Empowering Smart Cities Through Start-Ups: A Sustainability Framework for Incubator-City Collaboration

Abstract

The rapid advancement of Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0 technologies presents unprecedented opportunities to align start-up incubators with smart cities’ sustainability goals, fostering innovation and addressing complex urban challenges. This study introduces the Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework (SCISF)—a structured conceptual model that integrates sustainable business model innovation, digital transformation, and circular economy principles into incubator practices. Through an integrative literature review, conceptual framework development, and empirical application, the research identifies six key components essential for aligning incubators with smart city objectives: strategic vision alignment, technological integration, circular economy practices, public engagement, scalability, and impact monitoring. The framework’s empirical application to the Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF) incubator demonstrates its effectiveness in assessing incubator contributions to urban sustainability. The findings highlight strengths in public engagement and strategic vision, alongside opportunities to enhance Industry 5.0 integration, cross-sector partnerships, and ESG-driven impact reporting. By bridging the gap between city objectives and start-up ecosystems, the SCISF provides actionable insights for policymakers, urban planners, and incubator managers to foster smart, circular, and resilient urban environments.

1. Introduction

The imperative for sustainable urban development has become a cornerstone of global policy agendas, driven by the dual challenges of climate change and rapid urbanisation [1]. While Industry 4.0 technologies—IoT, AI, and big data analytics—have catalysed advancements in smart city infrastructure, the emergence of Industry 5.0 introduces a paradigm shift, prioritising human-centricity, resilience, and circularity as core pillars of sustainable innovation [2]. This evolution underscores the need for systemic frameworks that harmonise technological integration with societal well-being, particularly as cities transition toward the “Society 5.0” model, where digital transformation aligns with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [3].

Governments and businesses remain pivotal actors in this transition, yet the role of start-up incubators as intermediaries of disruptive innovation remains underexplored [4]. These entities serve as crucibles for translating Industry 4.0/5.0 technologies—such as blockchain-enabled resource management, AI-driven predictive analytics, and IoT-based smart grids—into scalable solutions for urban challenges. For instance, accelerators like PowerHUB (Prague) and X-Europe (Amsterdam) exemplify how to bridge gaps between smart city objectives (e.g., energy efficiency, mobility optimisation) and entrepreneurial ventures, fostering ecosystems that operationalise SDGs 9 (Industry, Innovation, Infrastructure) and 11 (Sustainable Cities). Similarly, initiatives in major global economies highlight this trend: Germany’s Munich Urban Colab supports IoT-driven urban sustainability projects; France’s Station F in Paris incubates start-ups focused on smart infrastructure and circular economy solutions; the UK’s Smart London Innovation Network collaborates with tech ventures to enhance public services through data analytics; the Urban Tech Hub in New York accelerates smart mobility and energy innovations; Seoul’s Digital Media City fosters AI and digital twin technologies for urban management; and Shenzhen’s innovation ecosystem in China leverages incubators to scale smart manufacturing and green logistics. However, the current literature lacks a cohesive model to diagnose and amplify synergies between these incubators and smart city governance structures, particularly in multi-stakeholder collaboration.

This study addresses this gap by proposing the Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework (SCISF), a diagnostic tool designed to optimise the alignment of start-up ecosystems with urban sustainability agendas. Grounded in the principles of Industry 5.0—sustainability, human-centricity, and resilience—the SCISF integrates three novel dimensions:

• Technological symbiosis—aligning IoT, AI, and blockchain solutions with city-specific SDG targets (e.g., air quality monitoring and smart water management).
• Stakeholder orchestration—facilitating public-private-academic partnerships to address systemic barriers, such as digital divides and ethical AI deployment.
• Resilience metrics—embedding adaptive capacity assessments to ensure incubator outputs withstand socio-economic shocks, as post-pandemic smart city initiatives demonstrate.

To anchor this inquiry, the study poses two research questions:

• RQ1: What role do start-up incubators play in supporting the development of sustainable and smart cities?
• RQ2: What parameters should a structured framework designed to diagnose, facilitate, and moderate relationships between smart cities and start-up incubators include?

The primary objective of this research is to develop a universally applicable framework that leverages Industry 4.0 technologies and Industry 5.0 principles to enhance the alignment between cities and start-up ecosystems. By identifying critical factors, the SCISF provides actionable insights for cities and incubators that aim to foster resilience, inclusivity, and environmental stewardship.

This paper contributes to the discourse on sustainable urban innovation by offering a novel perspective on the role of start-up incubators in smart city development, advancing the understanding of sustainable business model innovation within digitalised urban environments.

The paper is organised as follows: Section 2 provides the background and context for the study. Section 3 details the research methodology employed. Section 4 introduces the Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework and demonstrates its applicability. Finally, Section 5 and Section 6 discuss the results, present the conclusions, and highlight implications for research and practice.

2. Background

2.1. Urbanisation

Urbanisation, recognised by the United Nations as one of four major demographic megatrends alongside population growth, ageing, and migration, has significantly reshaped global demographics [5]. The urban population surged from 0.75 billion in 1950 to 4.22 billion in 2018 and is projected to reach 68% of the global population by 2050, with rapid growth concentrated in Asia and Africa [6]. While urbanisation drives economic development, it also presents significant challenges, including urban sprawl, resource constraints, and socio-economic disparities [7].

Cities range in size, with the number of megacities (over 10 million residents) expected to increase from 33 in 2018 to 43 by 2030 [6]. While some urban areas are expanding due to climate-induced migration, others—particularly in developed regions—are experiencing population decline due to ageing [8]. To meet Sustainable Development Goal 11, cities must focus on inclusive growth, equitable access to housing and infrastructure, and environmental resilience.

Urban planning must balance quantity and quality of life, integrating green infrastructure, social services, and climate adaptation strategies to enhance well-being [6,9]. The COVID-19 pandemic further underscored the need for cross-sector collaboration in transport, housing, and healthcare to support sustainable urban transformation [6]. Addressing these challenges demands integrated policies that align urban development with economic and environmental sustainability goals [10].

2.2. Smart City Concept

The Smart City concept has evolved with technological progress, urbanisation, and sustainability imperatives, yet lacks a universally agreed definition [11,12]. It is often described as an intelligent, digital, or knowledge-based urban system that leverages technology, governance, and citizen engagement for sustainable development [13,14]. Caragliu et al. [15] define smart cities as those that invest in human capital, modern infrastructure, and participatory governance to enhance economic growth and quality of life. Others emphasise citizen well-being [16], ICT-driven resource efficiency [17,18], and the integration of technological, human, and institutional factors [19,20].

Key characteristics of Smart Cities include technology integration (IoT, AI, big data) for optimising services [21], sustainability through resource efficiency and climate resilience [19], and citizen-centricity, fostering public engagement via digital platforms [22,23]. Cities demonstrating these principles can certify compliance with ISO 37120, which assesses urban services across health, education, transportation, environment, and energy [24].

