one prioritizes results, the second one analyzes processes,
demonstrating that a partnership between these two concepts will allow to widen the focus to
anticipate the anthropocentric and natural uncertainties.
4.4. The Smart Cities
The complexity of the administration of cities makes it imperative to develop smart cities as a
tool through which technology is put at the service of citizens, allowing not only the collection of data
but also the processing of these for the benefit of government entities under the principle of
governance.
The smart city is measured in six dimensions: economy, transportation and communications,
environment, community, quality of life, and management and smart administration [40]. For this
reason, an smart city is a territory with the capacity to learn using technologies as a differentiating
element in the hands of institutions dedicated to research and development to improve the quality of
life of the community.
5. Conclusions
It is inevitable that the conceptual evolution of each of these topics Urban Planning, Sustainability,
Resilience and Smart Cities will vary according to the historical moment we are going through,
together with political needs. However, the main changes in public policies have been unleashed as
a result of natural disasters that show the vulnerability of human beings as one more population in
this ecosystem.
It is important to emphasize that such situations should have been generated to allow the concepts
of land administration to mature, focusing on a common objective that guarantees the well-being of
the ecosystem, leaving aside the perception of land from an anthropocentric concept and in turn
generating tools that allow us to implement the concept of sustainable development and
sustainability.
It could be argued that the diversity concept of each of these topics is due to the multidisciplinary
nature fragmenting such terminology, however, one of the common points is to evaluate the territory
as a complex system explaining these concepts through temporal scales, understanding that can be
present in the long-term, through a cycle of adaptation, where impacts are assessed in the short-term
by applying the framework of the panarquia.
Sustainability requires predefined results by generating tools that drive a transformation in society
in the long term, understanding it as the goal we want to achieve while Sustainable Development is
the path we must chart, allowing to adapt and reorganize public institutions and policies proactively.
20 of 25
It is clear that there is still a long way to go to achieve a practical instrumentalization that addresses
and groups all the environmental, social and economic variables for the optimal administration of
the territory, and in addition prepares it for the new challenges.
It is also important to highlight the importance of citizen participation in the creation of territory,
which involves identifying and involving groups that may be positively and negatively affected by
the transformations in the territory, allowing their free expression, giving importance to debates,
cooperation in turn awakening the understanding of the territory as a bioregion and facilitating
citizen participation in the search for compliance with governance.
We urge the academic community to deepen scientific research that considers nature-based solutions
as a pillar for the understanding of adaptive cycles in complex ecosystems such as cities, in order to
strengthen resilience to risk management, and thus improve public policies that will lead to the
fulfillment of sustainable development objectives.
Funding
This research received no external funding
Acknowledgements
The authors want to thank the Nueva Granada Military University for the availability of databases
in the Doctorate of Applied Sciences.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Germán Arboleda, '"Planeación Y Desarrollo,", ed. 1, 2020.
2. R. C. Mejía and C. J. Camacho, "Lineamientos para la inserción de restricciones ambientales en el
ordenamiento territorial de la periferia de Maracaibo," I Jornada De investigación "La Competitividad
Institucional En El Siglo XXI;, 2020.
Available: https://www.academia.edu/12678148/Lineamientos_para_la_inserci%C3%B3n_de_restriccione
s_ambientales_en_el_ordenamiento_territorial_de_la_periferia_de_Maracaibo.
3. S. Hernández-Moreno, J. A. Hernández-Moreno and B. G. Alcaraz-Vargas, "Planeación de bajo carbono de
megalópolis en México," Bitácora Urbano Territorial, vol. 29, (2), pp. 49-58, 2019.
