 The question that we're all addressing today is how skill smart city's considered, how does that happen, how do we skill smart city's? I suppose one of the key ways is authorities or similar bodies investing in infrastructure and new services and Bristol's very fortunate. We have incredibly good connectivity infrastructure in the Bristol, in open architecture in Bristol. Not every city has that advantage. Perhaps the next way that smart city scale is that they grow as people start to use the services and share the benefits amongst their network and groups. The more people start to use it. The third way I think that that smart cities will scale in the future is as people use the infrastructure of smart cities themselves to create their own services and to share their own data, their own personal sensors into that data pool. So really it's the second and third of those I'm going to try and cover briefly today just how we involve citizens and communities in our smart cities in order to scale them. Oh, technology is baffling me. Right, there we go. So where do I start from? I'm starting from this sort of potential statement, know thyself. I think it's really important to recognise that one size won't fit all for smart cities. London's very different from Bristol's, very different from Manchester's, very different from Leeds, very different from Birmingham. So those attributes that go to make your city, I think we need to be very familiar with those things in order to be able to move forward with a successful smart city vision. Just put some in this patchwork, put some things about Bristol in terms of our infrastructure. We do have world class infrastructure which has been very heavily invested in in Bristol. We've got the Socrata open data platform and we also partner with Transport API to hold their data set. We've got a great history of innovation being the home to Brunel and Cliffs and Suspension Bridge, SS Great Britain, Concord, very creative place Bristol. Obviously the trip hop scene, also the Wersels and Wallace and Gromit and Banksy and the chap with the red trousers is just under the massive attack LP cover is George Ferguson. He's our mayor and I think he's a critical component of our smart city. He holds a single vision for Bristol's progress toward being a smart city. I think that's been extremely important as well as our progress in being a smart city also to helping us to gain the European Green Capital Award 2015. So why would we bother to involve citizens is much easier to run projects without citizen support. I know that I've been running tech projects for a long time and as soon as you involve citizens they get complex and hard. So why would we want to do that? I think the first thing to acknowledge is that smart city projects are not technology projects really. They're projects about how you make your city more efficient or more livable or better placed to be. So the technology is a component of it but really the outcomes are about people's lives so you need people to have some input to that. And citizens really understand the problem space, the things that we're trying to address fundamentally well. They live in those communities, they live with the transport in Bristol for instance or the air quality in parts of Bristol every single day and they can help to inform us so that we get a very granular view of what those problems are. And really critically I think is that you genuinely need support and buy-in from your communities in order for these things to work. My experience of working in Bristol is that the people of Bristol can be very vocal, they can be disruptive, they can be resistant to things that they don't want to happen. Practical examples are Mayor decided that he wanted to expand the residential parking zones and the activists of Bristol decided that they were going to bring a tank and park it in front of the council house to make sure that he got the message that they didn't want that. So I had to think about what is it that makes Smart City successful in this context? First of all they do need to be useful, they've got to respond to a genuine user needs, they've got to address something that people have some pain with and make it better. Usable is critical this and I think we can take some great leadership from Apple and others who put usability at the top of their technology tree to be able to interact with the city seamlessly and without additional complexity is going to be really important I think for getting uptake of new services. Accessible cities are going to be extremely important to both from the perspective of people who have disabilities but also making the infrastructure, making the architecture, making the data accessible to people and to communities so they can interact with it and they can use it for their own purposes. And this last element of it being acceptable, these are feelings that people might have about seeing their city transformed. It needs to be secure, safe, enabling, benign, trustworthy. People don't always trust city councils and I'll talk a little bit more about that later on. So I think those are critical elements that we have to address in order to get people to uptake Smart City services at scale and finally the tech definitely has to work. With a lot of these projects if you deploy technology and it's faulty or it's flawed in some way you've lost those participants for good and I know that through my own experience of tech projects in the past. So in involving citizens what are our challenges? Well in Bristol we've got 440,000 people and I don't have the time to talk to every single one of them so we have to find a way to do that to segment our societies to talk to representatives. The concepts around Smart City are probably okay for most of us in this room because we deal with this often but the idea of internet of things and ubiquitous connectivity and sensors to people who don't do this for a living are quite difficult to get across and you have to find a way to use language that informs in a general way. And also this access to hard to reach citizens, I hate to use them hard to reach, they're not hard to reach, they don't want to talk to us but we need to find a new way to do that. And I think the reason that there is this hard to reach group is because people have existing relationships with authorities and authorities present themselves in particular ways. And people's relationships and previous experiences not always being great. Sometimes you know as a city council we might have taken somebody's children away or even if it's something very trivial like we didn't collect they've been people have a certain view of city councils and often they don't necessarily want to interact with us in something as trivial as a Smart City project. So the way that in Bristol we've got around that resistance in the past is to use these third parties, trusted third party intermediaries who've got that local credibility. I have to say in Bristol's communities I have very little credibility, I don't even have a Bristol accent from Newcastle. And if I sort of wander in in my suit and my council badge and my Gioria accent I'm not going to get very far but there are those who can work on our behalf and will make a lot more progress. So how do we go about engaging people productively in the development of our Smart Cities? We have a couple of principles and the first comes from our mayor from George Ferguson, this is an idea of using the city as a test bed. He's very publicly stated that he wants Bristol to be viewed as a place where people can come and experiment with new technologies to try and improve the way that city works. And also we have the idea of a living lab, we have a designated area within Bristol where we work one-to-one with residents deploying technologies and iteratively developing those technologies based on the feedback from those citizens, in order to co-produce a solution that's usable, accessible, acceptable, all of those elements. The local partners who we work with in order to do the engagement work, we have them do long-term regular support and intervention, it's not just about getting people to be involved in your project and then them disappearing. Often we want to talk to people over a period of a year about things which are happening with the technology within their homes, so we need that long-term intervention, so we need to plan for a long-term support by our engagement partners. And just from our experience, we've used the living lab approach for about seven years and it's generally gone very well, there's a few experiences that have had it been quite painful but generally it's gone very well. And our plans at the moment is to extend that living lab network geographically, so moving to different areas of Bristol. But also our living lab works around a project basis, so we have a project, we have a certain technology we want to develop and we work with the living lab on that. But I wanted to set up a digital citizens panel where we can perhaps float new ideas that are not project based, perhaps not very formed and just get some feedback there from a panel of people who are representative of our demographics. And the last element there is a new thing which I'm taking to our senior leadership team in Bristol City Council. As we're moving into these new areas and we've got new sorts of data available and the opportunity to combine data with other organisations, I'm proposing that we should have some sort of citywide ethics security and privacy board where we have experts but also we have citizens, we have representatives from different authorities who are able to just discuss whether is it okay to tag somebody with dementia because I say it's for their own good or are they broader questions we need to ask about that. So here are my conclusions. There's this idea, I showed that montage at the start to demonstrate that Bristol is a unique city, it's dynamic, it's characterful, it's patchwork and lots of different things happening, lots of different ideas and neighbourhoods and communities all working collaboratively which doesn't make a neat and tidy pattern. So there probably isn't an opportunity to sort of helicopter in a smart city and drop it on the top of any area because it's not going to work probably, it's not going to be accepted in the same way. I think one of the critical things we need to look at is making sure, and that's what such a great job the ODI is doing, ensuring that the infrastructure, the systems, the data are all flexible enough to deliver the things that we want to reverse the city council and also to create the opportunity for citizens and for communities to build their own services, to add their own data and it creates this thing, this kind of idea of an open programmable city. And finally, if we don't do that then there is the danger that we will end up knowing the location of everything but the value of nothing. So thank you very much.