Smartness Assessment methodology / D2.1

Co-funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or REA. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. Smartness Assessment methodology/D2.1 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 2 Technical references Project Acronym SMART ERA Project Title SMART community-led transition for Europe’s Rural Areas Project Coordinator Fondazione Bruno Kessler (FBK) Project Duration January 2024 – December 2027 (48 months) Deliverable Title D2.1 – “Smartness Assessment methodology” Deliverable Type R Dissemination level* PU Work Package WP2 – “Multi-dimensional methodology for the smartness assessment of rural areas” Lead beneficiary Poliedra (POLI) Author(s) Gianluca Lentini, Andrea Mora (POLI) Reviewers Nina Cvar (UL), Jure Trilar (UL) Muhamed Turkanovic (UM), Matteo Gerosa (FBK), Alessia Torre (FBK) Due date of deliverable 31st December 2024 Actual submission date 20th December 2024 * PU – Public, fully open, e.g. web (Deliverables flagged as public will be automatically published on the CORDIS project’s page) SEN – Sensitive, limited under the conditions of the Grant Agreement Classified R-UE/EU-R – EU RESTRICTED under the Commission Decision No2015/444 Classified C-UE/EU-C – EU CONFIDENTIAL under the Commission Decision No2015/444 Classified S-UE/EU-S – EU SECRET under the Commission Decision No2015/444 v Date Contributor(s) Comment 0.0 31/07/2024 Gianluca Lentini, Andrea Mora, Alessandro Luè (POLI) Finalisation of the Literature Review and share of the report that represented the conceptual basis of the present document 0.1 03/09/2024 Gianluca Lentini (POLI) Incorporation of the comments to the Literature Review and share of the ToC of D2.1 0.2 30/09/2024 Gianluca Lentini, Andrea Mora (POLI) First version of SESAM’s qualitative path, also incorporated in T4.2’s data dashboard activities 0.3 25/10/2024 Gianluca Lentini, Andrea Mora, Alessandro Luè (POLI) Finalisation of the list of indicators and metrics for the Quantitative Path of SESAM 0.4 05/11/2024 Gianluca Lentini, Andrea Mora (POLI) First incorporation of the SESAM Qualitative Path + expansion of the D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 3 chapter on indicators - Quantitative Path reviewed by UOULU 0.5 06/11/2024 Gianluca Lentini (POLI) First draft of the Introductory Chapters, of the ISO 37122 rationale, and of the chapter on SESAM relationship with the other WPs 0.6 20/11/2024 Andrea Mora (POLI) Second version of the Qualitative Path of SESAM - Emotional Mapping and finalization of the Annexes 0.7 25/11/2024 Gianluca Lentini, Alessandro Luè (POLI) Second, consolidated version, of the Quantitative Path of SESAM; Revision and finalisation of the Introductory chapter, the ISO chapter, the chapter on the relationship of SESAM with the other WPs, Conclusions 0.8 27/11/2024 Gianluca Lentini (POLI) Final full draft of the document sent to internal reviewers 0.9 17/12/2024 Gianluca Lentini, Andrea Mora (POLI) Incorporation of the comments and integrations from the reviewers, final version shared with the PC and PM 1.0 20/12/2024 Alessia Torre (FBK) Final editing and submission D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 4 Table of contents Table of contents ..........................................................................4 Glossary ........................................................................................7 1. Introduction ..............................................................................9 2. The what and why of a smartness assessment method for rural areas ................................................................................... 10 3. The road to SESAM ................................................................ 13 4. SESAM .................................................................................... 16 4.1. SESAM dimensions .................................................................................................. 16 4.1.1 Enabling Factors……………………………………………………………………………16 4.1.2 Mobility and Transport……………………………………………………………………...18 4.1.3 Economy ................................................................................................................... 19 4.1.4 Smart Governance and Policy…………………………………………………………….20 4.1.5 Services of General Interest……………………………………………………………….21 4.1.6 Environment and Environmental and Climate-Related SDGs…………………………22 4.2. Qualitative path ......................................................................................................... 23 4.3. Quantitative path....................................................................................................... 28 5. ISO 37122 and SESAM - a more ambitious path .................. 39 6. SESAM within Smart ERA - relationships with other WPs and Tasks ........................................................................................... 42 7. Closing remarks and the way ahead ..................................... 45 Annex 1 ....................................................................................... 46 SESAM Qualitative questionnaire .................................................................................. 46 General information ........................................................................................................... 46 Annex 2 ....................................................................................... 63 Emotional Mapping ............................................................................. 63 General information ........................................................................................................... 63 Instructions for Emotional Mapping Participants ................................................................ 63 Annex 3 ....................................................................................... 68 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 5 Enabling Factors: Indicators and metrics ..................................................................... 68 Indicator list ........................................................................................................................ 68 Self-assessment ................................................................................................................ 69 Metrics, units, importance and sources.............................................................................. 71 Mobility and Transport: Indicators and metrics ............................................................ 76 Indicator list ........................................................................................................................ 76 Metrics, units, importance and sources.............................................................................. 80 Economy: Indicators and metrics .................................................................................. 88 Indicator list ........................................................................................................................ 88 Self-assessment ................................................................................................................ 90 Metrics, units, importance and sources.............................................................................. 96 Governance and Policy: Indicators and metrics ......................................................... 106 Indicator list ...................................................................................................................... 106 Self-assessment .............................................................................................................. 107 Metrics, units, importance and sources............................................................................ 110 Services of General Interest: Indicators and metrics ................................................. 115 Indicator list ...................................................................................................................... 115 Self-assessment .............................................................................................................. 115 Metrics, units, importance and sources............................................................................ 117 Environment and Climate-Related SDGs: Indicators and metrics............................. 124 Indicator list ...................................................................................................................... 124 Self-assessment .............................................................................................................. 125 Metrics, units, importance and sources............................................................................ 127 List of Tables Table 1. SESAM dimensions and topics ............................................................................ 16 Table 2. Basic emotions, their function and manifestation ................................................. 25 Table 3. SESAM framework ............................................................................................... 30 Table 4. Pairwise Comparison Matrix ................................................................................ 36 Table 5. Basic emotions: function and manifestation ......................................................... 64 Table 6. SESAM dimensions and topics ............................................................................ 64 Table 7. SESAM qualitative framework: part 1 .................................................................. 65 Table 8. SESAM qualitative framework: part 2 .................................................................. 66 Table 9. Enabling Factors - Indicators and their prioritization ............................................ 68 Table 10. Enabling Factors - pairwise matrix ..................................................................... 69 Table 12. Enabling Factors – Metrics and their units ......................................................... 71 Table 13. Mobility and Transport - Indicators and their prioritization .................................. 76 Table 14. Mobility and Transport - pairwise matrix............................................................. 78 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 6 Table 15. Mobility and Transport - Metrics and their units ................................................. 80 Table 16. Economy - Indicators and their prioritization ...................................................... 88 Table 17. Economy - pairwise matrix ................................................................................. 90 Table 18. Economy - Metrics and their units ...................................................................... 96 Table 19. Governance and Policy - Indicators and their prioritization .............................. 106 Table 20. Governance and Policy - pairwise matrix ......................................................... 108 Table 21. Governance and Policy - Metrics and their units .............................................. 110 Table 22. Service of General Interest - Indicators and their prioritization......................... 115 Table 23. Service of General Interest - pairwise matrix ................................................... 116 Table 24. Service of General Interest - Metrics and their units ........................................ 117 Table 25. Environment and Climate-Related SDGs - Indicators and their prioritization ... 124 Table 26. Environment and Climate-Related SDGs - pairwise matrix .............................. 125 Table 27. Environment and Climate-Related SDGs - Metrics and their units ................... 127 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 7 Glossary DASHBOARD: A dashboard is a tool used to consolidate and display data visually, providing at-a-glance insights into key aspects of a specific objective or process. It typically organizes diverse but interrelated information in a single interface, designed to be easily digestible and actionable. ICT: Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) is a broader term for Information Technology (IT), which refers to all communication technologies, including the internet, wireless networks, cell phones, computers, software, middleware, video-conferencing, social networking, and other media applications and services enabling users to access, retrieve, store, transmit, and manipulate information in a digital form. 1 IMPACT INDICATORS: Impact indicators focus on long-term outcomes, tracking measurable progress toward overarching objectives of smartness. They provide evidence of change resulting from programs and strategies, highlighting their broader societal, environmental, and economic effects. INDICATOR: a pointer, sign, instrument, tool, which quantifies the value of a variable. ISO: the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is an independent, nongovernmental international organization. It brings global experts together to agree on standardised, and possibly optimal, ways to measure status or achieve change. According to their mission, from climate change and healthcare, to quality management and artificial intelligence, ISO aims to make lives easier, safer and better – for everyone, everywhere 2 KPIs: Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are critical, quantifiable measures of progress toward intended results (represented by Result Indicators). They help focus attention on operational priorities, provide an analytical foundation for decision-making, and emphasize what matters most. Effective project management with KPIs involves setting clear targets (desired performance levels) and monitoring progress against these targets over time. This approach ensures continuous improvement, strategic alignment, and accountability throughout the project lifecycle. LIKERT SCALE: Developed in 1932 by Rensis Likert to measure attitudes, the typical Likert scale is a 5or 7-point ordinal scale used by respondents to rate the degree to which they agree or disagree with a statement. 3 1 Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) | AIMS. (s.d.). Obtained in December 16, 2024, from https://aims.fao.org/information-and-communication-technologies-ict 2 ISO - International Organization for Standardization. (December 6, 2024). ISO. https://www.iso.org/home.html 3 Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D. K. (2015). Likert Scale: Explored and Explained. Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 396–403. https://doi.org/10.9734/BJAST/2015/14975 Sullivan, G. M., & Artino, A. R. (2013). Analyzing and Interpreting Data From Likert-Type Scales. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 5(4), 541–542. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-5-4-18 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 8 METRICS: Metrics are measures of quantitative assessment commonly used for assessing, comparing, and tracking performance or production. RESULT INDICATORS: They reflect the benefits to end users resulting directly from project implementation. These indicators are vital for adaptive, community-driven development, serving as a basis for evaluating a project’s effectiveness, relevance, sustainability, and impact at local level. By measuring expected outcomes, Result Indicators reveal changes attributable to the project locally. To ensure clarity and maintain focus, projects should concentrate on a limited number of Result Indicators, ideally no more than 10. SDGs: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a collection of 17 global objectives established by the United Nations in 2015 as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development SESAM: It is the Smart ERA Smartness Assessment Method, the main deliverable of Task 2.1 of the project. SMART VILLAGE: Although there is no official definition of a 'smart village' within EU legislation, there are a number of definitions and distinguishing features associated with the smart village concept, with the involvement of the local community and the use of digital tools being seen as core elements. The concept implies the participation of local people in improving their economic, social or environmental conditions, cooperation with other communities, social innovation and the development of smart village strategies 4 . 