Smart Cities Are Not Necessarily Friendly for All Their Citizens
The label “smart city” has recently become a kind of new prestige symbol for regional governments in Indonesia. Citizen reporting applications, surveillance cameras at road junctions, automatic traffic lights and digital service portals have become an increasingly common sight in various cities.
But behind all this sophistication, there is a question that is rarely answered thoroughly: who actually benefits the most?
A Frequently Misunderstood Definition
Many people assume that a smart city is measured simply by how much technology is installed in a city. In fact, the concept is far broader than that.
The Movement Towards Smart City programme initiated by the government divides the concept into six main dimensions, ranging from smart governance for government administration and smart economy to promote digital SMEs and the creative economy, to other dimensions that directly touch citizens’ quality of life in health, education, security and public facilities.
This means technology is merely a tool. The real goal is better services for citizens, not simply a city that looks futuristic in government brochures.
Ambition Driven by Rapid Urbanisation
The push to build smart cities is not without reason. Indonesia is facing very rapid urbanisation.
Projection data shows that around 56.7 per cent of Indonesia’s population already lives in urban areas, and this figure is expected to continue rising to 66.6 per cent by 2035. The World Bank even projects that around 220 million people, or 70 per cent of Indonesia’s population, will live in cities by 2045.
A population surge of this scale automatically brings new challenges: congestion, slum settlements, pressure on health and education services, and environmental problems. The smart city concept has emerged as one answer to manage these pressures more efficiently.
A Number of Cities Have Taken the Lead
Several Indonesian cities have already become examples of smart city implementation, including Jakarta, Banyuwangi, Makassar, Sumedang, Semarang and Denpasar.
Jakarta, for instance, has integrated a real-time flood monitoring system at hundreds of points, while a number of electric bus fleets have also begun operating to reduce carbon emissions. Other cities have different approaches according to their respective characteristics, ranging from creative economy-based services to the digitalisation of public services at the sub-district level.
The central government, through the Ministry of Home Affairs, is currently preparing Indonesia’s participation in the annual ASEAN Smart Cities Network meeting in the Philippines in July 2026. One message emphasised in these preparations is that smart city development should be tailored to the character and needs of each region, rather than simply copying the models of other cities or countries.
Gaps That Are Often Overlooked
Despite the grand ambitions, smart city implementation on the ground is not always as smooth as the concept on paper.
One of the most frequent challenges is digital readiness. Not all citizens, including officials at the RT and RW neighbourhood levels, are accustomed to or trained in using the applications and digital systems launched by regional governments. Uneven internet infrastructure in a number of regions is also a challenge in itself.
There are also challenges on the financing side. Building a smart city system requires substantial investment, while not all regions have the budgets and human resources capable of operating and maintaining the technology in the long term.
If these gaps are left unaddressed, the smart city label risks becoming merely a symbolic status, without truly changing citizens’ daily experience.
A Truly Smart City
Ultimately, a truly smart city is not measured by how many surveillance cameras or applications it has, but by how far the benefits of that technology can be felt by all layers of society, including those unfamiliar with gadgets and digital systems.
Building a smart city also means building citizens’ readiness to adapt, rather than simply installing technology and hoping society will adjust to it.
As long as this perception is not genuinely addressed, the gap between a city that “looks smart” and a city that “truly serves” will remain a long homework assignment for many regions in Indonesia.