Despite their benefits, Smart Cities face challenges such as the digital divide, which exacerbates inequality [25], privacy and security risks due to extensive data collection [26], and interoperability issues, where disparate technologies hinder seamless integration [27,28,29]. The concept has expanded to include smart agriculture and health [30,31] and played a vital role during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in digital healthcare innovations [32].

Recent discourse has shifted toward Sustainable Smart Cities, integrating advanced technologies, data analytics, and climate-conscious policies to enhance resilience while promoting economic prosperity and social equity [33,34,35]. These cities prioritise energy efficiency, emissions reduction, green infrastructure, and waste management to mitigate environmental risks and create liveable, resilient urban environments [36,37].

2.3. Sustainable Smart Cities and Start-Up Ecosystems

In Sustainable Smart Cities, startup ecosystems—including incubators and accelerators—drive innovation by supporting early-stage enterprises focused on urban solutions [38]. They provide resources, mentorship, and networking, enabling startups to leverage IoT, AI, and sustainable infrastructure to improve urban living [39].

Startups and spin-offs play a key role in smart city transformation, fostering technology-driven innovation while benefiting from city support and acting as service providers for urban needs [40,41]. Cities cultivate this innovation through collaborative environments and public-private partnerships, helping mitigate risks related to limited expertise and funding [42,43]. The demand for specialised skills in emerging technologies, particularly in transportation and energy, further fuels startup activity.

This mutually beneficial relationship allows startups to introduce new technologies, manage urban infrastructures, and test market-ready solutions while addressing gaps in city administration knowledge [44,45]. Public and private incubators bridge entrepreneurs with investors, providing crucial support services and global networking opportunities and fostering local entrepreneurship and innovation [45].

Despite this potential, a structured framework for aligning incubator strategies with smart city sustainability goals remains lacking. This paper addresses this gap by proposing the Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework (SCISF), offering a practical tool for integrating technological innovation, circular economy principles, and ESG compliance into urban development.

3. Methods

This conceptual paper aims to develop a structured framework to diagnose, facilitate, and moderate relationships between smart cities and start-up incubators by employing a three-stage methodological approach: an integrative literature review, framework development, and empirical application. As utilised in this study, conceptual research relies on a model approach to explore new, previously unexamined relationships between concepts and their elements [46]. This approach is particularly suited for addressing emerging phenomena with limited empirical data, as it enables researchers to combine existing concepts in innovative ways, integrate insights from various disciplines, and provide multi-level, comprehensive perspectives [47,48]. The model approach focuses on detailing, graphically presenting, describing, and illustrating the relationships between entities [49]. Unlike purely theoretical work, conceptual research bridges theory and practice, generating new insights that can initiate further investigation or serve as breakthroughs in management and policymaking [50]. This is particularly relevant in management and sustainability, where many promising theories remain empirically untested.

This study documents the theoretical and practical state-of-the-art in sustainable urban development and business incubation processes. It synthesises these insights to develop a novel framework that integrates the roles of start-up incubators within the broader context of smart and sustainable city development. The research process included the following stages:

• Integrative literature review—conducted to synthesise existing knowledge and identify gaps related to smart cities, sustainability, and the role of incubators.
• Framework development—the insights from the literature review will be synthesised into a cohesive framework that outlines the key components of the start-up incubators and smart city cooperation.
• Empirical application—the developed framework will be applied to a practical context to illustrate its utility and explore its implications for research and practice.

3.1. Stage 1: Integrative Literature Review

The first stage aimed to answer RQ1: “What role do start-up incubators play in supporting the development of sustainable and smart cities?” To achieve this, an integrative literature review was conducted to identify and synthesise research on the intersection of start-up incubation and smart city development [51].

The review utilised two databases:

• Scopus (for peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings across disciplines).
• Google Scholar (for broader access to books, theses, and reports).

The search strategy employed the keywords: (“start-up incubator” OR “start-up accelerator”) AND (“smart city” OR “sustainable city”), ensuring relevance to smart city and sustainability themes. Only studies with these terms in the title or abstract were considered. From an initial 598 publications (Scopus = 321, Google Scholar = 277), a two-step screening process was applied:

• Abstract review to exclude studies where the keywords appeared incidentally or in unrelated contexts.
• Full-text analysis, resulting in 87 publications for in-depth review.

Then, a qualitative coding approach [52,53] was used to extract key themes. The literature was categorised based on recurring concepts, theoretical frameworks, and practical insights, supporting the development of the SCISF conceptual model.

3.2. Stage 2: Framework Development

The second stage sought to answer RQ2: “What parameters should a structured framework include to diagnose, facilitate, and moderate relationships between smart cities and start-up incubators?” This phase involved a manual qualitative content analysis to synthesise findings into a structured framework.

Thematic analysis followed a three-step process:

• Open coding—key concepts related to smart cities, incubators, and sustainability—such as Industry 4.0 tools, circular economy principles, and strategic alignment—were extracted and documented for consistency.
• Axial coding—themes were grouped into broader categories, mapping interconnections between elements.
• Selective coding—the final six components of the SCISF were synthesised, ensuring they were mutually exclusive yet collectively exhaustive, capturing the full scope of incubator-smart city interactions.

This iterative process ensured the framework was empirically grounded and conceptually robust.

3.3. Stage 3: Empirical Application

The final stage empirically applied the SCISF to assess its practical relevance in a real-world context. The case study focused on the Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF) incubator, examining its role in advancing smart city sustainability.

A mixed-methods approach was used for a comprehensive analysis:

• Quantitative Research:

A structured expert interview questionnaire, consisting of a 5-point Likert scale and open-ended questions for qualitative insights on strategic objectives, sustainability practices, and technological adoption, was conducted using the Computer-Aided Web Interview (CAWI) technique. The survey gathered responses from three experts, two middle-class managers, and two C-suite managers (70% of invited participants). The questionnaire was administered from 7 December 2023, to 10 January 2024, with two reminder emails sent to ensure completion.

• Qualitative Research:

  o

  Unstructured interviews with management and employees (45–60 min per interview, conducted remotely via Teams) and document analysis explored GEF’s operational strategies, stakeholder engagement, and ESG alignment. This phase lasted from 11 January to 18 January 2024.

  o

  A three-hour workshop with a group of six GEF management and staff members was held on 19 January 2024, to validate findings and refine the framework.

The data for the pilot application were primarily drawn from a broader research project documented in the Report on the Identification of Business Processes in the Context of ESG Reporting at the Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation [54]. This report provided valuable insights into GEF’s business processes, ESG metrics, and strategic alignment with sustainability and smart city objectives, forming the basis for the empirical validation of SCISF.

