The 21st century is moving towards redefining the urban model. Three leading reports -IESE Cities in Motion, Sustainability Magazine Top10 Smart Cities, and IMD Smart City- paint a broad picture for Smart Cities interested in cutting-edge technology, the fight against climate change, and seeking a housing balance that achieves social coexistence between their traditional residents and the talent they need to design their innovation and sustainability hubs.
This trio—affordable housing, the rise of AI, and progress toward a CO2-free energy transition—will shape their future standards of well-being and, therefore, their ability to tackle geopolitical challenges and establish active resilience measures in the face of growing international competition.
Experts from the Innovation Impact Alliance of the World Economic Forum (WEF), the managing institution of the Davos summits, state that “true urban resilience requires connecting innovation ecosystems, mobilizing investment to local economies, and applying scale solutions with tangible social impact." In their opinion, digitalization and urban technology only make sense when they foster inclusive development and social cohesion.
Furthermore, the IESE report, signed by professors Pascual Berrone and Joan Enric Ricart, reviews 183 cities in 92 countries, with assessments of sustainability, competitiveness, and quality of life based on one hundred indicators broken down into nine areas of action: human capital, social cohesion, economy, governance, environment, urban planning, mobility, technology, and international projection.
Its 2025 ranking places London, New York, and Paris on the podium for the third year in a row in a top-ten that is rounded out by, in this order, Tokyo, Berlin, Washington, Copenhagen, Oslo, Singapore, and San Francisco.
The study emphasizes that geopolitical tensions, energy crises, and atmospheric disasters and inclement weather demand convergent strategies that prioritize planning with the identification of municipal policies involving civic movements and businesses, until a poker hand with four aces is obtained: one sustainable, embodying the central spirit of the urban agenda, promoting mechanisms for decarbonization and combating climate change; another, of economic and social resilience, with equity projects and aid and incentives for SMEs, and digital and sustainable training; a third, of technological integration, ensuring connectivity in all urban areas and training residents and visitors in digital skills with open data platforms; and, lastly, a defined international collaboration strategy that lets them actively participate in global institutions that share knowledge and promote common urban initiatives.
In addition, it describes three heterogeneous city groups that reflect current trends in urban management:
- Emerging global cities. High potential for dynamism in developing areas, with challenges regarding governance, sustainability, and advanced technologies: Mexico DF, at 118 in the ranking; Bogotá (138), Bombay (155) and Lagos (181).
- Global metropolitan leaders. Inserted in diversified economies with a high level of innovation, international projection, and quality of life, but they must improve in sustainability and address certain social inequalities: London (first in the ranking and leader in human capital and global projection), New York (leader in economy), Paris (3), Tokyo (4), and Singapore (9).
- Sustainable and cultural cities. They prioritize social well-being, quality of life, and sustainability over accelerated growth: Amsterdam (12), Stockholm (20), and Madrid (24).
Its authors, Berrone and Ricart, emphasize that, after a decade of research on urban trends, "the future of cities will depend not only on their size or wealth, but also on their ability to innovate, anticipate, and respond swiftly to emerging challenges." Hence their emphasis on urban planning: "Progress comes from combining strategic vision and operational flexibility."
The technology-sustainability binomial
In this regard, the Sustainability Magazine ranking reveals the best integral technology and sustainability strategies after assessing their housing constraints and identifying their key business partners.
Helsinki occupies the top spot for its citizen-focused approach and its digital project Helsinki 3D+, in collaboration with Nokia. Dubai follows, an example of technological ambition with its Core42 autonomous taxis and AI-based applications as its private sector ally, although more than 40% of its residential properties are owned by non-residents. And Seoul, which combines connectivity and smart transportation (Samsung SDS), despite a gap between central and peripheral prices, forcing the displacement of the younger population.
Next is London with Arup serving as the company in its joint venture, prioritizing open data and social participation with the support of digital infrastructure, while facing traffic congestion and high prices. Ahead of New York (IBM) for wireless management, is Tokyo (Hitachi) for its capacity to detect and react to natural disasters , Copenhagen (Siemens) for its public transport, Amsterdam (Philips) for energy efficiency, Singapore (ST Engineering) for its urban mobility, and Barcelona (Cisco) for its high level of digital democracy.
Mobility, the invisible axis that underpins urban style
The IMD Smart City Index 2025 report reveals that, rather than the latest digital gadget, the real technological transformation demanded by Smart Cities must focus on mobility. Especially if they want to be competitive in addition to smart.
Experts from this market research firm cite six reasons to justify this thesis:
- Urban mobility emerges as a strategic factor of quality of life that directly impacts the social perception of smart cities. In an environment where citizens judge services, infrastructure and governance, collective transportation, connectivity and ease of movement become a barometer of urban progress. Mobility, understood on various fronts (accessibility, efficiency, inclusiveness, and technology), acts as a distinctive urban element.
- This strategy does not exclusively depend on inserting technology - such as sensors, big data or mobile apps - but on integrating it into a holistic vision of the city. This involves combining physical infrastructures - public transport, cycle-pedestrian lanes, intermodal nodes - with digital platforms that allow for optimizing flows, prioritizing sustainable modes, managing demand, and offering residents real alternatives to private cars. In other words, technology alone does not guarantee efficient mobility; it must be designed with the user, governance, and urban space in mind.
- Smart urban mobility must pursue three related objectives: reducing congestion, reducing emissions, and greater social accessibility. By linking mobility, environment, and equity, city models emerge that are more attractive to their citizens and companies, while attracting global talent. The implicit conclusion is that mobility is not just a matter of engineering, but a key driver for the transition towards a more sustainable and just city.
- Governance plays a critical role. Adopting smart mobility policies requires coordination between multiple actors - municipal, operators, regulators and, of course, their civil society - and support for decision-making regarding data, measurable indicators and transparency. Only in this way can a cycle of prosperity be made possible, in which transport systems can quickly adapt to new demands, emergencies, or technological changes. Cities that do so are able to attract investment, retain talent, and improve their international reputation.
- The economic value of efficient urban mobility is twofold. On one hand, it improves productivity by reducing travel times, increasing transport reliability, and expanding accessibility to the labor market. On the other, it reduces negative externalities, such as pollution, noise and congestion, that represent costs for administrations and society. Since cities compete globally to attract businesses, investors, and innovation, poor mobility can erode competitive advantages that take time to recover.
- The human factor: smart urban mobility must be inclusive and citizen-focused. Therefore, active modes (walking or cycling), combined trips using public transport, and urban design that reduces the need for long journeys should be promoted. Based on that logic, the city becomes more compact, more accessible, and more resilient. Similarly, citizens regain control over their time and urban space.
In conclusion, the IMD Smart City Index 2025 report leaves a warning for urban planners: investing in urban mobility is not an infrastructure expense, but a strategic commitment for the city.