Agenda item

Joe Dignan from Future Cities, Catapult gave evidence.

In the presentation and discussion the following points were made:

·         Catapult worked to accelerate innovation, to grow business and the economy and to make cities better. It undertook practical projects across 12 UK cities and 4 continents.

·         The Urban Innovation Centre was created by Catapult and was a place for businesses, academics and city leaders to discuss and develop the cities of the future. Urban innovators could work there together to turn new technologies and processes into real products and services that would be scaled up and used in cities around the world. These urban innovators included data scientists, urban designers and anthropologists. The resident innovators were Ordnance Survey Geovation Hub, Intel ICRI, Rockefeller 100 Resilient Cities, Hypercat City and Igloo Regeneration.

·         The Urban Innovation Centre had hosted 25 visits from overseas delegations in the last 6 months. Networking events were held at the centre each week.

·         PAS 181 provided standards to benchmark against.

·         In Belfast, a project had been undertaken in relation to business rates and ascertaining whether buildings were live.

·         Smart cities worked best when there was an innovation team which solely focussed on smart cities work and reported to the Chief Executive. They could become an income generating team.

·         One project involved creating and building air sensors. They were being used to monitor air quality outside schools.

·         Last year Catapult had worked with Bristol. Bristol had 1,500 street assets with sensors and this would be increased to 47,000 which would create a mass of data that could be turned into information.

·         A planetarium in Bristol had been upgraded to be a data visualisation centre. The gaming community and small and medium enterprises had been asked to explore the potential uses of the data.

·         A 3D model of Bristol had been produced.

·         Bristol had an elected mayor who provided a lead on smart cities work. The mayor received his allowance in local currency – the Bristol Pound.

·         The Treasury’s Digital Transformation Plan would be published soon.

·         In Scotland, there was an alliance of seven cities plus a virtual smart city. 

·         It was anticipated that in the future there would be more recognition that smart cities were critical to economic growth, that IT companies would no longer be seen as the leaders of smart cities and that cities would look for funding in a different way.

·         An all party parliamentary group had been set up.

·         In Vienna there was a super department called TINA which ensured collaborative working between departments.

·         Peterborough had won a 2015 World Smart City Award for its Living Smart and Circular Urban Laboratory.

·         Catapult Future Cities ‘City Academy’ had been attended by Camden and Islington. Suppliers were invited in and were given a challenge. They were invited to come back with a plan and any plans would then go through the procurement process.

·         In London, work was being done on the future of stations.

·         Work was taking place in Glasgow on the future of university campuses.

·         In Bristol, a scheme was taking place to assist those with Alzheimer’s stay independent for longer. Measures including skype meant people could remain in their own homes for longer and residential care was only used when the Alzheimer’s became more advanced.

·         A city co-ordination management centre had been set up in Bristol which included an NHS centre and a university.

·         Catapult worked with groups that wanted to be proactive.

·         It was important to audit data sets and turn data into information which could be used to make a difference.

·         Work should start with a good idea and an innovation team should progress it. Funding could often be obtained from various sources after ideas had been formulated.

·         Bristol was undertaking work with troubled families. The DCLG had funding available if it could be proven that work was helping families.

·         Islington Council was trying to enable residents to do more online whilst trying to ensure that those who were not online, were not excluded. More work was required to facilitate inclusion and accessibility.

RESOLVED:

That the evidence be noted.