Available: https://doaj.org/article/f42d4bfb014e45629ad564255951ef33. DOI:
10.15446/bitacora.v29n2.69015.
4. Hidalgo García, María del Mar, "Las ciudades como objetivo de desarrollo sostenible," Bie3: Boletín
Ieee, (5), pp. 22-32, 2017. Available: https://dialnet-unirioja-
es.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/servlet/oaiart?codigo=6057665.
5. S. C. Bento et al, "As Novas Diretrizes e a Importância do Planejamento Urbano para o Desenvolvimento
de Cidades Sustentáveis," Revista De Gestão Ambiental E Sustentabilidade, vol. 7, (3), pp. 469-488, 2018.
Available: http://www.revistageas.org.br/ojs/index.php/geas/article/view/1342. DOI:
10.5585/geas.v7i3.1342.
6. G. Kayakutlu et al, "Scenarios for regional waste management," Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, vol. 74, pp. 1323-1335, 2017.
Available: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.147. DOI:
10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.147.
7. P. A. Cifuentes Ruiz and J. M. Llop Torné, "Repensando la ciudad: estrategias de desarrollo urbano
sostenible de las ciudades intermedias de América Latina," Nodo: Arquitectura. Ciudad. Medio Ambiente, vol.
10, (19), pp. 73-83, 2015. Available: https://dialnet-unirioja-
21 of 25
8. J. M. Mella Márquez and A. López López, "Ciudades sostenibles: Análisis y posibles estrategias," Urbanismo
Y Organización Del Territorio En Clave Multidisciplinar, vol. 17, (50), pp. 59-68, 2015.
Available: http://hdl.handle.net/10486/678616.
9. G. Mercado et al, "Diagnóstico y metodología para la implementación de "internet of things" en el
planeamiento y desarrollo de ciudades inteligentes," pp. 171-175, 2017.
Available: https://www.openaire.eu/search?q=&Search=.
10. S. M. V. Coutinho et al, "Indicadores para cidades inteligentes: a emergência de um novo clichê," Revista De
Gestão Ambiental E Sustentabilidade, vol. 8, (2), pp. 389-405, 2019. . DOI: 10.5585/geas.v8i2.13574.
11. K. R. Therán Nieto and L. Rodríguez Potes, "Hábitat sostenible: adaptación y mitigación frente al cambio
climático. Hacia los territorios resilientes," Módulo Arquitectura CUC, vol. 21, (1), pp. 63-96, 2018. . DOI:
10.17981/moducuc.21.1.2018.03.
12. S. Rueda-Palenzuela, "El Urbanismo Ecosistémicos," Ciudad Y Territorio Estudios Territoriales (CyTET), vol.
51, (202), pp. 723-752, 2020. Available: https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/CyTET/article/view/77733.
13. M. T. Brouwer et al, "Predictive model for the Dutch post-consumer plastic packaging recycling system and
implications for the circular economy," Waste Management, vol. 71, pp. 62-85, 2018.
Available: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.10.034. DOI:
10.1016/j.wasman.2017.10.034.
14. A. Pandit et al, "Infrastructure ecology: an evolving paradigm for sustainable urban development," Journal
of Cleaner Production, vol. 163, pp. S19-S27, 2017.
Available: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.010. DOI:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.010.
15. F. Li et al, "Shifting to healthier cities with improved urban ecological infrastructure: From the perspectives
of planning, implementation, governance and engineering," Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 163, pp. S1-
S11, 2017. Available: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.151. DOI:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.151.
16. R. Obrero Guisado et al, "Perspectivas sostenibles del desarrollo: integración de la resiliencia a la
ordenación urbana," Avances, vol. 21, (4), pp. 394-404, 2019. Available: https://dialnet-unirioja-
17. B. Alcántara and F. Esther, "Herramientas y criterios para una ciudad sostenible," Tools and Criteria for a
Sustainable City, 2018. Available: https://upcommons.upc.edu/handle/2117/128512.
18. F. Angeoletto et al, "Ecología urbana y planificación: una convergéncia ineludible." Revista Electrónica Em
Gestão, Educação e Tecnologia Ambiental, vol. 23, (1), pp. 1, 2019.
19. J. J. Sepúlveda Jaramillo, "Acciones de Adaptación y Mitigación al Cambio Climático en La Planificación
de La Ciudad de Medellín: De La Sostenibilidad a La Resiliencia Urbana." , Universidad Nacional a
Distancia, 2015.
20. Juan José Castiblanco-Prieto, Fabián Adolfo Aguilera-Martínez and Fabián Alonso Sarmiento-Valdés,
"Principios, criterios y propósitos de desarrollo sustentable para la redensificación en contextos urbanos
informales," Revista De Arquitectura, vol. 21, (1), pp. 21-33, 2019. Available: https://search-proquest-
com.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/docview/2237783550. DOI: 10.14718/RevArq.2019.21.1.1209.