4 Ana Martinez Juan & James McEldowney. (2021). Smart villages. Concept, issues and prospects for EU rural areas (PE 689.349; p. 12). EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/689349/EPRS_BRI(2021)689349_EN.pdf D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 9 1. Introduction This Report presents SESAM, the Smart ERA Smartness Assessment Method, the main deliverable of the project’s Task 2.1. The Report includes a brief introduction to the context of smart villages and smartness assessment, an overview of the road taken within Smart ERA for the creation of SESAM, including the Literature Review on Smartness Assessment Methods, the detailed presentation of SESAM, a brief outline of its relationship with the ISO 37122 standard for Smart Cities and Communities, and some reflections on the relationship of SESAM with both Smart ERA’s Smart Innovation Packages (SIP, being developed within WP3), the project’s data dashboard included in WP4 and Smart ERA’s other WPs. The report concludes with a summary of findings and insights, offering direction for future developments both within the project and beyond. The Report also includes, as annexes, the comprehensive tools designed to assess smartness from both qualitative and quantitative perspectives: Annex 1 presents the qualitative survey, Annex 2 details the emotional mapping approach, and Annex 3 outlines quantitative indicators along with their associated metrics. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 16 4. SESAM SESAM is designed to offer a comprehensive qualitative and quantitative analysis of the factors that contribute to the smart development of a given territory, helping to assess the maturity of smartness in various dimensions and identifying strengths and potential gaps in each of them. SESAM is also conceived to inspire changes and monitor them, as well as to set priorities for future work. 4.1. SESAM dimensions The SESAM model captures specific dimensions or areas related to the concept of smartness but having an emphasis on some specific quality differentiating it from the main concept. The six general dimensions of smartness identified are: Enabling Factors, Mobility and Transport, Economy, Governance and Policies, Services of general interest, Environment and climate-related SDGs. These dimensions were identified through a Literature Review on Smartness Assessment Methods and compiled in the Intermediate Report for D2.1 – Analysis and Insights for Task 2.1. Each dimension contains different sub-dimensions, or specific topics, that serve as a headline for analysis. Sub-dimensions are a further refinement into related but specific areas of a specific dimension (see Table 1). Table 1. SESAM dimensions and topics Enabling Factors Mobility and Transport Economy Governance and Policies Services of general interest Environment and climaterelated SDGs Digital Infrastructure Technical and Information Infrastructure Primary sector Public Governance Healthcare Protection, Conservation, and Enhancement of Natural Capital Digital Literacy Mobility Methods and Vehicles used for this purpose Secondary Sector NonGovernmental Support Education Mitigation of Environmental Pressures and Risks Legal Tertiary and Advanced Tertiary Sector Policy Development and Implementation General Services Development of a ResourceEfficient, LowCarbon Economy 4.1.1 Enabling Factors Enabling factors are conditions or resources that facilitate or simplify the ability of individuals or communities to change their behavior or improve their environment. In the context of D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 17 digital transformation and technological access, enabling factors represent a critical dimension of SESAM, as they empower rural areas to effectively adopt and leverage digital technologies and services. Research highlights the presence of a hierarchy of factors that are instrumental in driving smart revitalization, both in urban and rural contexts. For example, concepts often associated with "smart cities" include factors such as technology, social infrastructure, governance, triple-helix partnerships (collaborations between academia, industry, and government), and information services, as emphasized in a case study presented at the Thirty-Seventh International Conference on Information Systems (2016). 17 Similarly, rural revitalization frameworks align with this perspective while addressing the specific needs of rural areas. For instance, the European Network for Rural Development (ENRD) Thematic Group in 2021 identified policy design (structures) and local empowerment (people) as essential building blocks for sustainable rural development 18 . These enabling factors, while tailored to rural contexts, complement and reinforce the broader principles of digital transformation seen in smart city initiatives. From the perspective of SESAM and its Smart Assessment Methods (SAMs), the literature reviews identify two key sub-dimensions of enabling factors: ● Digital Infrastructure: Refers to the physical and software systems, such as broadband connectivity, data networks, and cloud services, that support digital interactions and services. ● Digital Literacy: Represents the skills and knowledge required to effectively and critically use digital technologies, ensuring inclusivity and competence in the evolving digital landscape. Together, these enabling factors provide the foundation for meaningful and equitable digital participation. Digital Infrastructure Digital infrastructure refers to the physical and virtual systems that support digital services and technologies. This includes the hardware, software, networks, and data centres that organizations rely on to operate and communicate. Digital infrastructure also encompasses more advanced elements such as cloud computing and cybersecurity systems, which ensure secure and scalable access to digital resources. Equitable access is a crucial aspect of digital infrastructure, ensuring that all individuals and organizations can leverage these technologies effectively. In alignment with the European Parliament and Council’s 2006 Recommendation 19 , digital infrastructure requires not just physical resources but also specific competencies to make profitable use of these technologies. This means that 17 Petercsak, R., Maccani, G., Donellan, B., Helfert, M., & Connolly, N. (2016). Enabling Factors for Smart Cities: A Case Study. 37th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2016), 3, 1628–1637. 18 Gómez, G. H. (2022). Enabling factors for rural revitalisation & a self-assessment tool for policy design (Thematic Group Report, p. 18) [ENRD Thematic Group on Rural Revitalisation]. European Network for Rural Development. https://enrd.ec.europa.eu/publications/enabling-factors-rural-revitalisation-self-assessmenttool-policy-design_en 19 Document 32006H0962: Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning OJ L 394, 30.12.2006, p. 10–18. ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reco/2006/962/oj D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 18 effective use of digital infrastructure demands skills and knowledge to manage and navigate these systems properly. Digital Literacy Digital literacy goes beyond basic computer skills to encompass the ability to use digital technologies confidently, critically, and effectively in everyday life. It includes competencies such as retrieving, evaluating, storing, producing, presenting, and exchanging information through various technologies. Digital literacy also includes the ability to communicate, collaborate, and participate in digital networks. The increasing integration of technology in both professional and personal contexts means that digital literacy is now fundamental for engagement in society, work, and leisure activities. It’s a set of skills that enables individuals to interact with information society technologies (IST) to the full extent, empowering them to critically assess, use, and contribute to digital environments. 4.1.2 Mobility and Transport Mobility and transport is recognized as a distinct and critical dimension, even though it could be considered part of services of general interest, due to its essential role in rural areas. While transportation refers to the physical movement of goods or people between locations, mobility highlights the ability of individuals to move freely, efficiently, and sustainably. It involves not only access to transportation options but also ensuring their quality, inclusivity, and efficiency for all users. The European Union (EU) is leading the transition toward a sustainable, intelligent, and inclusive mobility system, striving to create a friendly transport network that serves citizens across both urban and rural areas. This transformation is driven by digitalization and innovative solutions, such as on-demand bus services, vehicle-sharing programs, and optimized public transport routes. In rural areas, unique challenges such as lower population density, longer travel distances, and infrequent transportation options demand targeted approaches. These challenges present opportunities to deploy innovative technologies and policies that enhance mobility. For instance, real-time tracking systems for buses, shared mobility services adapted to local needs, and integrated infrastructure planning can make rural transportation systems more accessible, cost-effective, and environmentally sustainable. To comprehensively address mobility in rural areas, it is essential to consider also the following sub-dimensions as identified by Orlowski and Romanowska (2019) 20 : Technical and Information Infrastructure This sub-dimension focuses on the physical and digital infrastructure that supports mobility, such as road networks, bike paths, charging stations for electric vehicles, and digital tools like apps for real-time transport tracking. In rural areas, improving infrastructure can include implementing digital platforms to coordinate transportation schedules or establishing robust broadband connectivity to support smart mobility solutions. 20 Orlowski & Romanowska (2019) Smart Cities Concept: Smart Mobility Indicator. Cybernetics and Systems, 50:2, 118-131, DOI: 10.1080/01969722.2019.1565120 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 19 Mobility Methods and Vehicles used for this purpose This sub-dimension refers to the variety of transportation modes available, such as public buses, bicycles, electric scooters, and carpooling. In rural regions, innovative mobility methods like on-demand mini-buses or community-driven ride-sharing programs can address challenges related to low population density and scattered settlements. Legislation Policies and regulations play a pivotal role in fostering smart mobility. This includes laws promoting sustainable transport modes, incentives, and plans to adapt mobility models to rural settings. 4.1.3 Economy The Economy dimension within SESAM encompasses both agricultural and nonagricultural industries that are pivotal in shaping the livelihood, resilience, and sustainability of rural communities. This dimension assesses the economic climate and the attractiveness of rural areas for businesses, investors, start-ups, and workers. Unlike urban economies, rural areas rely on distinct characteristics such as agricultural activities, small-scale industries, and natural resources. However, they face persistent challenges, including: ● Low productivity ● Underinvestment in agriculture and non-farm rural employment ● Inadequate infrastructure ● Unsafe working conditions ● Limited or no access to essential services, including financial services Addressing these challenges necessitates tailored strategies that reflect the unique dynamics of rural economies while promoting growth and long-term sustainability. Rooted in the unique characteristics and resources of rural areas, this dimension is divided into three sub-dimensions related to sectoral activities. Dividing the economy into sectors allows researchers and stakeholders to analyze economic activity within categories of businesses that share similar or related functions, products, or services. These subdimensions provide a framework to identify smart indicators tailored to rural economic contexts. Primary Sector The primary sector is the foundation of rural economies, focusing on the extraction and harvesting of natural resources. Key activities include agriculture, livestock farming, forestry, fishing, aquaculture, mining, and quarrying. These industries provide essential goods, employment, and cultural heritage, forming the backbone of rural livelihoods. Modernizing and ensuring the sustainability of this sector is critical to achieving food security, preserving ecosystems, and maintaining economic stability. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 20 Secondary Sector In rural contexts, the secondary sector often centres on energy production. Increasing emphasis on sustainability highlights the importance of renewable energy, decentralized systems, and energy efficiency. Smart energy initiatives strengthen the autonomy of rural communities, reduce environmental impacts, and contribute to broader climate objectives, making this sector a key component of economic resilience and diversification. Tertiary and Advanced Tertiary Sector The tertiary sector encompasses services vital to rural economies, such as tourism and business-related activities. Tourism leverages the cultural and natural assets of rural areas, boosting local incomes and diversifying economic opportunities. Advanced tertiary services, including finance, banking, and digital platforms, foster innovation and enhance access to markets, opening pathways for collaboration and growth. These services play a critical role in improving the quality of life and driving economic vitality in rural communities. 4.1.4 Smart Governance and Policy The Governance and Policy dimension explores how effective governance and policy play in enabling rural communities to embrace innovation, enhance digital capacity, and address societal challenges. Governance in this context refers to the political and institutional frameworks established by public and non-public entities, as well as the collaborative dynamics between stakeholders. It also encompasses the mechanisms through which policies are formulated, implemented, and monitored to ensure progress in digital transformation and broader rural development. The following sub-dimensions form the basis of smart governance and policy assessment. Public Governance This dimension evaluates the involvement and support of public entities in driving rural development and digitalization efforts. It measures the commitment, resources, and leadership provided by government actors at various levels to foster innovation and growth in rural areas. Non-Governmental Support The role of non-public organizations, including civil society organizations (CSOs), research institutions, and private entities, is critical in complementing public governance efforts. This dimension assesses how these actors contribute to digital initiatives and rural development, highlighting the importance of multi-sector collaboration. Policy Development and Implementation This dimension examines the processes involved in creating, adapting, and executing policies that facilitate digital transformation. It considers how these policies address critical societal issues such as privacy, security, and equitable access to digital resources. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 21 Additionally, it evaluates the effectiveness of inter-sectoral coordination and institutional capacities to implement policies and monitor their outcomes. 