4. Results

4.1. Stage 1: Integrative Literature Review

An integrative literature review approach explored the multidisciplinary intersection of start-up incubators, smart cities, and sustainability. This method enabled the synthesis of diverse research perspectives, covering technological innovation, urban development, circular economy, public engagement, and policy frameworks. The literature review focused on the following thematic areas, identified as crucial for the SCISF:

• Sustainability Goals Alignment
• Smart City Technologies and Industry 4.0 Integration
• Circular Economy Initiatives
• Energy Efficiency and Sustainability
• Public Engagement and Inclusivity
• Scalability and Replicability
• Economic Viability and Job Creation
• Urban Resilience and Adaptation
• Policy and Regulatory Support
• Monitoring and Reporting on Impact

4.1.1. Sustainability Goals Alignment

Aligning start-up incubators with city sustainability goals is key to building innovation ecosystems that address environmental and climate challenges. Incubators nurture start-ups advancing renewable energy, waste reduction, and water conservation, supporting broader climate action targets like carbon neutrality and fostering green infrastructure solutions [55]. Initiatives such as Green Garage Berlin and similar programs in Sweden, Finland, and Germany exemplify how regional cooperation, structured pre-incubation, and long-term funding create a continuous flow of sustainability-focused innovation [56,57].

Incorporating Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into incubator operations has become standard practice, especially in developing countries like India, where collaboration between programs and SDG-focused missions generates measurable impacts aligned with global sustainability priorities [58,59]. Knowledge transfer also plays a critical role—by raising awareness, identifying challenges, and assessing opportunities, incubators empower start-ups to create meaningful environmental solutions [60].

Technological innovation further enhances incubator alignment with sustainability goals, with digital tools, advanced marketing strategies, and training programs helping start-ups adopt sustainability principles [59]. Notable examples include Greentown Labs in the United States, which acts as a hub for economic development, innovation, and environmental sustainability, demonstrating the regenerative potential of linking entrepreneurship with green growth [61].

4.1.2. Smart City Technologies and Industry 4.0 Integration

The integration of Industry 4.0 technologies into smart cities highlights the role of start-up incubators as key drivers of technological innovation and sustainable urban transformation. Start-ups supported by incubators leverage IoT, big data analytics, AI, and blockchain to enhance city infrastructure and operations, enabling solutions such as smart energy grids, real-time traffic management, and predictive air quality monitoring [62,63].

Urban mobility has also been transformed by incubator-supported start-ups developing electric vehicles (EVs), autonomous transport, and smart public transit networks, reducing congestion and emissions while promoting sustainable urban mobility [64].

The foundation of smart cities lies in digital infrastructure, where 5G networks, broadband, and IoT sensors enable seamless connectivity across sectors. Investments in these technologies facilitate innovations like adaptive lighting, real-time analytics, and AI-driven disaster management [63]. Incubators provide crucial support, offering access to cutting-edge technology, mentorship, and investor networks, allowing start-ups to scale solutions for complex urban challenges [65,66].

The success of smart city initiatives depends on cross-sector collaboration among governments, businesses, and start-ups. Incubators act as connectors, fostering partnerships that align technological advancements with urban sustainability goals and ensuring balanced and inclusive development [64,67].

4.1.3. Circular Economy Initiatives

Start-up incubators play a vital role in developing and scaling circular business models, helping transition from traditional linear systems to a sustainable circular economy. They support innovations in recycling technologies, sustainable manufacturing, and upcycling, while also promoting low-carbon logistics and local sourcing strategies to reduce supply chain impacts [68]. Incubators provide access to critical information and networking opportunities, fostering collaborations with firms, government agencies, and analysts to identify circular economy opportunities through tools like Material Flow Analysis [68,69].

Entrepreneurial ecosystems, often linked to universities and business incubators, enable start-ups to scale circular models while balancing economic, social, and environmental benefits [70,71]. However, education and awareness remain crucial, as many entrepreneurs still associate circular strategies primarily with waste management rather than value-added waste conversion [72].

Acceleration programs like Circular Jumpstart provide structured mentorship, funding access, and collaboration networks, helping start-ups refine innovations and adapt to market demands [73]. A multi-level approach, integrating macro-level policies, meso-level circular supply chains, and micro-level circular start-ups, ensures circular practices are embedded across industries, supporting resource efficiency and sustainable production patterns [71]. By fostering these initiatives, incubators drive environmental sustainability and circular business adoption.

4.1.4. Energy Efficiency and Sustainability

Start-up incubators play a crucial role in advancing clean energy innovation by providing resources, mentorship, and network access to start-ups developing solar, wind, energy storage, and decentralised energy systems such as microgrids and peer-to-peer energy trading. A key focus is investing in clean energy technologies that enhance end-use efficiency and demand control, supporting the decarbonisation of the electricity sector [74,75].

Institutions like the National Alliance for Clean Energy Incubators exemplify how incubators facilitate capital raises and industry connections to drive energy innovation. Universities have also become key players, launching incubators dedicated to commercialising clean technologies and strengthening the link between academic research and practical application [76].

Incubators prioritise energy-efficient urban infrastructure, supporting innovations such as smart thermostats and retrofitting technologies to reduce energy consumption in buildings. Decentralised energy systems, including microgrids and peer-to-peer trading platforms, are gaining traction for their role in enhancing resilience and democratising energy access [74,77].

Real-world examples highlight incubators’ impact: the U.S. Department of Energy’s Photovoltaic Technology Incubator has boosted solar manufacturing capacity, creating jobs and increasing competitiveness [78]. Likewise, South Africa’s Gauteng Climate Innovation Centre supports green start-ups, addressing climate challenges while fostering enterprise development [77].

4.1.5. Public Engagement and Inclusivity

Incubators support startups that develop tools for civic participation, such as participatory budgeting apps, environmental monitoring platforms, and open data systems, empowering residents to shape their urban environments. By fostering diversity and inclusion, incubators ensure marginalised communities are not excluded from green and smart city solutions. Effective public policy and institutional reforms integrate governments, residents, and businesses, creating a shared vision for inclusive and innovative urban development while bridging economic and societal needs [65]. The link between business incubation and urban development is evident, as incubators enhance local development by supporting startups aligned with smart city goals. Diverse incubation approaches yield varied outcomes, reflecting unique urban contexts [62]. Local entrepreneurs create public value by fostering cooperation around smart technologies, bridging gaps between the state, market, and society, and accelerating sustainability transitions. Governments balance commercial interests with citizen needs, ensuring equitable distribution of benefits [79,80].