21. P. Gorgolas, "Estrategias de actuación para la promoción de una ecociudad: una experiencia marroquí. El
caso de estudio de la comuna de benslimane," Regeneración Y Planeamiento Para Ciudades Sostenibles.
Experiencias En América, Marruecos Y España, 2020.
Available: https://www.academia.edu/42768144/ESTRATEGIAS_DE_ACTUACI%C3%93N_PARA_LA_P
ROMOCI%C3%93N_DE_UNA_ECOCIUDAD_UNA_EXPERIENCIA_MARROQU%C3%8D._EL_CASO_
DE_ESTUDIO_DE_LA_COMUNA_DE_BENSLIMANE.
22. International Organization for Standardization, "ISO 37101:2016(en)
Sustainable development in communities — Management system for sustainable development —
Requirements with guidance for use," 2016.
23. International Organization for Standardization, "SO 37123: 2019 – Ciudades y comunidades sostenibles –
Indicadores para ciudades resilientes," 2019
24. Avid Nava Eunice María, "visión compartida con La resiliencia como visión global Ciudades fuertes,
flexibles, verdes y humanas ," Red Universitaria De Urbanismo Y Arquitectura, (18), 2017.
Available: http://rua.uv.mx/index.php/rua/article/view/15/15.
22 of 25
25. M. Suárez Casado, "De las Smart cities a los Smart citizens : La ciudadanía frente a la tecnología en la
construcción de resiliencia urbana = From Smart cities to Smart citizens: Citizenry against technology in
the construction of urban resilience," URBS: Revista De Estudios Urbanos Y Ciencias Sociales, vol. 6, (. 2), pp.
121, 2016.
26. I. Tumini, "Acercamiento teórico para la integración de los conceptos de Resiliencia en los indicadores de
Sostenibilidad Urbana," Revista De Urbanismo, (34), 2016. . DOI: 10.5354/0717-5051.2016.40056.
27. Anonymous (). Resilient Design Institute. Available: https://www.resilientdesign.org/.
28. Organización Naciones Unidas, "Temas hábitat iii15 - resiliencia urbana ," Quito, 2016.
29. M. Rogov and C. Rozenblat, "Urban Resilience Discourse Analysis: Towards a Multi-Level Approach to
Cities," Sustainability, vol. 10, (12), pp. 4431, 2018. Available: https://search-proquest-
com.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/docview/2322330443. DOI: 10.3390/su10124431.
30. J. Davalos and A. Romo Pérez, "Ciudades Sostenibles, Inclusivas y Resilientes: Gobiernos Locales y
Participación Ciudadana en la Implementación de las Agendas Globales para el Desarrollo," INNOVA
Research Journal, vol. 2, (10), pp. 116-131, 2017. . DOI: 10.33890/innova.v2.n10.2017.441.
31. P. M. Guerra, Lima, Herlander Da Mata Fernandes and J. C. Bizarreta Ortega, "Mitigação de desatres em
areas urbanas e construção de cidades resilientes," Oct 4, 2017.
32. A. Botequilha-Leitão and E. R. Díaz-Varela, "Performance Based Planning of complex urban social-
ecological systems: The quest for sustainability through the promotion of resilience," Sustainable Cities and
Society, vol. 56, pp. 102089, 2020.
Available: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102089.
33. Maite Aurrekoetxea Casaus, "Deconstruyendo la resiliencia urbana (Deconstructing urban
resilience)," OBETS : Revista De Ciencias Sociales, vol. 13, (Extra 1), pp. 229-255, 2018.
Available: https://doaj.org/article/f37de746e08b47afada42e509f7dd972. DOI: 10.14198/OBETS2018.13.1.09.
34. Lipp Daniel, "CIUDADES RESILIENTES," (79), pp. 69-74, 2018.
Available: http://www.gaea.org.ar/ACTAS2018/ACTAS2018LIPP.pdf. DOI: 10.1016/j.scs.2020.102089.
35. T. Li, Y. Dong and Z. Liu, "A review of social-ecological system resilience: Mechanism, assessment and
management," Science of the Total Environment, vol. 723, pp. 138113, 2020.
Available: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138113. DOI:
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138113.
36. International Organization for Standardization, "ISO 37122: 2019 Ciudades y comunidades sostenibles -
Indicadores para ciudades inteligentes," 2019.
37. Anonymous "Guia de resiliencia urbana," ONU-HABITAT, México, 2016.
38. M. V. Alderete, "Qué factores influyen en la construcción de ciudades inteligentes?: un modelo multinivel
con datos a nivel ciudades y países," CTS: Revista Iberoamericana De Ciencia, Tecnología Y Sociedad, vol.
14, (41), pp. 71-89, 2019. Available: https://dialnet-unirioja-
39. R. A. Alvarado López, "Ciudad inteligente y sostenible: hacia un modelo de innovación
inclusiva," PAAKAT: Revista De Tecnología Y Sociedad, vol. 7, (13), 2018.
Available: http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2007-
36072018000100002&lng=en&tlng=en. DOI: 10.18381/pk.a7n13.299.
40. D. Sikora - Fernández, "Factores de desarrollo de las ciudades inteligentes," Revista Universitaria De
