Cameras are no “easy solution” – practical privacy decision-making in smart cities

Purpose As smart cities are centred around the use of digital technology in the public sphere, questions arise about the protection of privacy and personal data. This study aims to investigate the extent to which smart city managers consider privacy and the protection of personal data in practical decision-making. Design/methodology/approach Using the methodology of “walkshops”, a focus group variety that takes participants for a structured walk/workshop in technology-mediated inner cities, Belgian smart city managers were prompted to discuss their practical approach to public values. Findings Findings show the values of efficiency, (cost-)effectiveness and accountability take precedence over privacy and personal data protection, posing a problem for the legitimacy of smart city interventions. Research limitations/implications The limitations of this qualitative study consist of its small sample size and limited geographical scope, which may have biased responses, as public values and privacy perceptions are culture- and context-specific. More on-the-ground research is warranted in other geographical locations and different urban contexts. On a more fundamental level, further research on public-sector technology governance is needed to clarify conceptually how legitimacy and legitimisation function in this sphere. Practical implications Policymakers must seek broader public value consensus and acknowledge the subjective nature of privacy concerns by including citizens’ voices directly in smart city decision-making. Social implications The disconnect between citizens’ concerns and smart city managers’ priorities can severely impact public trust and acceptance of technological interventions. This is particularly alarming with a view to the introduction of AI technologies in the public sector. Originality/value This study uncovered original empirical insights into managerial decision-making processes and tensions in the priority values between smart city managers and citizens.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Transforming Government People Process and Policy
Published
2026-04-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/tg-11-2025-0366
Primary Topic
Smart Cities and Technologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cameras are no “easy solution” – practical privacy decision-making in smart cities

Ine van Zeeland, Jonas Breuer
Transforming Government People Process and Policy
Smart Cities and Technologies
article

Cameras are no “easy solution” – practical privacy decision-making in smart cities

Ine van Zeeland, Jonas Breuer
article en

Abstract

Purpose As smart cities are centred around the use of digital technology in the public sphere, questions arise about the protection of privacy and personal data. This study aims to investigate the extent to which smart city managers consider privacy and the protection of personal data in practical decision-making. Design/methodology/approach Using the methodology of “walkshops”, a focus group variety that takes participants for a structured walk/workshop in technology-mediated inner cities, Belgian smart city managers were prompted to discuss their practical approach to public values. Findings Findings show the values of efficiency, (cost-)effectiveness and accountability take precedence over privacy and personal data protection, posing a problem for the legitimacy of smart city interventions. Research limitations/implications The limitations of this qualitative study consist of its small sample size and limited geographical scope, which may have biased responses, as public values and privacy perceptions are culture- and context-specific. More on-the-ground research is warranted in other geographical locations and different urban contexts. On a more fundamental level, further research on public-sector technology governance is needed to clarify conceptually how legitimacy and legitimisation function in this sphere. Practical implications Policymakers must seek broader public value consensus and acknowledge the subjective nature of privacy concerns by including citizens’ voices directly in smart city decision-making. Social implications The disconnect between citizens’ concerns and smart city managers’ priorities can severely impact public trust and acceptance of technological interventions. This is particularly alarming with a view to the introduction of AI technologies in the public sector. Originality/value This study uncovered original empirical insights into managerial decision-making processes and tensions in the priority values between smart city managers and citizens.

Transforming Government People Process and Policy
Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE)
Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Smart Cities and Technologies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.