Making Philadelphia a Connected City
Who will you meet?
Cities are innovating, companies are pivoting, and start-ups are growing. Like you, every urban practitioner has a remarkable story of insight and challenge from the past year.
Meet these peers and discuss the future of cities in the new Meeting of the Minds Executive Cohort Program. Replace boring virtual summits with facilitated, online, small-group discussions where you can make real connections with extraordinary, like-minded people.
What does a connected city look like, and why should cities strive to become connected? At times the term connected city has been synonymous with a “smart city,” a city that leverages digital technologies to influence and streamline efficiencies and services, however there is definite distinction to be made between a smart and connected city. Where a smart city prioritizes technology, a connected city prioritizes bringing citizens together in the most effective and efficient way.
The Center for Sustainable Design defines a Sustainable Connected City as “an urban area that leverages its technological and social infrastructure… supported by innovative governance in terms of policies, leadership and proper on-going management principles, to enable smart information services, aiming at improving its critical capabilities.”
By adding this social aspect to the idea of a “smart city,” government can improve local living conditions through the successful involvement of residents and private business in local planning and decision making. This creates willingness (and provides a buy-in for citizens) to interact with government to serve the public interest. This is what the City of Philadelphia is doing by working with leading technology companies to bring the public into the process of government.
A connected city is more than just a place where a lot of people live in the same area; it is a place where people regularly interact with each other, and their government, with communication methods that are straightforward and effortless, in order to create a cohesive and constructive culture of civic-minded and engaged communities.
The kind of connection, and improved communication, we are talking about is best facilitated through a network. At Philly311 we strive to be that network that connects citizens with each other and with city government. We give the many branches of local government a unified voice to establish an atmosphere of a welcoming and connected city.
As a governmental agency, Philly311 has to think about both its internal and external customers, and make sure that they are all properly communicating with each other to improve the quality of life in Philadelphia. By adopting a customer-centric model and adapting the entire culture of city government to be more customer focused – as public service should be – we can build trust and understanding between the public and the government that aims to serve them. This relationship allows us to understand our citizens’ needs, and be responsive and proactive in delivering services.
With our advanced customer relationship management solution we are able to listen to our customers, provide services, improve our systems based on user feedback, and anticipate and predict future service needs.
This responsive and predictive action makes us a connected city, using a system of open data, and data sharing we can communicate in a much more effective way. We can work internally between agencies and departments – as well as externally with citizens, residents, and visitors – to produce better results. We strive to set a standard of excellence for all customer experiences, both internally and externally.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
People seem frequently to assume that the terms “sustainability” and “resilience” are synonyms, an impression reinforced by the frequent use of the term “climate resilience”, which seems to enmesh both concepts firmly. In fact, while they frequently overlap, and indeed with good policy and planning reinforce one another, they are not the same. This article picks them apart to understand where one ends and the other begins, and where the “sweet spot” lies in achieving mutual reinforcement to the benefit of disaster risk reduction (DRR).
As extreme weather conditions become the new normal—from floods in Baton Rouge and Venice to wildfires in California, we need to clean and save stormwater for future use while protecting communities from flooding and exposure to contaminated water. Changing how we manage stormwater has the potential to preserve access to water for future generations; prevent unnecessary illnesses, injuries, and damage to communities; and increase investments in green, climate-resilient infrastructure, with a focus on communities where these kinds of investments are most needed.
A few years ago, I worked with some ARISE-US members to carry out a survey of small businesses in post-Katrina New Orleans of disaster risk reduction (DRR) awareness. One theme stood out to me more than any other. The businesses that had lived through Katrina and survived well understood the need to be prepared and to have continuity plans. Those that were new since Katrina all tended to have the view that, to paraphrase, “well, government (city, state, federal…) will take care of things”.
While the experience after Katrina, of all disasters, should be enough to show anyone in the US that there are limits on what government can do, it does raise the question, of what could and should public and private sectors expect of one another?