Geografía, vol. 26, (1), pp. 135-152, 2017.
Available: http://www.scielo.org.ar/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1852-
42652017000100007&lng=en&tlng=en.
41. Santana, Eber da Silva de, É d. O. Nunes and L. B. Santos, "The use of ISO 37122 as standard for assessing
the maturity level of a smart city," International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science, vol.
5, (12), pp. 309-315, 2018. . DOI: 10.22161/ijaers.5.12.42.
42. J. Rendon Acevedo and W. Miranda-Brand, "Smart cities and territories from the perspective of
technological surveillance," Dimensión Empresarial, vol. 17, (4), 2019. . DOI: 10.15665/17.4.2107.
43. E. Bustillo Holgado and P. Rodríguez Bustamante, "Los Sistemas de Información Geográfica y las ciudades
inteligentes," Polígonos. Revista De Geografía, (27), pp. 257, 2015. . DOI: 10.18002/pol.v0i27.3283
44. Jia-Wei Lu et al, "Smart and Green Urban Solid Waste Collection Systems: Advances, Challenges, and
Perspectives," Jsyst, vol. 11, (4), pp. 2804-2817, 2017. Available: https://ieeexplore-ieee-
org.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/document/7265018. DOI: 10.1109/JSYST.2015.2469544.
23 of 25
45. F. F. B. Mª, "Evaluation Model for Sentient Cities," Culturas, vol. 3, (2), pp. 55-87, 2016.
Available: https://www.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=dedup_wf_001::3f90a83b5affbbc5ba551f
a9e878bd73. DOI: 10.4995/cs.2016.6938.
46. A. Abella García, Ortiz de Urbina Criado, Marta and C. d. Pablos Heredero, "Information reuse in Smart
cities' ecosystems : Reutilización de información en las ciudades inteligentes," El Profesional De La
Información, vol. 24, (6), pp. 838, 2015.
47. Angela Tatiana Zona-Ortiz, Carlos Hernán Fajardo-Toro and Clara Milena Aguilar Pirachicán, "Propuesta
De Un Marco General Para El Despliegue De Ciudades Inteligentes Apoyado En El Desarrollo De IoT En
Colombia," Revista Ibérica De Sistemas E Tecnologias De Informação, (E28), pp. 894-907, 2020.
Available: https://search.proquest.com/docview/2388304777.
48. Méndez, Hugo and Pascale Carla, Ordenamiento Territorial En El Municipio Una Guía Metodológica. (1st ed.)
FAO: Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura, 2014.
49. [50] R. Chiarella Quinhoes, "Planificación del desarrollo territorial: algunas precisiones," Espacio Y
Desarrollo, (22), pp. 77-102, 2010. Available: https://dialnet-unirioja-
50. González Hernando, "Contexto para la planificación, gestión del desarrollo y ordenamiento territorial
agropecuario," Bogotá, 2018.
51. E. Troya and J. Félix, "Lloa entre lo urbano y lo rural: imaginarios, territorio y desarrollo en la ruralidad,"
2017. Available: http://repositorio.puce.edu.ec:80/xmlui/handle/22000/14453.
52. Ivan Mauricio Vasquez, "Los determinantes de ordenamiento territorial como límite a la autonomía local
en materia de disposición urbanística del territorio," Revista Digital De Derecho Administrativo, 2019.
53. D. Rea-Padilla, "Estrategias de planeación territorial y ambiental para procurar el equilibrio sustentable
entre el desarrollo de la ciudad y sus áreas verdes en el sur poniente del AMG," 2020.
Available: https://rei.iteso.mx/handle/11117/6120.
54. Ducci Maria, Conceptos Básicos De Urbanismo/Forma Y Estructura De La Ciudad/La Administración De La
Ciudad/Geografía Urbana. (1st ed.) Mexico: Trillas Editorial, 2009.
55. Bartram J, Corrales L, Davison A, Deere D, Drury D, Gordon B, Howard G, Rinehold A, Stevens M, OMS
| Manual Para El Desarrollo de Planes de Seguridad del Agua: Metodología Pormenorizada de Gestión de Riesgos
Para Proveedores de Agua de Consumo. World Health Organization, 2009.
56. A. Aledo Tur, "Desigualdad, urbanismo y medio ambiente: la primera urbanización," pp. 21, 2002.
Available: https://www.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=od_______935::91697116b73a88ed75f4cb
36570ce0cf.
57. J. J. Eiroa García, "Sobre el origen del urbanismo y el modelo de vida urbana en el viejo y nuevo
mundo," Evolución Urbana Y Actividad Económica En Los Núcleos Históricos, pp. 7-48, 2002.
Available: http://dialnet.unirioja.es.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/servlet/oaiart?codigo=1125626.
58. Alberto Nicolini, "La ciudad hispanoamericana, medieval, renacentista y americana," Atrio, (10-11), pp. 27-
36, 2005. Available: https://doaj.org/article/87cd07e649c8417fbb427bd761f79869.
59. I. Ramos Vázquez, "Ordenar la ciudad: derecho y urbanismo en la Edad Moderna castellana," Anuario De
Historia Del Derecho Español, (87), pp. 299-331, 2017. Available: https://dialnet-unirioja-