4.1.5 Services of General Interest This dimension focuses on the quality of life for rural residents and visitors across all age groups and demographics. By prioritizing individual well-being and fostering sustainable, thriving communities, services of general interest play a central role in rural development. Rural areas, however, face unique challenges in delivering these services, including: ● Shrinking budgets ● Depopulation ● Aging populations Smart approaches to services of general interest aim to address these challenges by improving accessibility, inclusivity, and reliability. Leveraging innovative technologies, such as digital platforms, Internet of Things (IoT) solutions, and data-driven tools can streamline and enhance service delivery. Furthermore, fostering civic and social engagement ensures that services remain aligned with the evolving needs of rural communities, creating a foundation for long-term sustainability and resilience. This dimension of the SESAM framework is structured around three interconnected subdimensions that are critical to supporting rural communities: Healthcare Healthcare services are essential for ensuring the health and safety of rural populations and are recognized as a fundamental human right. Access to quality healthcare includes hospitals, clinics, vaccination programs, and healthcare personnel (e.g., doctors, nurses, pharmacists). Innovative solutions such as eHealth and Ambient Assisted Living (AAL) technologies are particularly valuable in rural settings, enabling remote care, chronic condition management, and support for elderly residents. These approaches improve not only healthcare access but also the overall quality of care and safety for all. Education Education is a cornerstone of rural development, playing a key role in transmitting knowledge, skills, and cultural values across generations. It involves both physical infrastructure (e.g., schools, classrooms, laboratories) and organizational frameworks (e.g., curricula, student assessments, administrative processes). Digital inclusion is increasingly important, with e-learning platforms and connected classrooms helping to overcome the geographic and logistical challenges often faced in rural education systems. General Services General services encompass essential public functions that support daily life in rural communities, including postal services, banking, and local government services. These services are foundational to maintaining quality of life, enabling economic activity, and D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 22 fostering social cohesion. Smart solutions—such as digital platforms and IoT-enabled systems—can improve accessibility, efficiency, and sustainability, making these services more user-friendly and impactful. 4.1.6 Environment and Environmental and Climate-Related SDGs This dimension focuses on the essential theme of environmental sustainability, aligned with the "planet" cluster of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. As emphasized by the European Environmental Agency 21 , this cluster underscores the urgent need to protect our planet from degradation through sustainable consumption and production, responsible management of natural resources, and proactive climate action. In rural areas, environmental challenges often have compounded effects, impacting not only local communities but also local ecosystems and rural economies, threatening long-term viability and resilience. However, through the lens of the SESAM framework, environmental sustainability is not merely a goal but a fundamental principle for rural development. By integrating smart practices and leveraging advanced technologies, rural communities can effectively address environmental challenges while actively contributing to global sustainability targets. The smart use of digital tools, data-driven solutions, and innovative methods can transform how rural areas conserve natural resources, mitigate environmental risks, move towards sustainable, green economies, and also lead the way in achieving climate resilience. To work on these priorities, this dimension is structured around three interconnected subdimensions: Protection, Conservation, and Enhancement of Natural Capital This sub-dimension focuses on efforts to preserve biodiversity, sustain ecosystems, and improve the resilience of natural resources in rural areas. Strategies target the protection of wildlife habitats, the prevention of land degradation, and the preservation of vital ecosystems that provide essential services. Through these actions, rural areas aim to secure a healthy and thriving environment, one that supports both current and future generations while maintaining ecological balance. Mitigation of Environmental Pressures and Risks Rural regions often face heightened environmental pressures such as pollution, land mismanagement, and the pervasive impacts of climate change. This sub-dimension explores strategies to reduce these hazards, with a particular focus on pollution control, sustainable land use, and safeguarding water and air quality. Smart approaches, including the use of remote sensing, IoT sensors, and digital monitoring systems, play a key role in identifying risks and implementing effective mitigation strategies. These efforts are vital for building climate-resilient communities, reducing environmental health risks, and enhancing the well-being of rural residents. 21 European Environment Agency. (2020). Sustainable development goals and the environment in Europe: A cross country analysis and 39 country profiles. Publications Office.https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2800/044724 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 23 Development of a Resource-Efficient, Low-Carbon Economy Transitioning to a low-carbon, resource-efficient economy is crucial for the future of rural areas. This sub-dimension emphasizes the adoption of green practices, including renewable energy solutions, energy-efficient technologies, and circular economy approaches. By embracing these sustainable practices, rural communities can reduce their carbon footprint, lower energy costs, and foster long-term economic resilience. The use of smart grids, solar power, wind energy, and digital tools for resource management can help rural areas unlock new opportunities for economic growth while mitigating environmental impact. 4.2. Qualitative path The initial approach for assessing smartness in rural communities across the six smart dimensions begins with acknowledging that rural stakeholders may lack a detailed roadmap for implementing smart measures in their activities. Nevertheless, they possess a profound understanding of the challenges facing their communities and have clear priorities regarding where to focus their efforts to address these issues. Additionally, stakeholders often hold valuable insights into the potential applications of digitalization and ICT tools within their respective sectors, informed by their day-to-day experiences. As a foundational step in the assessment process, we propose conducting a qualitative survey to gather these insights and perceptions comprehensively. This will be complemented by an emotional mapping exercise to explore how individuals and communities relate to their environments through collective emotional experiences in the six smartness dimensions. These tools aim to provide a nuanced understanding of the local context, facilitating more targeted and effective interventions. Qualitative Survey This survey is designed to assess the smartness of rural communities by exploring six key dimensions of village and community development. It primarily uses qualitative questions to collect focused, meaningful feedback, and is structured to be administered periodically, enabling researchers and community leaders to track shifts in participant sentiment and perceptions over time. The survey is intended to be completed collectively by community members, encouraging group discussions to ensure a comprehensive and well-rounded perspective on the topics being addressed. Furthermore, It is self-administered, with a fixed structure that presents closed-ended questions in a standardized order for all participants. The survey utilizes a Likert-Type scale 22 , where respondents rate their opinions or perceptions along a five-level 22 Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D. K. (2015). Likert Scale: Explored and Explained. Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 396–403. https://doi.org/10.9734/BJAST/2015/14975; Sullivan, G. M., & Artino, A. R. (2013). Analyzing and Interpreting Data From Likert-Type Scales. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 5(4), 541–542. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-5-4-18 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 24 continuum, ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." This scale is particularly effective in measuring attitudes, opinions, or perceptions about specific aspects of smartness. In addition to close-ended questions, the survey includes provisions for open-ended responses, enabling participants to elaborate on the rationale behind their ratings. These qualitative inputs provide valuable insights into local experiences and perspectives, enriching the depth and contextual relevance of the collected data. Participants are encouraged to share their experiences and provide detailed explanations in the designated sections, contributing to a comprehensive understanding of community viewpoints. Data-driven dashboards for transparent and accountable decision-making To enhance the coherence and effectiveness of the SMART ERA framework, the qualitative survey has been seamlessly incorporated into the Data-Driven Dashboards under WP4, Task 4.2, led by the University of Maribor. These dashboards provide an integrated visualization of critical data, enabling users to gain actionable insights into trends and developments. Designed as intuitive, interactive tools, the dashboards empower users to make informed decisions and implement targeted actions, aligning with SMART ERA’s goal of advancing rural smartness assessments. Data dashboards 23 are visual displays that present the most important information needed to achieve specific goals on a single screen. Effective dashboards act as monitoring tools that are understood at a glance, leveraging visual perception to communicate dense data clearly and concisely. While they are typically used during the communication phase of evaluation, analytical dashboards can also play a role in the analysis phase. Strategic, analytical, and operational dashboards developed into SMART ERA address distinct communication needs, making it versatile tools for driving insights and actions. It bridges qualitative insights and quantitative data collection. Within each dimension, the survey includes questions designed to identify potential indicators or metrics that participants deem valuable for monitoring progress in their communities. These responses are instrumental in shaping relevant smart indicators, ensuring the dashboards are enriched with context-specific and community-informed data. Beyond their integration into the dashboards, the SESAM survey has been extensively developed as a standalone tool, enabling other interested parties to assess their communities qualitatively. Annex 1 provides the complete survey questionnaire, which supports a robust, user-centered methodology for evaluating rural smartness. This questionnaire will further contribute to SMART ERA’s WP3 objectives, forming part of the co-design process for Smart Innovation Plans (SIPs) aimed at fostering rural innovation and sustaining community engagement. 23 Smith, V. S. (2013). Data Dashboard as Evaluation and Research Communication Tool. New Directions for Evaluation, 2013(140), 21–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20072 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 25 Emotional Mapping Emotional mapping, a method rooted in psychology 24 , explores the relationship between emotions, space, and lived experiences, particularly in sensitive or therapeutic contexts. It serves as a dynamic tool to understand how individuals and communities connect to their environments through shared emotions. In SESAM, Emotional mapping examines the relationship between emotions and the six key dimensions that define rural "smartness": Enabling Factors, Mobility and Transport, Economy, Governance and Policies, Services of general interest, Environment and climaterelated SDGs. Emotions, while often perceived as personal, are profoundly shaped by social interactions and environmental contexts. Mapping these emotions offers a unique lens through which to explore the lived experiences of rural communities, providing insights into how they perceive and interact with their surroundings. By identifying these interactions, researchers and policymakers can better understand how communities experience their environments and how these feelings influence perceptions, decisions, and aspirations. The Role of Collective Emotions Emotions are intricate and multifaceted. Paul Ekman 25 identified six basic emotions— happiness, sadness, disgust, fear, surprise, and anger—that form the foundation for understanding emotional responses. Table 2. Basic emotions, their function and manifestation Emotion Function Manifestation Happiness Reinforces behaviours that benefit well-being and strengthen social bonds. Smiling, laughter, and increased energy. Sadness Signals a loss or need for support, fostering social connection and empathy. Tearfulness, withdrawal, and low energy. Disgust Protects from harmful substances or situations, both physical and moral. Wrinkling the nose, turning away, revulsion. Fear Alerts to danger and triggers survival mechanisms like fight, flight, or freeze. Increased heart rate, wide eyes, and alertness. Surprise Draws attention to unexpected events and prompts quick adaptation. Raised eyebrows, open mouth, sudden focus. Anger Motivates action to overcome obstacles or address perceived injustices. Frowning, raised voice, and physical tension. 24 Goldman, A., Gervis, M., & Griffiths, M. (2022). Emotion mapping: Exploring creative methods to understand the psychology of long-term injury. Methodological Innovations, 15(1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991221077924 25 See, for example, here: https://www.paulekman.com/universal-emotions/ D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 32 systems. It reflects the level of institutional commitment to enhancing mobility and transport in rural regions. Economy Primary Sector Status of Precision Agriculture Technologies Measures the adoption of precision tools that optimize resource use and improve yield. Level of Digitization and Automation in Agricultural Systems Evaluates the integration of digital and automated processes in farm management. Presence of Circular Agricultural Practices Assesses the implementation of sustainable practices, such as waste reduction and resource recycling. Level of Investment in Innovative Agriculture Indicates the extent of financial resources directed toward modernizing agricultural methods. Secondary Sector Level of Decentralization in Electricity Production Measures the spread of localized energy generation facilities, enhancing local energy resilience. Adoption of Circular Energy Solutions Evaluates practices like energy recycling and renewable energy usage to reduce waste. Level of Digitalization in the Energy Sector Assesses the integration of digital tools in managing and optimizing energy resources. Energy Storage Capacity Measures the storage capabilities for renewable energy, supporting energy availability and reliability. Tertiary Sector / Advanced Tertiary Sector: Level of Technical ICT Skills in the Labor Force Evaluates the prevalence of ICT skills within the local workforce, supporting digital economy initiatives. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 33 Accessibility of Cultural and Recreational Initiatives This indicator measures the ease with which residents and visitors in rural communities can access cultural and recreational activities including events, facilities, and programs. Economic Investment in ICT Sectors Indicates the level of financial commitment to ICT industries, driving innovation and employment in rural areas. Governance and Policy Public Governance Existence of Strategies, Rules, and Regulations to Promote ICT Literacy Assesses the presence of formal policies, strategies, and regulations aimed at improving ICT literacy among citizens to enable digital inclusion and smart governance practices. Level of Information and Data Availability and Accessibility Measures the extent to which community members have access to accurate, relevant, and up-to-date information and data for decisionmaking and participation in governance. Level of Online Service Accessibility Evaluates the availability and usability of online public services for citizens and businesses. Level of Investment in Smart Transition Initiatives Tracks the financial resources allocated by governments to projects and programs that drive smart development in rural communities. Non-Governmental Support Level of Information and Data Availability and Accessibility Assesses how nongovernmental actors (e.g., NGOs, private organizations) contribute to providing relevant data and resources to the community. Level of Civil Society Involvement and Measures the degree to which civil society D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 34 Engagement in Policy Processes organizations and citizens participate in policy-making and implementation processes. Level of Investment in Smart Transition Initiatives Evaluates financial contributions from nongovernmental actors to projects advancing smart rural development. Policy Development and Implementation Level of Civil Society Involvement and Engagement in Policy Processes Tracks the participation of civil society in shaping and executing policies at the local level. Level of Intersectionality in Rural Governance Practices Measures the extent to which governance practices integrate diverse demographic, social, and economic perspectives to ensure equity and inclusion. Services of General Interest Healthcare Level of Digitalization of Healthcare Systems Assesses the extent to which digital technologies are integrated into healthcare systems in rural communities to improve access, efficiency, and quality of care. Education Level of Digitalization in Rural Schools Evaluates the integration and usage of digital technologies in rural educational institutions to enhance learning outcomes and accessibility. General Services Level of Digital Accessibility in Services of General Interest Measures the availability and ease of use of digital tools for accessing general public services in rural areas, such as administrative processes and utilities. Environment and Environmental and Climate-Related SDGs Protection, Conservation, and Enhancement of Natural Capital Degree of Digitalization in Monitoring Systems Evaluates the integration of digital technologies in monitoring environmental systems, such as ecosystems, water, air quality, noise, D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 35 waste, and wastewater, to enhance data collection, analysis, and management. Mitigation of Environmental Pressures and Risks Degree of Integrated Water Resource Management Implementation Measures the extent to which integrated approaches to water management, incorporating digital tools, are implemented to optimize usage, reduce risks, and preserve resources. Level of Risk Reduction Systems Implemented Evaluates the deployment of systems to mitigate environmental risks (e.g., flooding, drought, pollution) using digital and smart technologies. Development of a Resource-Efficient, LowCarbon Economy Status of Smart Waste and Recycling Management Assesses the deployment of smart technologies to optimize waste collection, sorting, and recycling, promoting resource efficiency and reducing environmental impact. Status of Smart Water Resource Management Measures the implementation of digital technologies in water resource management to enhance efficiency, reduce losses, and support conservation. Self-Assessment To ensure that critical indicators and metrics essential for participants’ success are emphasized and that no key priorities are overlooked, this Report proposes a structured approach to prioritization. Recognizing limited funding and time, this prioritization, similar to a pairwise comparison, should guide participants in ranking all proposed dimensions, sub-dimensions and indicators. Additionally, at the end of each dimension, SESAM includes a "veto" question. This question prompts respondents to identify which indicator or metric is deemed indispensable, specifically, the element that must be included for any action within that dimension to be effective. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 36 Pairwise matrix Before proceeding with the ranking process, participants are encouraged to carefully consider the following questions: ● What is the relative significance of each indicator in achieving the objectives of the selected project? ● How does each specific indicator contribute to the success and long-term sustainability of the project? Once these considerations are made, all indicators are listed in a pairwise comparison matrix. Each pair of indicators is compared to determine their relative importance, as shown in the example table with three (A, B, C) random indicators: Table 4. Pairwise Comparison Matrix Indicators 3 2 1 2 3 Indicators A x B B x C C x A A double scale from 1 to 3 is used to assign preference values to each pair. ● Value 1: The two indicators are equally important. ● Value 2: One indicator is moderately more important than the other. ● Value 3: One indicator is significantly more important than the other. To ensure that every indicator is paired with every other indicator without repetitions, the concept of combinations can be applied. For 𝑛 indicators, the number of unique pairs can be calculated using the formula: Number of pairs = 𝑛⋅(𝑛−1)/2 After completing all pairwise comparisons, participants calculate the total score for each indicator using “points” across the rows. An indicator being deemed moderately or significantly more important than the other receives respectively 2 or 3 points (zero points are in this case allocated to the ‘losing’ indicator), whereas two indicators deemed equally important receive 1 point each. Based on the matrix above: Indicator A vs Indicator B: 3 vs 0 Indicator B vs Indicator C: 1 vs 1 Indicator C vs Indicator A: 2 vs 0 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 37 In this case, both Indicators A and C score 3 points, whereas Indicator B scores 1. Further discussion, if needed, can help select between Indicators A and C, or both can be retained for further analysis. Indicator B gets discarded from the present evaluation. Once all scores are calculated, participants rank the indicators by importance. The indicator, or the indicators group, with the highest score represents the most important or prioritized indicator. This approach enables communities to allocate resources efficiently, focusing on areas that best address their specific needs and objectives within the SESAM framework. Veto Factor The use of additive models for aggregating criteria is common in many multicriteria decision methods due to their straightforward scoring approach. However, a significant drawback of this compensatory approach is its ability to overshadow very low performance in certain criteria with high performance in others. This is problematic when some conditions are nonnegotiable for the success of a project. For instance, alternatives that fail to meet critical thresholds—referred to as Veto Factors—cannot be prioritized, regardless of their overall evaluation. Veto Factors represent indicators or conditions that are indispensable and cannot be compromised. They serve as a veto mechanism, preventing alternatives from being selected if they perform inadequately in critical areas. Thus, a sort of additive-veto models 31 can be introduced to address this issue, particularly in choice and ranking problems, ensuring that any alternative failing to meet these fundamental requirements is excluded or de-prioritized, despite its relative ranking or compensatory advantages in other areas. Implementation of the Veto Factor in SESAM occurs in three steps: 1. Identification: After finalizing the ranking of indicators, stakeholders should reflect on the essential indicators that directly impact the project's core objectives and feasibility. Any indicator that directly influences the project's success or its ability to meet legal, technical, or environmental requirements should be considered as a Veto Factor. 2. Assessment: If any indicator is flagged as a Veto Factor, it must be treated with utmost importance in the decision-making process, even if its ranking in the pairwise comparison is lower than others. The Veto Factor can also help prioritize resources towards meeting these critical conditions. 3. Actionable Insights: When completing the ranking and prioritization of indicators, stakeholders should ensure that the Veto Factor is integrated into the final decision. 31 De Almeida, A. T. (2013). Additive-veto models for choice and ranking multicriteria decision problems. AsiaPacific Journal of Operational Research, 30(06), 1350026. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217595913500267 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 38 For example, in a SESAM Dimension Six project focused on improving the sub-dimension “mitigation of environmental pressures and risks,” a Veto Factor could be the presence of a “digital monitoring system infrastructure.” Without this critical framework, the project would lack the ability to track the performance of other key indicators. This necessity overrides other indicators, such as the “level of risk reduction systems implemented in rural communities,” even if those indicators are ranked higher in terms of participants' interest. The Veto Factor ensures that the foundational capabilities required for effective implementation and monitoring are in place. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 39 5. ISO 37122 and SESAM - a more ambitious path ISO standards are a set of internationally recognized guidelines or specifications developed and published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). These standards cover a wide range of topics, including technology, safety, quality, environmental management, and many other areas of business and manufacturing. The main purposes of ISO standards are to ensure that products, services, and systems are safe, reliable, and of high quality, and to facilitate international trade by ensuring that goods and services meet consistent criteria. As such, the key features of ISO standards can be summarised as follows: International Consistency: ISO standards are developed through collaboration among experts from different countries to ensure a common framework for various industries. Voluntary Adoption: Although ISO standards are not legally binding, they are widely adopted by organisations and governments to demonstrate compliance with best practices. Continuous Improvement: ISO standards are regularly reviewed and updated to stay relevant with technological advances and changing market needs. In this context, in 2018 the family of ISO standards 37120 - “Sustainable cities and communities — Indicators for city services and quality of life” 32 was approved by the ISO dedicated committees. In their own words, “cities need indicators to measure their performance. Existing indicators at the local level are often not standardised, consistent, or comparable over time or across cities. This document is focused on city services and quality of life as a contribution to the sustainability of the city. As part of a new series of International Standards being developed for a holistic and integrated approach to sustainable development, that includes indicators for city services and quality of life, indicators for smart cities and indicators for resilient cities, this set of standardised indicators provides a uniform approach to what is measured, and how that measurement is to be undertaken. As a list, it does not provide a value judgement, threshold or target numerical value for the indicators. Conformance with this document does not confer a status in this regard. A city which conforms to this document in regards to measurement of indicators for city services and quality of life may only claim conformance to that effect. These indicators can be used to track and monitor progress on city performance. In order to achieve sustainable development, the whole city system needs to be taken into consideration. Planning for future needs should take into consideration current use and efficiency of resources in order to better plan for tomorrow. The indicators and associated test methods in this document have been developed in order to help cities: a) measure performance management of city services and quality of life over time; 32 https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/en/#iso:std:iso:37120:ed-2:v1:en D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 40 b) learn from one another by allowing comparison across a wide range of performance measures; and, c) support policy development and priority setting.” From these introductory words, it is already clear how similar the rationale and scope of the ISO 37120 context and SESAM are. The scope itself of the different types of indicators, for policy development and priority setting, is embodied in particular in SESAM’s quantitative path. More, as a general remark, it is also well within the ambitions of SESAM to provide a standardised way to define smart rural development in an agreed and co-constructed way. In 2019 a further development in the ISO 37120 family took place, i.e. the approval of the ISO 37122 standard “Sustainable cities and communities — Indicators for smart cities” 33 , which displays, at the same time, a wider outlook on indicators beyond the provision of services, and a more focused approach on smartness and digitalisation as a set of tools to increase the attractiveness and guarantee the development of cities. In their own words, ISO 37122, “when used in conjunction with ISO 37120, helps cities to identify indicators for applying city management systems such as ISO 37101 and to implement smart city policies, programmes and projects to:  respond to challenges such as climate change, rapid population growth, and political and economic instability by fundamentally improving how they engage society;  apply collaborative leadership methods, work across disciplines and city systems;  use data information and modern technologies to deliver better services and quality of life to those in the city (residents, businesses, visitors);  provide a better life environment where smart policies, practices and technology are put to the service of citizens;  achieve their sustainability and environmental goals in a more innovative way;  identify the need for and benefits of smart infrastructure;  facilitate innovation and growth;  build a dynamic and innovative economy ready for the challenges of tomorrow.” Also, in this case, remarkable similarities with the scopes and the rationale of SESAM arise, so much so that the quantitative path of SESAM was built also taking into account the dimensions, metrics and indicators included in the ISO 37122 standard for smart cities, as well as, naturally, the main conclusions and insights of the Literature Review that has led to the creation of SESAM. The dimensions of ISO 37122, divided into several indicators, are the following: Economy, Education, Energy, Environment and Climate Change, Finance, Governance, Health, Housing, Population and Social Conditions, Recreation, Safety, Solid Waste, Sport and Culture, Telecommunication, Transportation, Urban/local Agriculture and Food Security, Urban Planning, Wastewater, Water. 