4.1.6. Scalability and Replicability

Start-up incubators and accelerators are pivotal in fostering scalable and replicable solutions to address urban challenges and promote sustainability. They provide startups with resources, mentorship, and networking to develop innovations that can expand within cities or adapt to diverse urban contexts. Scalability involves extending solutions across cities, often supported by universities offering research, talent, and funding. Replicability tailors solutions to different environments, addressing local needs, regulations, and cultures. Partnerships with local entities ensure these solutions maintain core functionality while adapting effectively to new contexts [81]. Partnerships with larger entities such as corporations, universities, and public institutions are key to scaling and replicating innovations. These collaborations provide startups with the resources, expertise, and market access necessary to expand their solutions beyond the initial urban context. Additionally, such partnerships offer startups credibility, financial backing, and institutional support, which can significantly accelerate the process of scaling and replication [82].

4.1.7. Economic Viability and Job Creation

Start-up incubators drive economic growth and job creation, particularly in sustainability-focused sectors such as renewable energy, sustainable construction, and eco-friendly products. By providing resources, mentorship, and networks, incubators strengthen local supply chains and SMEs, fostering smart and green city ecosystems [83].

The economic impact of incubators is complex. While they may initially have a negative effect on sales revenue, long-term evidence suggests a positive turnaround, emphasising the need for strategic planning and patience [84]. However, their direct impact on job creation is less clear, with studies indicating a minimal immediate effect. Instead, their role lies in stimulating innovation and sustainable development, with sector-specific approaches proving most effective. For example, in the agri-tech sector, incubators have successfully driven economic progress and employment growth through tailored services such as funding, mentorship, and legal support [85].

Beyond financial outcomes, incubators act as innovation intermediaries, connecting government, businesses, and local stakeholders to advance green economic development. This role is particularly vital during institutional uncertainty, where incubators help scale sustainable innovations and challenge outdated systems [83]. Their effectiveness is shaped by regional environmental policies and knowledge networks, which influence the sustainability ambitions of affiliated start-ups [86]. In regions with strong environmental policies, incubators also enhance the formation and financing of green start-ups, reinforcing their role in sustainable economic development [87].

4.1.8. Urban Resilience and Adaptation

Incubators equip start-ups with resources, networks, and expertise to develop resilient urban solutions, including flood detection systems, heat-resistant infrastructure, and disaster management tools. They also promote sustainable urban planning technologies, such as smart zoning systems and real-time environmental monitoring platforms, strengthening cities’ ability to withstand public health, economic, and environmental crises [88].

For climate adaptation, start-ups are encouraged to implement risk and asset management frameworks, integrating them into urban planning to mitigate climate risks and enhance resilience [89]. Additionally, human-centred urban digital twins (UDTs) leverage AI and multi-agent interactions to improve infrastructure resilience and support adaptive planning [90].

Incubators also foster resilient entrepreneurial ecosystems by merging technological innovation with human capital, creating socio-technical systems capable of adapting to urban challenges [91]. In marginalised communities, incubators play a vital role in driving economic development and addressing social challenges by leveraging local resources and entrepreneurship to support community growth [92].

4.1.9. Policy and Regulatory Support

Start-up incubators thrive in policy environments that support smart and green innovations. Local governments facilitate this by offering financial incentives, green financing schemes, and open data access, lowering startup barriers. Prioritising locally developed solutions in municipal procurement further aligns innovations with urban sustainability goals. Effective collaboration among incubators, government agencies, academia, and industry is essential for scaling these solutions [58,93].

Incubators and accelerators link local, state, and business efforts to advance green economic development, especially during institutional uncertainty [83]. For example, South Africa’s Climate Innovation Centre supports green technologies and climate-compatible growth [77]. Green financing policies also address funding barriers for sustainable startups but require ongoing refinement to enhance accessibility [94,95]. Networking and open innovation boost sustainable value creation through technological advancement [86].

Challenges persist in fully integrating sustainability into incubator operations. Many incubators show interest but lack systems to support tenants with sustainability-specific services, requiring coordinated policy efforts [96]. Policy support should also be tailored to a firm’s size and development stage, as market identification is more critical for new entrants than those expanding their green offerings [97].

4.1.10. Monitoring and Reporting on Impact

Incubators need robust systems to monitor and report environmental and social impacts effectively. This requires comprehensive metrics and continuous improvement mechanisms to adapt to feedback and urban ecosystem needs. Key environmental metrics include carbon reductions, energy savings, and waste diversion, which measure incubators’ contributions to sustainability goals [60,98,99]. Social impact metrics are equally important, particularly for incubators supporting startups with social missions. Using triple bottom line frameworks—covering social, economic, and environmental dimensions—ensures a holistic evaluation of impact [99,100]. ESG criteria also help assess environmental stewardship and social responsibility, attracting socially responsible investment [101,102]. Continuous improvement mechanisms further enhance incubator effectiveness by using impact assessment insights to refine support programs [60,98].

Although incubators have the potential to drive urban sustainability, there is no structured framework aligning their activities with smart city objectives. More research is needed to integrate sustainability criteria into incubator models to support city-wide environmental and social priorities better, enabling inclusive and sustainable urban ecosystems.

4.2. Stage 2: Framework Development

Finally, the SCISF was structured into six interconnected components, each defined based on the synthesised themes (Figure 1):

• Strategic Vision Alignment—emerged from the need to map incubator activities to urban sustainability goals and integrate SDGs into incubation models.
• Technological Integration and Digital Infrastructure—was formulated by analysing the pivotal role of Industry 4.0 technologies in optimising urban systems and enabling smart city functionalities.
• Circular Economy and Resource Efficiency—was defined by recurring themes on circular business models, supply chain innovations, and sustainable production practices.
• Public Engagement and Inclusivity—was shaped by insights on fostering civic participation, inclusive innovation models, and equitable urban development policies.
• Scalability and Replicability of Solutions—emerged from the identified need for adaptable business models and strategic partnerships that facilitate growth and contextual adaptation.
• Monitoring, Reporting, and Continuous Improvement—was established by recognising the importance of impact metrics, ESG reporting, and feedback loops for continuous enhancement of incubator programs.

Figure 1. Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework. Source: Authors’ own study.

Figure 1. Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework. Source: Authors’ own study.

These components were cross-referenced with multiple sources to ensure their validity and reliability, ensuring that each was empirically grounded and contextually relevant.

Table 1. Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework (SCISF).