60. S. G. Ortman et al, "Settlement scaling and increasing returns in an ancient society," Science Advances, vol.
1, (1), pp. e1400066, 2015. Available: https://search.datacite.org/works/10.1126/sciadv.1400066. DOI:
10.1126/sciadv.1400066.
61. K. Ames, '"On the Evolution of the Human Capacity for Inequality and/or Egalitarianism,", pp. 15-44.
62. Cortés and Rodrigo, "Del urbanismo a la planeación en Bogotá (1900-1990) Esquema inicial y materiales
para pensar la trama de un relato Del urbanismo a la planeación en Bogotá (1900-1990) Esquema inicial y
materiales para pensar la trama de un relato," Bitácora Urbano Territorial, vol. 11, (1), pp. 55, 2011.
Available: https://www.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doajarticles::581c2f239c23774ead6e5ebcf
94063cc.
63. J. Delgado, "De los anillos a la segregación. La ciudad de México, 1950-1987," Estudios Demográficos Y
Urbanos, vol. 5, (2), pp. 237-274, 1990. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40314617.
64. Anonymous "Informe Barlow ," Revista Arquitectura, pp. 113, 1970.
Available: https://www.coam.org/media/Default%20Files/fundacion/biblioteca/revista-arquitectura-
100/1959-1973/docs/revista-articulos/revista-arquitectura-1970-n140-pag113.pdf.
24 of 25
65. M. Becerril-Padua, "Contribuciones de la CEPAL en los estudios del fenómeno urbano metropolitano, 1950-
1990," Revista De Estudios Regionales, (70), pp. 149-172, 2004.
Available: http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=1004865.
66. Jankilevich, S. (2012). Las cumbres mundiales sobre el ambiente Estocolmo, Rio y Johannesburgo 30 años de Historia
Ambiental [Working Paper]. Universidad de Belgrano Area de Estudios Ambientales y
Urbanos. http://repositorio.ub.edu.ar/handle/123456789/690
67. O. B. Agoglia Moreno, "La Crisis ambiental como proceso. Un análisis reflexivo sobre su emergencia,
desarrollo y profundización desde la perspectiva de la teoría crítica," 2011.
Available: https://www.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=od______1264::b689e16b0a36b099566892
9f8402159d.
68. Calderón and Francisco, "repensando la sostenibilidad: desarrollo sostenible, migraciones y codesarrollo
en un mundo global," vol. 4, (12), 2011.
69. F. López Ramón, "Introducción a los significados de la ordenación del territorio en Europa," Revista De
Administración Pública, (166), pp. 213-230, 2005.
Available: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=1326003.
70. Anonymous "Informe libro verde de cohesión territorial: Convertir la diversidad territorial en un punto
fuerte " 2008.
71. Subgerencia Cultural del Banco de la República. (2015). Capacidad de carga de un ecosistema. Recuperado
de: http://www.banrepcultural.org/blaavirtual/ayudadetareas/ciencias/capacidad_de_carga_de_un_ecosi
stema
72. Fermín Carreño Meléndez David Iglesias Piña Rafael Fernando Sánchez Barreto Roque Juan Carrasco
Aquino Hena Andrés Calderón Francisco Platas López, Discusión Epistemológica En Torno a La Sustenibilidad
y El Desarrollo. 2018.
73. Carlos Morera Beita, "Ordenamiento territorial: desafíos para una sociedad en crisis ecológica," GEOUSP:
Espaço E Tempo, vol. 19, (2), pp. 312-323, 2015.
Available: https://www.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doajarticles::b040c192e474bae34c13b415
d02d1e12. DOI: 10.11606/issn.2179-0892.geousp.2015.102804.
74. Anonymous "Informe de los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible 2018," Naciones Unidas, Nueva York, 2018.
75. R. Cuberos, "Cambios de paradigma en la ordenación del territorio," in "Planificación Territorial Y Desarrollo
Sostenible", Feb 8, 2017, pp. 15.
76. B. G. Reguero et al, "Uniendo ingeniería y ecología: la protección costera basada en
ecosistemas," Ribagua, vol. 4, (1), pp. 41-58, 2017.
Available: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23863781.2017.1332824. DOI:
10.1080/23863781.2017.1332824.
77. J. W. Zillman, "Historia de las actividades en torno al clima," 2009.
78. A. Caselles Moncho et al, "La huella ecológica corporativa de los materiales : aplicación al sector comercial,"
2008. Available: http://hdl.handle.net/10550/2375.
79. T. Ribera and A. Olabe Egaña, "La cumbre del clima en París," Dt, vol. 3, pp. 2015, 2015.
80. Agius, E. (2010). Ética ambiental: Hacia una perspectiva intergeneracional. En Ética ambiental y políticas
internacionales (pp. 89-115). Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura
81. B. Walker, "Resilience, instability, and disturbance in ecosystem dynamics," Environ. Dev. Econ., vol.
3, (2), pp. 221-262, 1998. Available: https://www.cambridge.org/core/article/resilience-instability-and-
