1. Introduction
With the rapid urbanization rate and increasing population in urban areas, consequent problems hinder urban development [
1] and manifest themselves in social, economic, and environmental aspects [
2]. Driven by information and communication technologies (ICTs), the conception of a smart city is proposed as an innovative urban development model, aiming to achieve high-quality urban life and sustainable development. The smart city can be defined as a city where investments in human and social capital and traditional (transport) and modern (ICT) communication infrastructure fuel sustainable economic growth and high quality of life, with a wise management of natural resources, through participatory governance [
3]. Particularly, participatory governance in the smart city requires the engagement of citizens, implying the notable role of public participation [
4].
Smart city development is of great significance in promoting sustainable urban development [
2], and facilitating cities’ sustainable development is one of the positive results of smart city development [
4]. Apart from promoting the quality of urbanization, smart city development can not only develop strategic emerging industries but also contribute to economic growth and environmental protection [
5]. Moreover, as a crucial way to achieve urban sustainability, smart city development can also enhance cities’ core competitiveness and promote urban innovation [
5]. Although smart city development can bring about a dozen of positive results, potential pitfalls such as privacy leakage and the digital divide still exist [
6]. In addition, factors influencing smart city development, such as civil engagement, public attitude, and social inclusion, cannot be ignored [
7]. Furthermore, smart city development requires the participation of stakeholders, comprising government, enterprises, and the public, which is of great importance for its success [
8].
Among these stakeholders, the public’s key role in smart city development has been widely concerned. However, a lack of public participation in smart city development still exists [
9]. Many research findings indicate that the public perceives plenty of risks and uncertainties, and the perceived risks are important variables affecting their participation intention in smart city development. It is noted that the public faces risks of trust, data privacy, and technical application [
10]. In addition, technology issues and lack of social inclusion could also make the public less willing to involve in smart city development [
11]. Moreover, insufficient public participation in smart city development and the risk from stakeholders’ conflicts need to be noticed [
12]. Therefore, although existing studies have analyzed different risk factors, there is still a lack of systematic research on the public’s perceived risk (PR) in smart city development.
In terms of research methods, existing studies have focused more on qualitative analysis, while the research on the public’s perceived risk by quantitative measurement is scarce. Theoretical research on the relationship between perceived risk and public participation intention and their influential effect on quantitative analysis is still lacking. To sum up, risks perceived by the public involve different aspects and dimensions, and further exploratory research needs to be carried out. Based on the effective identification and definition of perceived risk, a theoretical model combining the risk with the participation intention is constructed by extending the theory of reasoned action (TRA). The model not only enriches the relevant theories of smart city development but also reveals the influential mechanism of perceived risk on public participation. Practically, this model also aims to provide a theoretical basis for improving the public’s intention and formulating risk prevention methods for governments and other stakeholders. The risk prevention methods are solutions and strategies to mitigate the effect of risk on public participation intention by identifying, analyzing, and ranking.
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows.
Section 2 conducts the literature review.
Section 3 presents the conceptual model and research hypotheses.
Section 4 describes the variable measure and data collection.
Section 5 reports the results of data analysis using the structural equation modeling (SEM) method.
Section 6 focuses on the discussion and conclusion.
6. Discussion and Conclusions
Based on the TRA, this study constructed a theoretical model concerning the public’s perceived risk, attitude, subjective norm, and participating intention for smart city development. The model aimed to reveal the influence mechanism of perceived risk on the public-participating intention. To the best of our knowledge, the research is the first study to investigate the influential effect of the publics’ perceived risk on their participation intention in smart city development literature.
This research empirically tested the proposed hypotheses by using AMOS software and obtained the following findings. First, perceived risk has a negative impact on the public intention to participate in smart city development. The negative relationship between perceived risk and participation intention was verified by the questionnaire data, namely, the higher the publics’ perceived risk, the lower their intention to participate in smart city development. Second, perceived risk is directly and negatively associated with attitude and subjective norms. Perceived risk has a stronger impact on subjective norms. Third, perceived risk exerts an indirect influence on the public’s participating intention through attitude and subjective norms. Finally, attitude and subjective norms are both significantly and positively related to the public participation intention in smart city development. The results indicate that attitude and subjective norms are important determinants of public participation intention. The more positive the public’s attitude is, the stronger their intention to participate in smart city development will be. Similarly, the more positive the subjective norm is perceived by the public, the stronger their intention is to participate in smart city development.
6.1. Theoretical Contribution
This study has contributed to the smart city development literature in several aspects. Firstly, this research explored the relationship of perceived risk with participating intention, which further expanded the research boundary and application of the TRA in the context of smart city development. Based on the TRA, this study constructed an expanded model concerning the effect of perceived risk on public participation intention. Moreover, it integrated perceived risk into the TRA model, which could expand the traditional TRA and further enrich research in other regions.
Secondly, this research defined the risk perceived by the public, including the aspects of potential threat to personal privacy, risk of technology use, negative emotion, and potential conflicts, which further enriched the theory of risk perception in the context of smart city development. Furthermore, this study explored the effect of perceived risk on public participation intention, and the finding provided a perceptive understanding of their relationship. Accordingly, with the characteristic of smart city development, perceived risk played a negative role in public participation intention.