Category	Objective	Key Elements	Implementation Tools	Key References
1. Strategic Vision Alignment	Ensure congruence between smart city sustainability objectives and incubator missions.	- Sustainability Goal Mapping—Aligning start-up incubation initiatives with urban sustainability goals, such as carbon neutrality, green infrastructure, and circular economy practices. - SDG Integration—Incorporating relevant Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into the operational models of incubators to enhance social and environmental impacts. - Strategic Partnerships—Establishing cross-sector partnerships with local governments, research institutions, and private sectors to foster regional cooperation and long-term funding.	- Strategic vision workshops for stakeholders. - Alignment matrices linking incubator activities to urban sustainability metrics.	[56,58,60]
2. Technological Integration and Digital Infrastructure	Utilise advanced digital technologies to optimise smart city operations and support sustainable start-ups.	- Industry 4.0 Tools—Leveraging IoT, AI, blockchain, and big data analytics to optimise urban infrastructure, including smart energy grids, urban mobility, and real-time environmental monitoring. - Industry 5.0 Integration—Fostering human-centric innovations that enhance urban resilience and inclusivity, focusing on collaborative AI systems and digital twins for urban planning. - Digital Infrastructure Investment—Developing robust digital infrastructures such as 5G networks and IoT-enabled smart sensors to support scalable start-up solutions.	- Digital innovation labs within incubators. - Public-private partnerships for digital infrastructure development.	[62,63,65]
3. Circular Economy and Resource Efficiency	Promote circular business models and resource-efficient solutions.	- Circular Business Models—Supporting start-ups in developing circular products, recycling technologies, sustainable manufacturing, and upcycling solutions. - Supply Chain Innovation—Fostering low-carbon logistics, local sourcing, and circular supply chains to enhance urban sustainability. - Knowledge Networks Facilitating knowledge exchange on circular economy practices through multi-stakeholder networks, including universities, government agencies, and private enterprises.	- Circular economy acceleration programs. - Collaborative platforms for knowledge sharing and resource optimisation.	[69,70,73]
4. Public Engagement and Inclusivity	Foster inclusive urban innovation by involving diverse stakeholders, including marginalised communities.	- Civic Participation Tools—Developing tools for civic engagement, such as participatory budgeting platforms and open data systems, to empower community-driven urban innovation. - Inclusive Incubation Models—Designing incubation programs that cater to underrepresented groups, ensuring equitable access to resources and opportunities. - Policy and Institutional Reforms—Advocating for inclusive urban policies that integrate community needs with smart city solutions.	- Digital platforms for citizen engagement. - Community-centric incubator outreach programs.	[65,79,80]
5. Scalability and Replicability of Solutions	Enable the growth and adaptation of start-up solutions across diverse urban contexts.	- Scalable Innovations—Supporting start-ups in developing scalable solutions for smart cities, such as urban mobility systems, energy efficiency tools, and digital governance platforms. - Replicability Frameworks—Creating adaptable business models that can be customised for local regulations, cultural contexts, and urban challenges. - Cross-Sector Partnerships—Facilitating partnerships with universities, corporations, and public institutions to support scaling and replication.	- Growth hacking strategies for start-ups. - Cross-city pilot programs for testing replicable solutions.	[81,82]
6. Monitoring, Reporting, and Continuous Improvement	Ensure accountability and adaptive management through comprehensive impact monitoring and reporting.	- Impact Metrics—Developing metrics for environmental (e.g., carbon reductions), social (e.g., community development), and economic impacts (e.g., job creation). - Triple Bottom Line Evaluation—Applying a comprehensive framework encompassing social, economic, and environmental dimensions. - Continuous Improvement Mechanisms—Implement feedback loops to refine incubator models and support programs based on evolving urban needs and challenges.	- ESG reporting frameworks tailored for start-ups and incubators. - Digital dashboards for real-time impact monitoring and feedback integration.	[60,98,99]

Source: Authors’ own study.

presents a structured overview of the Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework (SCISF), highlighting each component’s objectives, key elements, implementation tools, and supporting references. This structured format ensures the framework’s scientific rigour and provides a clear, actionable guide for integrating start-up incubators into smart city sustainability strategies.

4.3. Stage 3: Empirical Application—Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF)

This section illustrates the application of the Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework (SCISF) through a pilot study on the Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF). This empirical application examines how GEF, as a pivotal incubator within the Gdańsk region, contributes to the Gdańsk smart city initiatives and sustainability objectives.

Gdańsk, located on Poland’s Baltic coast, is a frontrunner in advancing smart city initiatives to enhance urban living and sustainability. It was the first Polish city to receive the “smart city” certificate, which assesses the management of city services and quality of life. A cornerstone of its urban transformation is the “Gdańsk 2030 Plus Development Strategy”, emphasising citizen involvement, learning, cooperation, mobility, and openness [103].

The Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF) plays a crucial role in this ecosystem by fostering innovation and entrepreneurship within the region. As a key incubator, GEF supports the development of start-ups and micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), bridging the gap between business and education to drive economic growth and sustainability. Its mission includes cultivating entrepreneurial attitudes, particularly among youth, and preparing them for dynamic careers across industries. GEF actively integrates start-ups into the broader business ecosystem, enhancing their growth prospects and success rates. GEF’s strategic initiatives include:

• Mentoring, training, and specialised advisory services for individuals planning to start their own businesses, startups, and entrepreneurs.
• Entrepreneurial education programs tailored for youth and educators.
• Startup ecosystem support for industry-specific initiatives aligned with Pomeranian Smart Specialisations, including the blue and green economy.
• Publications, reports, and studies that inform and guide entrepreneurs, educators, and young professionals.
• Rental of modern office spaces offering favorable conditions for the growth of startups and innovative companies.

These initiatives provide essential resources and expertise that significantly contribute to the regional economy by fostering a vibrant and resilient entrepreneurial community [104].

This pilot application illustrates the practical implementation of the Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework (SCISF) within the context of GEF’s partnership with the City of Gdańsk. Specifically, the study aims to:

• Diagnose GEF’s alignment with smart city sustainability objectives and identify key strengths and areas for improvement in GEF’s strategic alignment, operational processes, and stakeholder engagement (

  Table 2. Pilot application of the Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework (SCISF)—the Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF) diagnosis.