disturbance-in-ecosystem-dynamics/B6B6C785BC92A5F03DAFA08396C2739B. DOI:
10.1017/S1355770X98280120.
82. E. Prieto Barboza, "Resiliencia y panarquía: claves para enfrentar
la adversidad en sistemas sociales," Red De Revistas Científicas De América Latina, El Caribe, España Y
Portugal, vol. 13, (1), pp. 8, 2013. Available: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/904/90428348007.pdf.
83. López, Z. R. A., & López, T. R. A. (2019). Ética Ambiental: Estudio exploratorio de la percepción estudiantil
universitaria. Revista Scientific, 4(13), 221-238.
84. Obra completa: Rincón-Ruíz, A., Echeverry-Duque, M., Piñeros, A. M., Tapia, C. H., David, A., Arias-
Arévalo, P. y Zuluaga, P. A. 2014. Valoración integral de la biodiversidad y los servicios ecosistémicos:
Aspectos conceptuales y metodológicos. Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von
Humboldt (IAvH). Bogotá, D. C. Colombia, 151 pp.
25 of 25
85. UNEP, 2011, Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication
- A Synthesis for Policy Makers, www.unep.org/greeneconomy
86. M. Suarez, "De las Smart cities a los Smart citizens. La ciudadanía frente a la tecnología en la construcción
de resiliencia urbana," URBS. Revista De Estudios Urbanos Y Ciencias Sociales, vol. 6, (121 - 128), 2016.
87. Lopera, A. P. (2019). Legislación ambiental en colombia: Ayer, hoy y desafíos. Summa Iuris, 7(1), 97-
113. https://doi.org/10.21501/23394536.3277 Congreso de la República de Colombia, 1973
88. J. Veza, "Sostenibilidad: Preguntas frecuentes … y algunas respuestas," 2013.
89. C. Folke, "Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses," Global
Environmental Change, vol. 16, (3), pp. 253-267, 2006.
Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/science/article/pii/S0959378006000379.
DOI: https://doi-org.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002.
90. Asprone, D.; Manfredi, G. Linking disaster resilience and urban sustainability: A glocal approach for future
cities. Disasters 2015, 39, s96–s111
91. Pumain, D. (Ed.) Alternative explanations of hierarchical differentiation in urban systems. In Hierarchy in
Natural and Social Sciences; Methods Series; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2006; Volume 3, pp. 169–
222.
92. G. Lanfranchi, A. Herrero and J. Jaureguiberry, "Resiliencia urbana diálogos institucionales. programa de
ciudades de CIPPEC," 2016.
93. I. Cartes Siade, "27F/8.8 La reconstrucción de las ciudades del Borde Costero de la Región del Bio Bio:
"sustentabilidad y participación para ciudades resilientes," Oct 1, 2010.
94. R. Méndez, "Ciudades y metáforas: sobre el concepto de resiliencia urbana," Dialnet, (172), pp. 215-232,
2012. Available: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=4022594.
95. R. Ramírez and M. Matus, Ciudades Inteligentes En Iberoamérica; Ejemplos De Iniciativas Desde El Sector
Privado, La Sociedad Civil, El Gobierno Y La Academia. México: INFOTEC, 2016.
96. M. Batty, "The computable city," International Planning Studies, vol. 2, (2), pp. 155-173, 1997.
Available: http://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/doi/abs/10.1080/13563479708721676. DOI:
10.1080/13563479708721676.
97. D. Sáenz, "Smart Environments: Las TICs en las ciudades inteligentes," 2011.
98. R. Achaerandio et al, "Análisis de las ciudades inteligentes en España," pp. 48, 2012.
Available: https://www.aeiciberseguridad.es/descargas/categoria6/8883484.pdf.
99. R. G. Hollands, "Will the real smart city please stand up?" City, vol. 12, (3), pp. 303-320,
2008.Available: http://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.umng.edu.co/doi/abs/10.1080/13604810802479126.
DOI: 10.1080/13604810802479126.
100. A. Caragliu, C. Del Bo and P. Nijkamp, "Smart Cities in Europe," Journal of Urban Technology: Creating Smart-
Er Cities, Guest Edited by Mark Deakin, vol. 18, (2), pp. 65-82, 2011.
Available: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10630732.2011.601117. DOI:
10.1080/10630732.2011.601117.
101. R. Griffinger et al, "Smart cities: ranking of European medium cities," 2007. Available: http://www.smart-
cities.eu/download/smart_cities_final_report.pdf.
102. Nicos Komninos, Intelligent Cities. Taylor and Francis, 2013.
103. R. Y. Clarke, "Business Strategy: IDC Government Insights' Smart City Maturity Model Assessment and
Action on the Path to Maturity. 2013," Available
in:< Http://az370354.Vo.Msecnd.Net/Publicsector/Citynext/Whitepapers/IDC Government Insights' Smart
City Maturity Model_IDC.Pdf>.Access In, vol. 2, 2018.