Lastly, the findings on public participation intention in smart city development vary from previous studies, indicating discrepancies in different backgrounds. Among the factors directly influencing the public’s intention to participate in smart city development, the findings showed that the path coefficient of the subjective norm was the largest. In addition, this study was a pioneer in the field of smart city development from the perspective of the public in China, which can further enrich regional research.
6.2. Practical Implications
Perceived risk negatively influenced the public participation intention in smart city development. Hence, measures should be taken to reduce the risk. This study offers practical implications that are beneficial to policymakers, related enterprises, and other stakeholders.
First, smart city development and subsequent operation are typically data-driven. The public is not only a vital participant in smart city development but also an important provider of data sources and feedback. However, the public is expected to improve their awareness of privacy protection and proactive prevention so as to avoid potential security risks and loss of personal information disclosure. In order to further enhance their ability to protect privacy, learning personal privacy protection policies and related procedures should be strengthened by the public. Moreover, the city government should improve the privacy protection mechanism and policies and reduce the possibility and loss of risk by increasing appropriate punishment. Some cities have already begun to formulate relevant policies, such as “Shanghai data regulations”, released in November 2021. For the sake of increasing the public’s ability to identify and screen risk, the government also needs to extend various channels of publicity and reinforce the guidance of public opinion. Accordingly, a solid institutional guarantee for public privacy protection should be provided and improved by the government.
Second, smart city development requires the application of ICTs, but the public’s discrepancies in accessing, applying, and affording new technologies might lead to a digital divide. The divide will further affect their participation intention and degree. Therefore, the city government and relevant associations could set up corresponding training courses, which can equip the public with appropriate skills and qualities to use technologies and avoid being gradually marginalized. For example, the training activity on information technology application for special education was held in Qingdao. In addition, for the disabled, aged, and other vulnerable groups, alternative technologies, products, or services should be developed and supplied by related enterprises. These alternative ones can not only increase the channels and pervasiveness of public participation but also enhance the social inclusion of smart city development.
Third, the potential risks of information security and use have been encountered by the public during their participation in smart city development. The risks may result in negative emotions, such as distrust, which can further inhibit their participating intentions. Combining the actual characteristics of digital and network space in smart city development, the government should increasingly improve special policy systems of information usage and security. For example, an action plan for data security and personal information protection was implemented in Tianjin. Moreover, the behaviors of information insecurity and usage infringement should be explicitly defined, and corresponding punishments also need to be provided. Accordingly, the government should strengthen the penalty for infringement behavior and actively promote the credit system of digital space and network environment through the development of smart cities. In addition to emphasizing institution construction and government supervision, the industry self-discipline with relevant enterprises and practitioners should be further strengthened.
Forth, potential conflicts between the public and other stakeholders involved in smart city development should be considered, which can negatively affect the public’s participation intention. In order to reduce the conflicts, it is necessary to build a cooperation mechanism involving multiple stakeholders. By enhancing different stakeholders’ communication and cooperation and optimizing and adjusting the allocation of urban resources, the different stakeholders’ uneven interests should be further balanced. Accordingly, a flat urban governance structure, including the government, enterprises, and the public as main participants, should be constructed. Taking Jinan as an example, a co-contribution and coordinating model by the main participants is emphasized. This is not only conducive to the effective supply of public services but also creates conditions for conflict resolution and collaborative governance of all participants.
Lastly, attitudes and subjective norms are found to be both positively associated with public participation intention. To increase the public’s positive attitude toward participating in smart city development, the government can establish partnerships with the public, relevant enterprises, and other stakeholders. Moreover, the publicity for smart city development should be strengthened by the government and companies to attract more public participation. In addition, participating channels for public participation can also be expanded by the government and enterprises, such as offline activity and online platforms. In terms of subjective norms, the public feels social pressure when they are making decisions to participate in smart city development. The citizens of Shanghai can fill in the online questionnaire about their needs for a smart city by Apps. Therefore, except for the policy guidance and extended publicity by the government, urban culture and atmosphere that encourage public participation need to be considered.
6.3. Limitations
The limitations should also be highlighted for future research. First, the data applied in this research were all collected in Mainland China, which may reduce the generalizability of the results due to the differences in culture and development context. In addition, the cross-sectional data might also limit the generalizability as public participation in smart city development tends to vary with time. Future research will expand the regions of data collection, and increase the number of valid data, so as to further improve the universality of the research conclusions. Second, few studies on the perceived risk of public participation in smart city development have been conducted, and the definition of the perceived risk might be different from diverse perspectives. In future research, the connotation, extension, and system framework of risk perceived by the public need to be further improved. Third, this study mainly explored the effect of perceived risk on the public participation intention in smart city development. However, there might be other crucial determinants that are significantly related to the intention. Since public participation plays a notable role in smart city development and operation, future studies need to investigate other antecedent factors (e.g., participation cost) influencing public participation intention and behavior from different viewpoints.