  SCISF Component	Findings	Key Areas for Improvement
  1. Strategic Vision Alignment	- GEF aligns its activities with UN SDGs, including SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities), SDG 13 (Climate Action), and SDG 17 (Partnerships). - SDG Integration is evident in initiatives like the Hub of Innovation for Blue and Green Economy and Innovation and Entrepreneurship Hub for Youth. - GEF maintains an extensive network of partners, including the City of Gdańsk, but lacks deep cross-sector collaborations with private enterprises.	Cross-sector partnerships—strengthen collaborations with private enterprises and industry leaders, particularly in technology, energy, and urban mobility sectors.
  2. Technological Integration and Digital Infrastructure	- GEF supports start-ups leveraging IoT, AI, and big data analytics, particularly through the Blue Baltic Community initiative. - Limited focus on Industry 5.0 tools such as human-centric AI or collaborative systems for urban resilience. - Lacks advanced digital infrastructure like 5G networks or digital twins for urban planning.	Industry 5.0 integration—invest in human-centric AI systems, digital twins, and collaborative technologies for enhanced urban resilience and inclusivity.
  3. Circular Economy and Resource Efficiency	- GEF integrates circular economy concepts into educational programs, promoting sustainable development and circular practices. - No explicit mention of supply chain innovations or local sourcing strategies. - Participates in international networks like Digi-Inclusion, supporting knowledge exchange on sustainable practices.	Circular supply chains—advance circular economy initiatives by promoting circular supply chains, local sourcing, and sustainable manufacturing practices.
  4. Public Engagement and Inclusivity	- GEF actively engages with local communities, e.g., Women Can Sea initiative promoting gender equality in maritime industries. - Inclusive incubation models support social entrepreneurship and underrepresented groups. - Collaborates with the City of Gdańsk, influencing community-oriented urban development, but lacks structured policy advocacy.	Policy advocacy for inclusive urban development—establish a structured approach to policy advocacy to better integrate community needs into urban planning and smart city solutions, ensuring inclusive and equitable digital infrastructures and public services.
  5. Scalability and Replicability of Solutions	- GEF supports scalable innovations through the Business Booster initiative, facilitating market access for diverse start-ups. - Lacks a formal replicability framework for scaling solutions across different urban contexts. - Cross-sector partnerships are mainly international but limited in private-sector collaboration.	Replicability frameworks—develop adaptable business models for start-ups that can be scaled and replicated across different urban contexts.
  6. Monitoring, Reporting, and Continuous Improvement	- GEF tracks environmental, social, and governance metrics, including energy efficiency and social inclusion. - Applies a triple bottom line approach for strategic evaluation. - Feedback loops exist in educational programs but lack a formal continuous improvement system across all activities.	Continuous improvement mechanisms—implement comprehensive feedback loops and adaptive management systems to enhance strategic agility and continuous improvement.

  ).
• Formulate strategic recommendations to enhance GEF’s role as a catalyst for sustainable urban transformation and smart city development in Gdańsk (

  Table 3. Strategic recommendations for the Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF).

  SCISF Component	Recommendation	Expected Outcome
  1. Strategic Vision Alignment	- Deepen cross-sector partnerships—Establishing strategic alliances with private enterprises in technology, energy, and urban mobility sectors. - Enhance strategic vision workshops—Conducting regular workshops with stakeholders to align with evolving urban sustainability goals. - Broaden SDG integration—Expanding focus to include SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production).	- Stronger alignment with smart city objectives (e.g., align 100% of incubator KPIs with city smart city KPIs. - Increased strategic collaboration and resource mobilisation (e.g., 20% increase in cross-sector projects by 2025). - Enhanced impact on innovation-driven circular economy practices (e.g., €200K additional private-sector investment).
  2. Technological Integration and Digital Infrastructure	- Incorporate Industry 5.0 technologies—Investing in collaborative AI systems, digital twins, and human-centric IoT solutions. - Strengthen digital infrastructure—Partnering with tech companies to develop 5G networks, edge computing, and IoT smart sensors. - Establish digital innovation labs—Creating dedicated labs to prototype and pilot smart city solutions.	- Enhanced urban resilience and inclusivity (e.g., 30% reduction in municipal energy use via smart grids). - Scalable digital solutions for smart cities (e.g., 15 new AI-driven solutions by 2027). - Increased start-up success in tech-driven urban ecosystems (e.g., achieve 80%+ survival rate for tech start-ups post-incubation by 2027).
  3. Circular Economy and Resource Efficiency	- Foster circular supply chains—Collaborating with local suppliers to pilot circular supply chains and sustainable manufacturing practices. - Expand circular business model support—Offering targeted programs for start-ups developing circular products, recycling technologies, and upcycling solutions. - Launch knowledge networks—Establishing a Circular Economy Knowledge Network for knowledge exchange and resource optimization.	- Increased circular economy adoption among start-ups (e.g., 50% of incubated start-ups integrate circular principles by 2026). - Enhanced local sourcing and sustainable manufacturing practices (e.g., 25% waste reduction in partner industries). - Stronger stakeholder collaboration and resource efficiency (e.g., reduce resource waste in incubator operations by 25% by 2025).
  4. Public Engagement and Inclusivity	- Policy advocacy for inclusive urban development—Establishing a structured approach to policy advocacy to integrate community needs into urban planning and smart city solutions. - Expand community-centric incubation models—Developing tailored incubation programs for underrepresented groups. - Enhance civic participation platforms:—Implementing digital civic engagement platforms for participatory urban solutions.	- More inclusive urban innovation processes (e.g., 30% increase in social entrepreneurship applications). - Increased participation from marginalised communities (e.g., 1000+ active platform users by 2026). - Policy frameworks supporting digital equity and urban inclusivity (e.g., ensure 40% of incubator resources target marginalised communities).
  5. Scalability and Replicability of Solutions	- Develop replicability frameworks—Designing adaptable business models for start-ups that can be customized for local regulations and urban challenges. - Promote cross-city collaboration—Establishing cross-city pilot programs for testing and scaling solutions. - Strengthen cross-sector partnerships—Facilitating public-private partnerships with corporations, universities, and public institutions.	- Enhanced scalability and adaptability of start-up solutions (e.g., €500K in EU Horizon grants for scaling). - Increased cross-city collaborations and knowledge transfer (e.g., 5+ cities adopt GEF models by 2027). - Greater impact on smart city ecosystems (e.g., 50% of incubated solutions adopted in ≥2 city districts).
  6. Monitoring, Reporting, and Continuous Improvement	- Implement advanced ESG reporting frameworks—Adopting advanced ESG reporting tailored for start-ups and incubators. - Develop digital dashboards—Create real-time digital dashboards for impact monitoring and integration of feedback. - Establish continuous improvement mechanisms—Implementing feedback loops and adaptive management systems.	- Greater transparency and accountability in ESG impacts (e.g., 100% of start-ups report ESG metrics by 2026). - Data-driven decision-making and strategic agility (e.g., 25% improvement in SDG-aligned outcomes). - Continuous enhancement of incubation models and strategic vision (e.g., Integrate stakeholder feedback into strategic vision updates biannually).

  ).

The pilot SCISF analysis reveals that the Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF) demonstrates significant alignment with the SCISF components, particularly in strategic vision alignment, public engagement, and monitoring and reporting. GEF actively integrates SDGs into its strategic objectives, supports inclusive urban innovation, and employs a triple bottom line approach for impact evaluation. However, the analysis also highlights certain areas for improvement. These findings provide a solid foundation for strategic recommendations to enhance GEF’s role in fostering sustainable smart city development, leveraging start-up ecosystems within Industry 4.0 and 5.0 contexts (Table 3).

These recommendations provide a comprehensive roadmap for the Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF) to enhance its role in fostering sustainable smart city development. By expanding technological integration to include Industry 5.0, promoting circular economy practices, and improving public engagement and scalability frameworks, GEF can significantly strengthen its impact within smart city ecosystems. To operationalise these strategies, GEF should develop a detailed implementation plan, including timelines, resource allocations, and performance indicators.