Preprints202011 0487 v1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preprints202011 0487 v1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preprints202011 0487 v1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 18 November 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202011.0487.

Type of the Paper (Review)

Sustainability and resilience in smart city planning: a

© 2020 by the author(s). Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY license.

iv. Smart Cities

2. Materials and Methods

TITLE-ABS-KEY ("smart cities"))

Figure 1. Methodology of analysis

2.1 Co-occurrence analysis

Figure 2. Co-occurrence analysis of terms

3. SUSTAINABILITY AND RESILIENCE IN SMART CITIES PLANNING

Figure 3. Milestones of Urban Planning Evolution

3.2. Approaches to Urban Planning in the 21st century

Figure 4. Sustainable Development Goals

Figure 5. Evolution of urban population by regions

3.3. Environmental Sustainability and UP

Figure 6. Millennium Goals.

Figure 7. Sustainability timeline.

Figure 8. Venn diagram sustainable development

Figure 9. ISO standards for SDG [22].

3.4. Resilience in Smart Cities Planning

phenomenon is categorized by a type of disturbance that may be of natural, anthropic or astronomical

Table 1. Classification of phenomena [37]

Figure 11. Evolution of resilience

Currently, multiple organizations of great global influence such as Resilience Alliance,

3.5 Smart city planning strategies

Figure 12. Dimensions of smart cities [40].

4.4. The Smart Cities

This research received no external funding

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

You might also like