5. Discussion

• RQ1: What role do start-up incubators play in supporting the development of sustainable and smart cities?

Start-up incubators are central to fostering sustainable and smart city development by acting as catalysts for innovation and collaboration. They provide essential resources, mentorship, and networking opportunities that empower start-ups to address urban challenges with technological and sustainable solutions. Incubators play a critical role in advancing clean energy technologies, circular economy models, and digital infrastructure, thereby contributing to cities’ goals for carbon neutrality, resource efficiency, and resilience to climate change.

Moreover, incubators bridge gaps between stakeholders, including local governments, academia, and businesses, enabling the co-creation of smart city solutions tailored to specific urban needs. Their focus on public engagement and inclusivity ensures that innovations benefit diverse communities, enhancing social equity within urban environments. By aligning start-ups’ missions with cities’ sustainability objectives, incubators not only support local economic development but also contribute to global efforts to combat climate change and resource depletion.

• RQ2: What parameters should a structured framework designed to diagnose, facilitate and moderate relationships between smart cities and start-up incubators include?

The Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework (SCISF) identifies six key components essential for strengthening collaborations between smart cities and start-up incubators. These components were developed through a comprehensive literature review and validated through the pilot study at the Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF).

• Strategic Vision Alignment—This ensures that incubator missions align with smart city sustainability goals, such as carbon neutrality and circular economy practices. It emphasises integrating SDGs and building strategic partnerships to maximise urban sustainability impact.
• Technological Integration and Digital Infrastructure—This highlights the importance of using Industry 4.0 and 5.0 technologies—including IoT, AI, and digital twins—to optimise urban systems. The GEF case showed the need for advanced digital infrastructure, such as 5G networks and collaborative AI, to support scalable start-up solutions.
• Circular Economy and Resource Efficiency—This promotes circular business models and sustainable supply chains. By supporting recycling technologies, sustainable manufacturing, and low-carbon logistics, incubators can drive circular economy practices in urban environments.
• Public Engagement and Inclusivity—This focuses on inclusive urban innovation by involving diverse stakeholders. Although GEF effectively engaged communities, it lacked a structured policy advocacy approach. Integrating community needs into urban planning is crucial for equitable digital infrastructures and public services.
• Scalability and Replicability of Solutions—This emphasises creating adaptable business models and forming cross-sector partnerships to scale start-up solutions in different urban contexts. GEF’s initiatives showed the importance of collaborating with universities, corporations, and public institutions to enhance global impact.
• Monitoring, Reporting, and Continuous Improvement—This ensures accountability through impact metrics and continuous feedback loops. While GEF used a triple bottom line evaluation, it could strengthen continuous improvement mechanisms using digital dashboards for real-time monitoring.

The pilot study at GEF demonstrated the framework’s effectiveness in aligning strategies, improving stakeholder collaboration, and enhancing operational efficiency. It also highlighted the need for stronger cross-sector partnerships, advanced digital infrastructure, and structured policy advocacy to promote inclusive urban innovation. The SCISF offers a strategic pathway for sustainable smart city development through effective incubator-city cooperation.

The findings of this study, while empirically grounded in the Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF) case, hold broader relevance for cities across Poland, Europe, and globally. For instance, cities such as Warsaw and Kraków in Poland face similar challenges in aligning start-up ecosystems with sustainability goals, particularly in scaling digital infrastructure (e.g., IoT for energy efficiency) and fostering circular economy practices. The SCISF framework’s emphasis on strategic vision alignment and stakeholder orchestration is equally applicable to these contexts, provided local adaptations are made to address regional policy landscapes and infrastructural capacities. Similarly, European cities like Munich (Germany) and Lyon (France), which prioritise Industry 5.0 human-centric innovations, could leverage the SCISF to enhance incubator-city collaboration in domains such as AI-driven public services or climate-resilient urban planning. Beyond Europe, the framework’s scalability and replicability components align with initiatives in Shenzhen (China), where incubators drive smart manufacturing, and Seoul (South Korea), which integrates digital twins into urban management. These examples underscore the SCISF’s adaptability to diverse governance models and technological priorities.

However, several key barriers may hinder its full implementation:

• Lack of government incentives—While some cities, like Gdańsk, benefit from EU sustainability policies, many municipalities lack targeted financial incentives, such as tax breaks or funding programs, to encourage incubators to prioritise sustainability-focused start-ups.
• Resistance from start-ups—Many entrepreneurs prioritise short-term profitability over sustainability, particularly in industries with high operational costs. Without clear market advantages or regulatory requirements, sustainability-driven innovation may not be a priority.
• Public-private sector integration challenges—Collaboration between municipal governments and incubators requires long-term strategic alignment, which can disrupt political shifts or administrative inefficiencies. In cities with fragmented governance structures, start-ups may struggle to navigate regulatory hurdles, slowing their contribution to urban sustainability.
• Infrastructure limitations—In cities with weaker digital ecosystems, the SCISF component on technological integration may require foundational investments in connectivity, data-sharing platforms, and smart grid infrastructure before incubators can fully contribute to smart city initiatives.
• Regulatory differences—National policies shape the effectiveness of incubator-city collaboration. In countries with strong green transition incentives (e.g., Germany), start-ups receive direct financial support for circular economy projects. Conversely, incubators may need alternative funding models in cities with weaker environmental regulations to support ESG-driven entrepreneurship.

Addressing these barriers requires a combination of policy interventions, cross-sector partnerships, and targeted financial mechanisms. Cities with emerging sustainability strategies should focus on integrating incubator-friendly policies, such as dedicated funding for green start-ups and regulatory frameworks that encourage long-term investment in smart city technologies.

Practical and Research Implications

The findings of this study hold significant practical implications for urban development and sustainability. The Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework (SCISF) offers a structured approach to fostering collaboration between cities and start-up incubators. For cities like Gdańsk, the framework provides actionable insights into integrating start-up-driven innovations into urban planning to address sustainability and smart city development challenges. Policymakers can utilise these insights to design targeted regulatory and financial incentives, such as tax breaks for green innovations or prioritising locally incubated start-ups in municipal procurement. These measures can strengthen the alignment between incubator activities and broader city sustainability objectives.

For incubators, the SCISF highlights the importance of expanding their capacity to support start-ups in key areas such as energy efficiency, circular economy, and public engagement. By adopting best practices and fostering the integration of digital technologies, incubators can enhance their role as hubs for sustainable innovation. Moreover, the framework emphasises the need for scalable and replicable solutions that address urban challenges locally and globally. Innovators can amplify their impact and contribute to global sustainability efforts by developing innovations adaptable to diverse urban contexts. Jointly developing integrated monitoring systems with city administrations can ensure accountability and continuous improvement, enabling cities and incubators to track progress on shared goals such as carbon neutrality and digital inclusion.

From a research perspective, the study opens new avenues for exploring the dynamics between incubators and city governance. Future research could investigate how incubators influence urban resilience, climate adaptation, and economic diversification. The SCISF presents opportunities for empirical validation across different urban contexts, providing insights into its adaptability and effectiveness under varying regional policies, socio-economic conditions, and technological infrastructures. Additionally, exploring the role of incubators in emerging economies can reveal how these entities address unique urban challenges, such as rapid urbanisation and resource constraints. Further studies can investigate the contributions of start-ups to digital transformation and the development of smart city technologies. This line of research can provide valuable insights into fostering innovation ecosystems that support cities transitioning toward digital economies. The development of robust metrics for assessing the long-term impacts of incubator-supported start-ups on urban sustainability, encompassing social, economic, and environmental dimensions, also presents a critical research priority. Finally, understanding how incubators foster inclusivity in smart city initiatives can illuminate strategies to ensure technological advancements benefit marginalised communities and address social inequalities.

These practical and research implications underscore the pivotal role of incubators in driving sustainable urban development and advancing global efforts to create smarter, more inclusive cities. By bridging gaps between innovation, policy, and community engagement, incubators are uniquely positioned to transform urban landscapes and foster resilience in the face of future challenges.

6. Conclusions

This study highlights the critical role of start-up incubators in advancing sustainability and smart city agendas by fostering innovation, enabling collaboration, and addressing urban challenges. Start-up incubators act as key intermediaries that connect local governments, businesses, and academia, facilitating the development of innovative solutions that align with urban sustainability goals. The Smart City-Incubator Sustainability Framework (SCISF) developed in this research provides a structured approach to diagnosing and enhancing collaborations between cities and incubators, ensuring their alignment with shared objectives such as resource efficiency, climate resilience, and social equity.

Applying the SCISF to the partnership between the City of Gdańsk and the Gdańsk Entrepreneurship Foundation (GEF) demonstrates the framework’s practical utility in identifying strengths and gaps. The analysis revealed a strong alignment between the incubator’s activities and the city’s sustainability vision but also highlighted areas for improvement, such as deeper integration of innovative technologies, enhanced stakeholder engagement, and the need for robust monitoring systems to measure shared progress. These insights underline the importance of fostering collaborative governance structures and diversifying funding mechanisms to support long-term sustainability goals.

While this study focused on Gdańsk, the SCISF’s components—strategic alignment, technological symbiosis, and continuous impact monitoring—are transferable to cities globally. In Poland, cities like Łódź and Wrocław, which are investing in smart mobility and green infrastructure, could adopt the framework to strengthen incubator linkages with municipal sustainability agendas. Across Europe, cities such as Barcelona (Spain) and Helsinki (Finland), renowned for their open-data platforms and citizen-centric innovation, could refine existing incubator programs using the SCISF’s public engagement and inclusivity metrics. In non-European contexts, such as Tokyo’s Society 5.0 initiatives or New York’s climate resilience projects, the framework offers a diagnostic tool to align entrepreneurial ecosystems with long-term urban transitions. However, successful implementation requires contextual adjustments: for example, incubators in rapidly urbanising Asian cities may prioritise scalability over circularity, while European hubs might focus on ethical AI governance.

The direct beneficiaries of this research span conceptual, pragmatic, and policy-making spheres:

• Conceptually, academics and researchers gain a structured model to analyse incubator-city synergies, particularly in understudied areas like ethical AI deployment and multi-stakeholder governance.
• Pragmatically, incubator managers and urban planners benefit from actionable tools (e.g., alignment matrices, replicability frameworks) to optimise resource allocation, foster cross-sector partnerships, and measure ESG impacts. Start-ups, especially in sustainability-focused sectors, gain clarity on aligning innovations with city-wide SDG targets.
• Policy makers at municipal, national, and EU levels (e.g., the European Green Deal) can utilise the SCISF to design targeted incentives, such as grants for circular economy start-ups or mandates for incubator-city co-development in smart city funding programs.

6.1. Limitations

While this research provides a novel framework for aligning start-up incubators with smart city sustainability goals, several limitations must be acknowledged. First, the single-case focus on Gdańsk limits the generalisability of the findings. Although the SCISF was designed as a universal tool, its empirical validation in a single urban context—a mid-sized European city with a strong municipal sustainability agenda—may not fully capture the challenges faced by megacities in rapidly urbanizing regions (e.g., Lagos, Mumbai) or cities with divergent governance models (e.g., state-driven smart cities in China). Second, the reliance on qualitative methods, including interviews and workshops, introduces potential biases, such as self-reporting inaccuracies or overrepresentation of incubator management perspectives. A quantitative analysis of start-up performance metrics (e.g., survival rates, revenue growth) or city-level sustainability data (e.g., carbon emissions, energy savings) would strengthen causal claims about the framework’s impact. Third, the study’s temporal scope—a cross-sectional analysis of GEF’s operations in 2023—does not account for long-term outcomes or adaptive challenges, such as economic downturns or shifts in policy priorities. Finally, the SCISF’s current iteration underweights cultural and institutional factors, such as variations in entrepreneurial ecosystems (e.g., risk capital availability in Silicon Valley vs. Eastern Europe) or the influence of national regulations on municipal innovation agendas.

6.2. Future Research

To address these limitations, future studies should pursue the following directions:

• Test the SCISF across cities with contrasting economic profiles, such as post-industrial regions (e.g., Katowice, Poland), tech hubs (e.g., Berlin, Singapore), and Global South cities (e.g., Nairobi, Bogotá). This would clarify how factors like digital infrastructure maturity, funding accessibility, or civic engagement norms influence framework applicability and allow the development of context-specific implementation strategies, particularly for cities with limited resources or regulatory support, to improve SCISF’s adaptability.
• Combine qualitative insights with quantitative analyses, such as longitudinal tracking of incubator alumni (e.g., survival rates, SDG-aligned patents) or econometric modelling of incubator-driven urban sustainability outcomes (e.g., correlation between mentorship hours and energy efficiency gains).
• Investigate how national and supranational policies (e.g., EU Green Deal, China’s “Digital Silk Road”) shape incubator-city collaboration. For example, how do subsidies for green tech alter the strategic alignment component of the SCISF?
• Track SCISF adoption over 5–10 years to evaluate its role in fostering urban resilience during crises (e.g., pandemics, climate events). This could involve pairing the framework with dynamic resilience metrics, such as adaptive capacity indices.
• Tailor the SCISF to high-priority domains like smart mobility or circular manufacturing. For instance, how might the “technological symbiosis” component evolve to support AI-driven transit systems or blockchain-enabled waste tracking?

By addressing these gaps, the SCISF can be refined into a dynamic, context-sensitive tool while advancing interdisciplinary dialogues at the nexus of urban studies, entrepreneurship, and sustainability science.