33 https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/en/#iso:std:iso:37122:ed-1:v1:en D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 41 Clearly, ISO 37122 refers specifically to smart ‘cities’, even though it includes the somewhat more ambiguous term ‘communities’ in its title. Any connection between indicators explicitly conceived for urban areas and those that intend to be referring to rural areas needs to be cautiously pondered, with clear, specific evaluation of every single dimension, metric or indicator. In this sense, the work of P. W. Maja and colleagues of 2020 34 , “Development of Smart Rural Village Indicators in line with Industry 4.0” has been particularly useful. The Authors, in their quest to create indicators for smart rural villages that are aligned both with ISO 37122 and the Industry 4.0 concept, ask themselves the following three questions: “Will the indicator support sustainability of rural villages? Will it be supporting smartness? Would the indicator require some form of ICT infrastructure for it to be realised?”. The Authors’ working definition of ‘smartness’ is a process that, simultaneously, advances the economic prospects and sustains social development in a village. The three questions allow the Authors to investigate the compatibility of the ISO 37122 indicators for rural villages. The Authors also reflect on connectivity as a possible human right, and how the smart village transition for rural areas can be subsumed in the Sustainable Development Goal 7 - Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. SESAM has also been constructed, in its quantitative path, on a similar manner, also taking into account the insights and indications coming from Maja et al, 2020, but with a less narrow focus on the concept of Industry 4.0, and a wider approach aiming to include as many of the original ISO 37122 dimensions’ as possible. An effort has been made in this sense for two main reasons: 1) to be adhering as close as possible to the best internationally recognised standards, and to the most recent literature on the subject of standardisation of indicators for rural areas; 2) to prepare the terrain for a possible submission of a new ISO standard, specifically designed to assess the level of smartness of rural (and in general, non-urban) areas to the ISO committees. The latter ambition goes, by itself, beyond the scope of Smart ERA as a project, but could represent a key research topic for the project’s partnership, as well as a further, remarkably interesting output of the project itself. In a way, the spirit and the letter of ISO 37122 has already been included in the present iteration of SESAM: its future path as a standard for rural areas is possible, but at present yet to come. 34 Maja, P. W., Meyer, J., & Von Solms, S. (2020). Development of Smart Rural Village Indicators in Line with Industry 4.0. IEEE Access, 8, 152017-152033. Article 9169887. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3017441 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 48 ● Very poor ● Poor ● Acceptable ● Good ● Very good ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● How would you consider the cost of communication services (e.g., mobile, fixed internet) in your community, considering the effectiveness and efficiency of the services provided? Please explain your reasoning and share any specific challenges or benefits you’ve encountered. ● Very low ● Low ● Moderate ● High ● Very high ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ● How would you describe your community's ability to access, understand, and effectively use digital information and content? Please explain your reasoning and highlight any specific challenges or strengths your community faces. ● Very low ● Low ● Moderate ● High ● Very high ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● How frequently does your community participate in political or social discussions online, and through which platforms or methods (e.g., email, social media, forums, messaging apps)? Please provide examples and describe the level of engagement. ● Never ● Seldom ● Sometimes ● Often ● Almost always D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 49 ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● How familiar is your community with tools for creating digital content in various formats (e.g., text, images, video, or audio) for daily use? How do you assess this familiarity, and can you provide any examples? ● Unfamiliar ● Slightly familiar ● Moderately familiar ● Very familiar ● Expert ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Metrics ● Which enabling factors related to digital infrastructure and literacy are most important for you to monitor? Please rate each option on a scale from 1 (Not important) to 5 (Very important). ● Access to high-speed internet ● Availability of public Wi-Fi hotspots ● Digital literacy levels among the population ● Access to digital training programs ● Usage rates of digital services (e.g., e-governance, online education) ● Availability of digital devices (e.g., smartphones, computers) ● Community engagement in digital initiatives ● Infrastructure for digital entrepreneurship ● Are there any other Indicators related to enabling factors that you believe would be important to track? Please specify: ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Mobility and Transport While transportation can be described as the act of moving goods or people, mobility underlines the act or the ability of a person to be moved. Mobility isn't just about having access to one mode of transportation but having the ability to access these services and the quality of those options. As the EU moves rapidly towards a more sustainable, smart, and inclusive mobility and transport sector, rural areas must also adapt to these changes. The EU's focus is on creating an interconnected, efficient, and environmentally friendly transport system that serves all citizens, including those in remote or rural areas. Digitalisation plays D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 50 a key role in this transition, enabling innovative solutions like on-demand bus services, vehicle sharing programs, and optimised public transport routes. This section aims to assess the current state of mobility and transport in your rural community, identify areas for improvement, and explore how much space there is for new technologies and smart policies in this sector. Questions ● How would you assess the current state of transport infrastructure in your village (e.g., roads, railways, bus stops, cycle lanes)? What specific factors— such as maintenance, accessibility, or convenience—influence your assessment? Please explain your reasoning and share any key examples or experiences ● Very poor ● Poor ● Acceptable ● Good ● Very good ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● Think about the public transport services in your area. Do you believe they are efficient and well-organized? Why or why not? Consider factors such as timeliness, coverage, reliability, and user experience in your response ● Strongly Disagree ● Disagree ● Undecided ● Agree ● Strongly Agree ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● How would you assess the condition and upkeep of public transportation means (trains, buses, car/bike-sharing, etc.) in your village, and what factors contribute to your rating? ● Very poor ● Poor ● Acceptable ● Good ● Very good ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 51 ● How frequently do you think your community rely on private means of transportation (e.g., cars, motorcycles) for daily commute or errands in your villages, and why? ● Never ● Rarely ● Sometimes ● Very Often ● Always ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Metrics ● Which of the following mobility-related data points are most important for you to track? Please rate each option on a scale from 1 (Not important) to 5 (Very important). ● Public transport usage ● Electric vehicle adoption ● Traffic congestion levels ● Cycling and walking infrastructure ● Average commute times ● Car-sharing and ride-hailing service usage ● Pedestrian walkability ● Environmental impact (e.g., emissions reduction) ● Cost-efficiency for citizens ● Convenience and accessibility ● Car ownership rates between regions ● Bike-sharing program usage ● Growth in electric vehicle use ● Traffic density across tourist seasons ● Are there any other Indicators related to infrastructure and mobility that you believe would be important to track? Please specify: __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Economy Economic activities are generally divided into three main sectors. This survey focuses on those most commonly associated with rural areas: ● Primary Sector: Activities that involve extracting or harvesting resources from the Earth, such as agriculture, livestock farming, forestry, fishing, aquaculture, mining, and quarrying. ● Secondary Sector: Specifically focusing on energy production in rural contexts. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 52 ● Tertiary Sector: Services provided to individuals or enterprises, especially those related to tourism, and business services activities. The aim of the following questions is to encourage participants to reflect on the various income-generating activities in rural areas, including those they are currently involved in or plan to pursue. Consider the challenges and opportunities rural economic activities face, and the availability of financial resources to support the digital transformation of these sectors. It’s important to acknowledge that not all activities are viable in every context or location. Questions ● How important are agriculture, forestry, fishing, aquaculture, mining, quarrying activities in your community? Describe their role in the local economy, considering aspects like employment, income generation, and cultural importance. ● Not Important ● Slightly Important ● Moderately Important ● Important ● Very important ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● How common is it in your community to produce renewable energy through small-scale production systems (e.g., solar panels, wind turbines, small hydro systems, or biomass), and what types of systems are being used? ● Very uncommon ● Somewhat uncommon ● Moderately common ● Common ● Very common ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● Does your community or household use energy storage systems (e.g., home batteries, community-scale storage) to store excess energy? If yes, why was it necessary? ● Not used or needed ● Rarely used and optional ● Moderately used and helpful ● Often used and beneficial ● Widely used and essential D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 53 ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● Reflect on the economic impact tourism has on your community, considering both direct and indirect contributions, as well as the types of tourism activities prevalent in the area (e.g., cultural, eco-tourism, adventure tourism, etc.). How has tourism contributed to your local economy and why? ● Insignificant or non-existent ● Limited and supplementary ● Moderate and beneficial ● Important and growing ● Significant and transformative ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● How would you assess the growth of the ICT sector over the past decade in your community? Do you believe it is gaining prominence, and if so, why? ● Very slow growth ● Slow growth ● Moderate growth ● Significant growth ● Rapid growth ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● Reflect on the challenges faced by your community or business in accessing financial resources that are aimed at enabling digital transformation in rural areas. Consider the availability of loans, grants, or other forms of financial support tailored for rural digital initiatives. How would you assess the difficulty in obtaining financial support (e.g., loans) linked to digital transformation in your local economy and why? ● Not Important ● Slightly Important ● Moderately Important ● Important ● Very Important ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 54 Metrics ● Which economic data related to the three main sectors would you find most valuable for improving productivity and decision-making? Please rate each option on a scale from 1 (Not valuable) to 5 (Very valuable). ● Crop yield data ● Soil quality and fertility levels ● Weather and climate conditions ● Pest and disease outbreaks ● Market prices for agricultural products ● Water availability and usage ● Production volumes of local agri-food products (e.g., olive oil, wine) ● Economic data on the local agri-food sector (revenues, exports) ● Visitor numbers and trends ● Revenue generated from tourism ● Sustainable tourism initiatives (e.g., eco-tourism) ● Tourist satisfaction surveys ● Impact of tourism on local resources ● Renewable energy usage (e.g., solar, wind) ● Are there any other economic Indicators related the three main economic sectors that you believe would be important to track? Please specify: ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Governance and Policy This module helps to assess the digital maturity of governance and policy within public administrations. Governance refers to the political and institutional frameworks provided by both public and non-public entities, as well as the collaborative dynamics between key stakeholders—including external actors and those directly benefiting from development initiatives. It also considers how policies are formulated and implemented to support digital transformation. The section is structured around the following dimensions: ● Public Governance: Evaluates the level of support and involvement from public actors in driving rural development and digitalization within the community. ● Non-Governmental Support: Investigates the role of non-public entities, such as civil society organizations (CSOs) and research institutions, in contributing to rural development and digital initiatives. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 55 ● Policy Development and Implementation: Focuses on the creation, adaptation, and execution of policies that promote digital transition, including policies that address societal challenges, such as privacy, security, and equitable access. The module also explores how effectively policies and governance mechanisms coordinate across different sectors to support digital transformation, as well as the capacity of institutions to implement these policies and monitor progress. To assess smart governance and policy in your area, please answer the following questions Questions ● Reflect on any digital programs or initiatives launched or supported by local schools, libraries, healthcare institutions, or government offices. Consider aspects such as infrastructure development, training programs, or funding opportunities for digital projects. Which kind of support public institutions provide to aid digital initiatives in your community and how? ● Very little support ● Limited support ● Moderate support ● Significant support ● Full support ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● Consider the extent to which your local government leaders advocate for digital policies, allocate funding, or partner with stakeholders to drive digital transformation. Reflect on public speeches, strategies, or campaigns that focus on digitalization. What role do local government leaders play in promoting digital transformation? ● No role ● Minimal role ● Moderate role ● Active role ● Leading role ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 56 ● Think about the presence of local NGOs, associations, or community groups that work to promote digital literacy, provide technology access, or encourage digital inclusion. What role do civil society organizations (CSOs) play in supporting digital initiatives in your community and how they do it? ● No role ● Minimal role ● Moderate role ● Active role ● Leading role ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ● Consider how well digital initiatives are coordinated across different sectors (e.g., education, health, transport, etc.) in your community. Are digital policies consistent and aligned across various governance siloes and why? ● Not integrated at all ● Slightly integrated ● Moderately integrated ● Well integrated ● Fully integrated ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Metrics ● Which of the following governance-related information would you find most valuable? Please rate each option on a scale from 1 (Not valuable) to 5 (Very valuable). ● Public spending and budget allocation ● E-governance services usage ● Citizen participation in decision-making processes ● Public satisfaction with local government services ● Legislation and policy changes that impact the region ● Are there any other Indicators related to governance and policy information that you believe would be important to track? Please specify: D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 57 _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Services of general interest Universal access to essential services such as healthcare, education and other general services is a core mandate for European countries. However, factors like shrinking budgets, depopulation, and ageing societies make it increasingly difficult to provide these services—particularly in rural areas where costs and accessibility challenges are greater. Ensuring reliable access to these services is crucial for helping rural areas thrive, making them more attractive and viable for residents. This section on the survey is structured around three key dimensions: ● Healthcare: Health services are vital to society and the economy. Healthcare is recognized as a basic human right, essential for safeguarding the health and safety of populations. It includes various components of a healthcare system, such as hospitals, vaccination programs, clinics, and the personnel who run the system (doctors, nurses, managers, pharmacists, etc.). ● Education: Education involves the transmission of knowledge, skills, and character traits, taking place in both formal and informal settings, both of which are crucial for community development. In its infrastructural aspect, it includes the physical entities and facilities of schools, classrooms, laboratories, etc., while in its organizational aspect, it includes curricular materials, student assessments, administrative procedures, and learning routines. ● General Services: These encompass essential functions that support the daily needs of residents in rural communities, including postal services, banking, and local government services. Questions ● Think about the proximity and quality of the nearest healthcare facilities, including hospitals, clinics, and emergency services. Reflect on how quickly healthcare services respond in urgent situations and the overall effectiveness of healthcare interventions in your community. How do you believe the healthcare system is functioning in your community, and why? ● Very poor functions ● Poor functions ● Acceptable functions ● Good functions ● Very good functions ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 64 ● The background of the map should be neutral (not colourful) to facilitate the marking of emotions using different colours. 2. Identify Emotional Responses Reflect emotions based on Paul Ekman's universal identification of basic emotions. It serves as the foundation for understanding emotional responses. Below are operative explanations for these emotions and some extended ones. Table 5. Basic emotions: function and manifestation Emotion Function Manifestation Happiness Reinforces behaviours that benefit well-being and strengthen social bonds. Smiling, laughter, and increased energy. Sadness Signals a loss or need for support, fostering social connection and empathy. Tearfulness, withdrawal, and low energy. Disgust Protects from harmful substances or situations, both physical and moral. Wrinkling the nose, turning away, revulsion. Fear Alerts to danger and triggers survival mechanisms like fight, flight, or freeze. Increased heart rate, wide eyes, and alertness. Surprise Draws attention to unexpected events and prompts quick adaptation. Raised eyebrows, open mouth, sudden focus. Anger Motivates action to overcome obstacles or address perceived injustices. Frowning, raised voice, and physical tension. This Emotional mapping focuses specifically on qualitatively assessing smartness in rural communities. It addresses six key dimensions of villages and communities’ level of smartness. Table 6. SESAM dimensions and topics Dimensions Sub-dimensions Manifestation Enabling Factors digital infrastructure and digital literacy This dimension underpins the digital transformation of rural areas by ensuring equitable access to digital infrastructure and fostering digital literacy. It emphasizes the importance of robust physical and virtual systems (e.g., broadband, cybersecurity) and skills development to empower individuals and communities to engage effectively in the digital era. Mobility and Transport Technical and information infrastructure; Mobility methods and vehicles used for this purpose; Legislation Focuses on creating accessible, efficient, and environmentally sustainable transport systems tailored to rural needs. Through smart technologies such as real-time tracking and shared mobility solutions, this dimension addresses challenges like low population density and long travel distances, bridging urban-rural mobility gaps. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 65 Economy Three-sector model of the economy Aims to boost the resilience and sustainability of rural economies through innovation and smart practices. It encompasses: Primary Sector: Sustainable agriculture, livestock, and resource harvesting. Secondary Sector: Energy production with an emphasis on renewable solutions. Tertiary Sector: Tourism and advanced services fostering economic vitality and digital inclusion. Smart Governance and Policy Public Governance; NonGovernmental Support; Policy Development and Implementation Explores the role of governance and collaborative policies in rural innovation. It evaluates the contributions of public entities, non-governmental organizations, and policy frameworks to drive digital transformation and address societal challenges while ensuring equitable resource allocation. Services of General Interest (SGIs) Healthcare; Education; General Services Addresses the provision of essential services like healthcare, education, and general public utilities in rural areas. By leveraging smart solutions (e.g., eHealth, IoT), it enhances accessibility, reliability, and inclusivity, ensuring a high quality of life and community cohesion. Environment and ClimateRelated SDGs Protection, Conservation, and Enhancement of Natural Capital; Mitigation of Environmental Pressures and Risks; Development of a Resource-Efficient, LowCarbon Economy Centres on achieving environmental sustainability through: Preserving biodiversity and ecosystems; Reducing pollution and adapting to climate change; Advancing renewable energy and circular practices to ensure a greener, more resource-efficient future. Consider how these emotions relate to each of the six SESAM dimensions within your community. For example: ● How do you feel about the state of public transport (Mobility and Transport)? ● What emotions arise when thinking about digital infrastructure (Enabling Factors)? 3. Assess the Spatial Extent of Emotions When connected to the SESAM framework's six dimensions, emotions provide insights into how individuals and communities perceive, adapt to, and interact with their surroundings. Determine if the emotions are tied to specific object (e.g., a cycleway, building) o locations (e.g., a school, park) or if they span broader areas of the community and try to build a chart similar to the chart that follow. Table 7. SESAM qualitative framework: part 1 SESAM Dimensions Object Location Response Emotion Enabling Factors Investment First street in the ABC village …. Anger Mobility and Transport New cycleway Second crossroads in the ABC village …. Happiness D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 66 Economy Tomato’s market Third street in the ABC village …. Surprise Governance and Policy Smart reform Fourth crossroads in the ABC village …. Fear Services of General Interest (SGIs) Healthcare system Fifth street in the ABC village …. Sadness Environment and Climate-Related SDGs Waste Sixth crossroads in the ABC village …. Disgust 4. Place Emotions on the Map ● Using the printed map, mark locations that elicit strong emotional responses. ● Use distinct colours to represent different emotions and make a legend (e.g., green for happiness, red for frustration). 5. Describe the Emotions ● For each marked location, describe the response of specific emotions felt by your community. ● Explain why these emotions are present at that location and what factors influence them. Table 8. SESAM qualitative framework: part 2 SESAM Dimensions Object Location Response Emotion Enabling Factors Investment First street in the ABC village Frustration when an infrastructural Anger Figure : Eg.,of emotional map D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 67 broadband project is interrupted due to a lack of investments…. Mobility and Transport New cycleway Second crossroads in the ABC village Cycling along the newly created agricultural cycleway, developed with European funding, feels truly rewarding and uplifting…. Happiness Economy Tomato’s market Third street in the ABC village Receiving unexpected good news about improved production performance following the adoption of digital tools…. Surprise Governance and Policy Smart reform Fourth crossroads in the ABC village Anxiety about a conservative leadership change affect smart innovative strategies…. Fear Services of General Interest (SGIs) Healthcare system Fifth street in the ABC village Sadness when elderly residents in rural areas cannot access essential public services, like healthcare, due to limited transportation options and poor connectivity…. Sadness Environment and Climate-Related SDGs Waste Sixth crossroads in the ABC village Reacting to illegal waste disposal practices…. Disgust 6. Review the Emotional Map ● Examine the completed map for patterns, clusters, or gaps in emotional responses. ● Discuss these findings with other participants to gain a broader understanding of the emotional and spatial landscape. 7. Engage in Collective Reflection ● Discuss your observations with other participants to explore the emotional landscape collectively. ● Reflect on how these shared emotions may influence the community’s understanding of its current situation and future aspirations D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 68 Annex 3 Enabling Factors: Indicators and metrics Indicator list Table 9. Enabling Factors - Indicators and their prioritization Dimensions Subdimensions Indicators Definitions Total score Veto Factor Enabling factors Digital infrastructure Level of Digital Connectivity Measures the availability and quality of digital network connections within a rural community. Level of Analog Connectivity Assesses traditional, nondigital means of connectivity (e.g., postal services, telephony) to gauge infrastructure inclusivity in areas with limited digital access. Computational Capacity Potential Evaluates the available computing resources and potential for scaling digital capabilities within rural areas. Economic Accessibility of Internet Services Examines the affordability and economic accessibility of internet services for rural residents, aiming to highlight potential barriers to digital engagement. Digital literacy Technical Proficiency of Rural Populations Evaluates the ICT skill levels within rural communities, D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 69 reflecting their capability to leverage digital tools effectively. Self-assessment Before proceeding with the ranking process, participants are encouraged to carefully consider the following questions: ● What is the relative significance of each indicator in achieving the objectives of the selected project? ● How does each specific indicator contribute to the success and long-term sustainability of the project? Rank each pair of indicators in the pairwise matrix below based on preference, using the scoring system provided. The scale ranges from 1 to 3: ● “One” indicates that the two indicators are equally important; ● “Two” indicates that one indicator is moderately more important than the other; ● “Three” indicates that one indicator is significantly more important than the other. For each pair of indicators choose a value from 1 to 3. A 3 or 2 to the left column chart shows that the statement on the left is significantly or moderately more important than the one on the right, while a 2 or 3 to the right column chart indicates that the statement on the right is moderately or significantly more important than the one on the left. Table 10. Enabling Factors - pairwise matrix 3 2 1 2 3 Level of Digital Connectivity Computational Capacity Potential Level of Digital Connectivity Economic Accessibility of Internet Services Level of Digital Connectivity Technical Proficiency of Rural Populations Level of Analog Connectivity Computational Capacity Potential Level of Analog Connectivity Economic Accessibility of Internet Services D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 70 Level of Analog Connectivity Technical Proficiency of Rural Populations Computation al Capacity Potential Economic Accessibility of Internet Services Computation al Capacity Potential Technical Proficiency of Rural Populations Economic Accessibility of Internet Services Technical Proficiency of Rural Populations Completing all pairwise comparisons, participants calculate the total score for each indicator using “points” across the rows. The values should be added with a positive or negative sign based on the indicator's position in the matrix. After finalizing the ranking of indicators, reflect on the essential indicators that directly impact the project's core objectives and feasibility. ● Any indicator that directly influences the project's success or its ability to meet legal, technical, or environmental requirements should be considered as a Veto Factor. ● If any indicator is flagged as a Veto Factor, it must be treated with utmost importance in the decision-making process, even if its ranking in the pairwise comparison is lower than others. ● When completing the ranking and prioritization of indicators, stakeholders should ensure that the Veto Factor is integrated into the final decision. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 71 Metrics, units, importance and sources Table 11. Enabling Factors – Metrics and their units Status indicators Metric Units Importance/Definition Sources Level of Digital Connectivity Ratio of backbone fiber length to households (km/households ) Fiber backbone supports the necessary quality of experience and reliability broadband services need. So, a higher amount of backbone fiber per household drives greater reliability and performance for broadband networks. Global Fiber Development Index: 2020 Level of Digital Connectivity Cells site density per km² (Number/ km²) All equipment (antenna, building and ground) used to transmit cell signals to and from the mobile device back to the receiver. They’re absolutely vital to the wireless infrastructure that powers rural areas. Horanont, T., Phiboonbanakit, T., & Phithakkitnukoon, S. (2018). Resembling Population Density Distribution with Massive Mobile Phone Data. Data Science Journal, 17, 24. https://doi.org/10.5334/ dsj-2018-024 Computational Capacity Potential Data centers capacity per km² (kW/km²) This indicator measures the total computational capacity (in teraflops or petaflops) of data centers located within a rural area, normalized by the total land area (in square kilometers) of that area. It assesses the density of computational resources available, highlighting the potential for technological applications, data processing, and digital services in rural communities. …. Economic Accessibility of Internet Services Average of monthly cost of broadband and mobile internet services per household (€/household) The Broadband Internet Cost indicator measures the average monthly cost that households pay for broadband and mobile internet services. This value is expressed in euros per household (€/household) and provides insights into the affordability and accessibility of internet Broadband statistics OECD https://www.oecd.org/e n/topics/subissues/broadbandstatistics.html D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 72 services within a rural region or community. Level of Analog Connectivity Percentage of households with access to traditional telephone lines % This metric measures the proportion of rural households that have access to traditional telephony. In many rural communities, where digital infrastructure may be underdeveloped, analog communication remains a primary means of connectivity. Level of Analog Connectivity Percentage of households with access to regular postal service. % This metric measures the proportion of rural households that have access to postal services. In many rural communities, where digital infrastructure may be underdeveloped, analog communication remains a primary means of connectivity. Level of Analog Connectivity Number of Post Boxes per Square Km (Number/km²) This metric represents the density of post boxes available within a given area, calculated as the total number of post boxes divided by the total land area (in square kilometers). It serves as an indicator of the accessibility and availability of basic postal services in a region. In rural areas, the availability of post boxes can significantly affect community connectivity and access to essential services, particularly for residents in remote locations. ECONOMICS OF POSTAL SERVICES: Report to the European Commission DGMARKT Prepared by NERA July 2004, London: https://ec.europa.eu/do csroom/documents/141 08/attachments/1/transl ations/en/renditions/pdf Level of Analog Connectivity Percentage of consumers receiving reliable local radio broadcasts. % This metric assesses the extent to which local radio broadcasts reach rural communities reliably. Radio remains a widely accessible and effective medium for communication, particularly in areas where internet access is limited or sporadic. Local radio broadcasts often include relevant information on weather, public announcements, emergency alerts, and community events. The metric is expressed as the percentage of the rural area that receives consistent and clear radio signals from local stations. Rice, S. (2022). Importance of Digital Terrestrial Television and Broadcast Radio | Ipsos. https://www.ipsos.com/ en-uk/importancedigital-terrestrialtelevision-andbroadcast-radio Level of Analog Connectivity Percentage of consumers receiving % This metric assesses the extent to which local or Rice, S. (2022). Importance of Digital D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 73 television exclusively through over-the-air broadcast signals national over-the-air broadcast television signals reach rural communities. Television remains a widely accessible and effective medium for communication, particularly in areas where internet access or cable is limited or sporadic. The metric is expressed as the percentage of the rural area that receives exclusively overthe-air broadcast signals. Terrestrial Television and Broadcast Radio | Ipsos. https://www.ipsos.com/ en-uk/importancedigital-terrestrialtelevision-andbroadcast-radio Level of Digital connectivity Density of number of public Wi-Fi hotspots per person (Hotspot/person ) The wireless technology has revolutionized communication, allowing for various interactive applications. Wireless hotspots, also known as Wi-Fi hotspots, serve as access points that provide network and internet connectivity to mobile devices like laptops and smartphones, typically in public locations which has become an essential technology for the growth and progress of communities. Indicators linked to proposed metrics from University of Maribor, Maribor (UM) Level of Digital connectivity Percentage of households with access to broadband internet (%) The "Broadband Penetration" indicator measures the proportion of households within a specific area (e.g., city, region, or country) that have access to broadband internet services. This metric is expressed as a percentage of the total number of households. Indicators linked to proposed metrics from University of Maribor, Maribor (UM) Level of Digital connectivity Geographic coverage of broadband and mobile networks (%) The indicator measures the geographic area where broadband internet and mobile networks are available. This indicator reflects the physical reach of the infrastructure that provides access to high-speed internet (broadband) and mobile data services. It is typically expressed as a percentage of the total geographic area within a region, city, or country. Maja et al., 2020 Level of Digital connectivity Density of cellphone provider networks reachable in a village (Number/km²) This indicator measures the density of cellphone provider networks in a specific village or rural area. It reflects how many different cellphones network providers are available and accessible per unit of geographic area, typically expressed as number of Maja et al., 2020 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 80 and Plans Integration of Smart ICT Solutions in Vehicles Adoption of Mobility Regulations and Plans Completing all pairwise comparisons, participants calculate the total score for each indicator using “points” across the rows. The values should be added with a positive or negative sign based on the indicator's position in the matrix. After finalizing the ranking of indicators, reflect on the essential indicators that directly impact the project's core objectives and feasibility. ● Any indicator that directly influences the project's success or its ability to meet legal, technical, or environmental requirements should be considered as a Veto Factor. ● If any indicator is flagged as a Veto Factor, it must be treated with utmost importance in the decision-making process, even if its ranking in the pairwise comparison is lower than others. ● When completing the ranking and prioritization of indicators, stakeholders should ensure that the Veto Factor is integrated into the final decision. Metrics, units, importance and sources Table 14. Mobility and Transport - Metrics and their units Status indicators Metric Units Importance/Definition Sources Accessibility and availability of public transportation services in rural areas Density of bus stops/shelters in a given area (Number/km²) This indicator measures the density of bus stops or shelters within a specified geographic area, expressed as the number of bus stops or shelters per square kilometer. It provides insight into the accessibility and availability of public transportation services in a given area. A higher density of bus stops indicates better access to public transportation, making it easier for residents to use buses for their daily commutes and travel needs Kim, J., Park, J., Lee, J., & Jang, K. M. (2024). Examining the socio-spatial patterns of bus shelters with deep learning analysis of street-view images: A case study of 20 cities in the U.S. Cities, 148, 104852. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.cities.2024.104852 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 81 Accessibility and availability of public transportation services in rural areas Length of bicycle network (dedicated cycle paths and lanes) (km) This indicator measures the length of cycling and walking infrastructure (such as bike lanes, footpaths, and pedestrian walkways) deployed in a specific area, expressed by km European Commission (A c. Di). (2017). Methodological manual on city statistics: 2017 edition (2017 edition). Publications Office. https://doi.org/10.2785/ 708009 Accessibility and availability of public transportation services in rural areas Ratio of cycling and walking infrastructure deployed to population (km/population) This indicator measures the length of cycling and walking infrastructure (such as bike lanes, footpaths, and pedestrian walkways) deployed in a specific area, expressed as a ratio to the number of population in that area. It helps assess the availability and accessibility of active transportation options relative to the population density. European Commission (A c. Di). (2017). Methodological manual on city statistics: 2017 edition (2017 edition). Publications Office. https://doi.org/10.2785/ 708009 Accessibility and availability of public transportation services in rural areas Percentage of the villages public transport network covered by a unified payment system (%) For rural areas, a high percentage of the public transport network covered by a unified payment system is key to simplifying access, encouraging the use of public transport, and improving convenience for residents and visitors, particularly in areas where transport options are fragmented. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Accessibility and availability of public transportation services in rural areas Percentage of municipal budget allocated for provision of mobility aids, devices, and assistive technologies to citizens with special needs (%) This metric measures the share of a municipality's budget dedicated to providing mobility aids, devices, and assistive technologies that support citizens with special needs. It includes funding for essential resources such as wheelchairs, hearing aids, visual assistance tools, and other accessibility devices that help improve mobility, autonomy, and quality ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 82 of life for residents with disabilities. Adoption of Mobility Regulations and Plans Number of villages with active Sustainable Mobility Plans (SMPs) or similar plans tailored for rural areas, divided by the total number of villages in the area Percentage (%) This metric represents the proportion of rural villages that have adopted and are actively implementing mobility plans focused on sustainable transportation. These plans might include provisions for public transport, active mobility (cycling and walking), and lowemission vehicles, tailored to rural needs. Adoption of Mobility Regulations and Plans Percentage of rural villages with zoning laws supporting mobility infrastructure Percentage (%) This metric measures the share of rural villages that have enacted zoning regulations to prioritize and support the development of mobility infrastructure, such as bike lanes, public transport hubs, and electric vehicle charging stations. Adoption of Mobility Regulations and Plans Number of rural villages that have introduced speed limits, trafficcalming measures, or other road safety initiatives, divided by the total number of villages % of communities This metric reflects the proportion of rural villages actively implementing road safety measures. These initiatives may include reduced speed zones, installation of speed bumps, or pedestrian-friendly infrastructure. Integration of Smart Solutions in collective service vehicles Number of trains operating per hour that provide smart services for passengers. Number of Smart Service Trains per Hour= Operating Hours per Day/Total Smart Service Trains in Operation per Day x 100 This metric measures the availability and frequency of trains equipped with modern, passenger-friendly smart services such as Wi-Fi, USB charging ports, and standard power outlets. It reflects advancements in rail transport infrastructure aimed at improving the quality of service and enhancing the travel experience for passengers in both rural and regional contexts. Dotter, F., Lennert, F., & Patatouka, E. (2019). Smart Mobility Systems and Services. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 83 Integration of Smart Solutions in collective service vehicles Number of Private Collective Transport Buses Offering Smart Services Smart Service Buses Per Day= Total Operated Buses Per Day/Total Smart Service Buses in Operation (Daily) ×100 This metric measures the availability of smart services such as Wi-Fi, USB charging ports, and standard power outlets, in private collective transport buses used in rural and regional areas. It focuses on enhancing passenger experience and providing digital connectivity for private collective travel options. Dotter, F., Lennert, F., & Patatouka, E. (2019). Smart Mobility Systems and Services. Integration of Smart Solutions in collective service vehicles Number of Public Transport Buses Offering Smart Services Smart Service Buses Per Day= Total Operated Buses Per Day/Total Smart Service Buses in Operation (Daily) ×100 This metric evaluates the penetration of smart services such as Wi-Fi, USB charging ports, and standard power outlets, in public bus transport, emphasizing the role of public authorities in advancing accessible and modern mobility solutions in rural and urban fringe areas. Dotter, F., Lennert, F., & Patatouka, E. (2019). Smart Mobility Systems and Services. Level of Digitalization in Public Transport Systems and infrastructures in Rural Communities Percentage of public transport lines equipped with a realtime system (%) For rural areas, having a high percentage of public transport lines equipped with real-time systems is critical to making transport services more reliable, accessible, and efficient, especially in contexts where public transportation options are limited and services tend to be infrequent. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Level of Digitalization in Public Transport Systems and infrastructures in Rural Communities Percentage of public transport routes with municipally provided and/or managed internet connectivity for commuters (%) For rural areas, a high percentage of public transport routes with internet connectivity is essential to improving commuter experience, enhancing digital inclusion, and promoting the use of public transportation, particularly where connectivity options are limited. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Level of digitalization in Public Transport Systems and infrastructures in Rural Communities Percentage of marked pedestrian crosswalks equipped with accessible pedestrian signals (%) In rural areas, a high percentage of rosswalks equipped with accessible pedestrian signals is ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 84 crucial for improving pedestrian safety, ensuring accessibility for all, and enhancing the overall walkability and inclusivity of the community. This is especially important in areas with aging populations, fewer transport options, and less pedestrian infrastructure. Level of Digitalization in Public Transport Systems and infrastructures in Rural Communities Percentage of outdoor lamp posts and street lighting that are managed by a light management system (%) In rural areas, outdoor lighting is often less concentrated than in urban settings, leading to darker environments at night, which can pose safety risks. The percentage of outdoor lamp posts and street lighting that are managed by a light management system indicator helps assess the efficacy and efficiency of street lighting systems. Smart lamp posts can improve safety by adjusting brightness based on real-time conditions, such as the presence of pedestrians or vehicles, while also conserving energy and reducing light pollution. This metric provides valuable insights into how effectively rural areas are balancing safety with energy efficiency in their public lighting infrastructure. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Level of Digitalization in Public Transport Systems and infrastructures in Rural Communities Percentage of street lighting that has been refurbished (%) Upgrading older streetlights improves the quality of lighting, increasing visibility for pedestrians and drivers. This is especially important in rural areas, where roads and pathways may be poorly lit, and improved lighting can reduce the risk of accidents and enhance night-time safety. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 85 Level of Digitalization in Public Transport Systems and infrastructures in Rural Communities Percentage of Public Parking Spaces Equipped with both Epayment Systems and traditional option (%) In rural areas, where digital infrastructure may not be as robust, offering both epayment and traditional options ensures inclusivity for residents who may not have access to digital payment methods, while still encouraging modernization ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Level of Digitalization in Public Transport Systems and infrastructures in Rural Communities Number of Electric Charging Stations per Electric Vehicle (EV) (Number) In rural areas, tracking the number of electric charging stations per EV is essential for ensuring that charging infrastructure is developed at a pace that meets current and future demand. This metric promotes convenience, economic development, and sustainability. EAFO database https://alternative-fuelsobservatory.ec.europa. eu/ Level of Digitalization in Public Transport Systems and infrastructures in Rural Communities Percentage of the total regional railway network powered by electricity. Percentage (%) This metric measures the proportion of the railway network in a specific region that operates using electric power instead of diesel or other fossil fuels. It is calculated by comparing the total length of electrified railway lines to the total length of the regional railway network. EAFO database https://alternative-fuelsobservatory.ec.europa. eu/ Low-carbon Fuels Veicles Number of Registered Electric Vehicles per 100 000 population Electric Vehicles per 100,000 inhabitants This metric measures the penetration of electric mobility in rural communities, highlighting the adoption of sustainable transport and machinery solutions across various sectors. The metric encompasses multiple categories of vehicles serving diverse rural functions: Passenger Cars for personal and business use; Trucks for goods transport and logistics; Tractors and other farm machinery essential for agricultural operations; Specialized Vehicles utilized in Indicators linked to proposed metrics from University of Maribor, Maribor (UM) D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 86 forestry, fisheries, and other rural industries. Low-carbon Fuels Vehicles Percentage of Electric Vehicles Percentage (%) This metric reflects the shift toward lowemission technology across the rural economy, emphasizing how electric and hybrid vehicles support the functional needs of these areas. Indicators linked to proposed metrics from University of Maribor, Maribor (UM) Low-carbon Fuels Vehicles Share of alternative fuelled Heavy-Duty class vehicles Percentage (%) This metric evaluates the proportion of Heavy-Duty class vehicles (e.g., trucks, buses, agricultural vehicles) powered by renewable energy sources in rural areas. It includes vehicles running on electricity produced from renewable sources (e.g., solar or windpowered grids) and those using biofuels like biodiesel. EAFO database https://alternative-fuelsobservatory.ec.europa. eu/ Low-carbon Fuels Veicles Share of alternative fuelled light-duty (M1 + N1) vehicles (Number) This metric evaluates the proportion of lightduty vehicles (e.g., cars, mini buses) powered by alternative energy sources in rural areas. It includes vehicles running on electricity produced from renewable sources (e.g., solar or wind-powered grids) and those using biofuels like biodiesel. EAFO database https://alternative-fuelsobservatory.ec.europa. eu/ Modal Shift Transport Number of bicycles available through municipally provided bicycle sharing services per 100 000 population (Number) The metric measures sustainable, affordable, and healthy transportation options, enhances local accessibility, and supports tourism and economic development. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Modal Shift Transport Number cars in car sharing schemes per 100.000 populations (Number) Rural areas are often highly car-dependent, as public transportation systems typically face low ridership and limited coverage. This metric helps track the Circularity Metrics Lab. (2024, luglio 16). Number cars in car sharing schemes. European Environment Agency. https://www.eea.europ D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 87 availability of affordable, flexible, and sustainable transportation options, enabling rural communities to meet modern mobility needs while addressing the unique challenges of low population density and long distances between essential services. a.eu/en/circularity/them aticmetrics/consumer/num ber-cars-in-carsharing-schemes-1 Modal Shift Transport Number of Buses per 1000 People (Number) This metric quantifies the availability of bus services in a rural area, normalized per 1000 residents. It reflects the accessibility of public transport and is a proxy for evaluating how well rural communities are served by buses. Public – Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPIAF). (2006.). Benchmarks and Indicators. Urban Bus Toolkit. Last view November, 26 2024, https://www.ppiaf.org/si tes/ppiaf.org/files/docu ments/toolkits/UrbanBu sToolkit/assets/1/1c/1c. html Modal Shift Transport Number Trains per 10,000 Population (Number) This metric measures the frequency of train services available to rural residents, normalized per 10,000 population. It captures the role of rail transport in providing longdistance and regional connectivity. Modal Shift Transport Cost of a combined monthly ticket (all modes of public transport) in the rural area Currency value per month (e.g., euros/month). This metric measures the total price of a monthly ticket that provides access to all available modes of public transport within a rural area. Modes may include buses, trains, trams, or other forms of shared mobility where applicable. European Commission (A c. Di). (2017). Methodological manual on city statistics: 2017 edition (2017 edition). Publications Office. https://doi.org/10.2785/ 708009 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 88 Economy: Indicators and metrics Indicator list Table 15. Economy - Indicators and their prioritization Dimensions Subdimensions Indicators Definitions Total score Veto Factor Economy Primary Sector Status of Precision Agriculture Technologies Measures the adoption of precision tools that optimize resource use and improve yield. Level of Digitization and Automation in Agricultural Systems Evaluates the integration of digital and automated processes in farm management. Presence of Circular Agricultural Practices Assesses the implementation of sustainable practices, such as waste reduction and resource recycling. Level of Investment in Innovative Agriculture Indicates the extent of financial resources directed toward modernizing agricultural methods. Secondary Sector Level of Decentralization in Electricity Production Measures the spread of localized energy generation facilities, enhancing local energy resilience. Adoption of Circular Energy Solutions Evaluates practices like energy recycling and renewable D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 89 energy usage to reduce waste. Level of Digitalization in the Energy Sector Assesses the integration of digital tools in managing and optimizing energy resources. Energy Storage Capacity Measures the storage capabilities for renewable energy, supporting energy availability and reliability. Tertiary Sector / Advanced Tertiary Sector: Level of Technical ICT Skills in the Labor Force Evaluates the prevalence of ICT skills within the local workforce, supporting digital economy initiatives. Accessibility of Cultural and Recreational Initiatives This indicator measures the ease with which residents and visitors in rural communities can access cultural and recreational activities including events, facilities, and programs. Economic Investment in ICT Sectors Indicates the level of financial commitment to ICT industries, driving innovation and employment in rural areas. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 96 Metrics, units, importance and sources Table 17. Economy - Metrics and their units Status indicators Metric Units Importance/Definition Sources Accessibility of Cultural and Recreational Initiatives Percentage of recreation services that can be booked online % This metric measures the percentage of recreation services (such as sports facilities, cultural events, community activities, or social programs) that offer online booking options. These services are designed to promote physical, cultural, and social development within a community. In rural areas, where physical access to services can be limited due to distance, the ability to book recreation services online makes these activities more accessible to a wider population.. Accessibility of Cultural and Recreational initiatives Number of Smart Tourism Initiatives (such as Virtual Tours, Podcasts, QR Codes, GPS Tracking Technology, and Gamification) (Number and category) This metric tracks the number of smart tourism initiatives implemented in a given area. These initiatives include virtual tours, podcasts, QR codes, GPS tracking technology, and gamification elements that enhance the tourism experience through digital innovations. Accessibility of Cultural and Recreational Services Volume of Economic Investment in Digital Marketing in the Tourism Sector as a Percentage of Total Marketing Investment (%) (%) This metric measures the proportion of total marketing investment that is allocated specifically to digital marketing within the tourism sector. It provides insight into how much focus is placed on digital strategies compared to traditional marketing approaches. A higher proportion of investment in digital marketing suggests D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 97 that rural tourism operators are leveraging modern tools to promote destinations more efficiently and effectively. Accessibility of Cultural and Recreational Services Percentage of the community cultural records that have been digitized (%) This metric measures the proportion of cultural records— including archives, historical documents, photos, and other forms of cultural heritage— that have been digitized. It reflects the extent to which a community has taken steps to preserve and make accessible its cultural heritage in a digital format. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Accessibility of Cultural and Recreational Services Proportion of cultural institutions and events in the villages for which online participation is offered. % The metric measures the proportion of cultural institutions and events for which online participation is offered. Cultural resources online include: events and activities provided online, and watched or listened through electric/virtual media. ITU 4902, ITU 4903 Accessibility of Cultural and Recreational Services Number of public library book and e-book titles per 100.000 population (Number) This metric measures the number of book and e-book titles available in public libraries for every 100.000 people in a given community. It provides insight into the availability and diversity of reading materials that are accessible to the public, both in physical and digital formats. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Adoption of Circular Energy Solutions Electrical and thermal energy (kWh) produced from waste water treatment, solid waste treatment and other waste heat resources, as part of the villages’ energy mix (%) (%) This metric shows how well rural areas are utilizing waste resources (e.g., wastewater, solid waste, and other waste heat) to produce renewable energy. They promote sustainability, energy independence, and cost-efficiency, all of which are essential in ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 98 rural settings where resources are often scarce and access to centralized energy infrastructure can be limited. Adoption of Circular Energy Solutions Electrical and thermal energy produced from wastewater treatment per capita per year (kWh) This metric shows how well rural areas are utilizing waste resources (e.g., wastewater, solid waste, and other waste heat) to produce renewable energy. They promote sustainability, energy independence, and cost-efficiency, all of which are essential in rural settings where resources are often scarce and access to centralized energy infrastructure can be limited. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Adoption of Circular Energy Solutions Electrical and thermal energy produced from solid waste treatment per capita per year (kWh) This metric shows how well rural areas are utilizing waste resources (e.g., wastewater, solid waste, and other waste heat) to produce renewable energy. They promote sustainability, energy independence, and cost-efficiency, all of which are essential in rural settings where resources are often scarce and access to centralized energy infrastructure can be limited. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Adoption of Circular Energy Solutions Percentage of Public Buildings Requiring Renovation/Refurbish ment by Floor Area Square meters This metric measures the percentage of total floor area of public buildings in rural areas that require renovation or refurbishment. It helps assess the physical condition of public infrastructure and the need for upgrades or maintenance to improve safety, energy efficiency, and functionality. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 99 Economic Investment in ICT Sectors Number and volume of financial products designed for digital transformation (Number, €) This indicator measures both the quantity (number) and the size (volume) of financial products that are specifically aimed at supporting digital transformation initiatives in a given region or sector. These financial products can include loans, grants, subsidies, or investment schemes that help businesses or public entities adopt digital technologies. This metric captures the financial readiness of rural areas to embrace digital transformation. Economic Investment in ICT Sectors Externally funded digital projects e.g., EU grants, national funds, etc (Number) This metric measures the number and total funding volume of digital projects in a region or community that receive financial support from external sources, such as EU grants, national funds, or international development organizations. It reflects the degree to which local initiatives are leveraging external funding to promote digital transformation and innovation. Energy Storage Capacity Percentage of Households/buildings with energy storage systems (%) This metric measures the percentage of households and buildings in a community that are equipped with energy storage systems (ESS). These systems can include technologies such as batteries (e.g., lithium-ion batteries, lead-acid batteries) or other forms of energy storage that allow for the storage of electricity for later use. Energy Storage Capacity Storage Capacity of the Community Energy Grid per Capita (GJ/person) This metric measures the energy storage capacity (in gigajoules, GJ) of a community ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 100 energy grid per person in rural areas. It reflects the community's ability to store surplus energy generated from local sources, such as solar or wind power, and use it when demand is higher or renewable generation is lower (e.g., at night or during low-wind conditions). Level of Decentralization in Electricity Production Households/buildings with small-scale decentralized electricity production systems (%, number and types) This metric focuses on penetration rates, making it useful for tracking how well rural areas are embracing decentralized energy solutions, such as solar panels, wind turbines, or bioenergy systems. Level of Decentralization in Electricity Production Annual Energy Produced from decentralized electricity production systems in Villages as percentage of total energy consumption (%, kWh) This metric reflects the degree of energy selfsufficiency in rural areas, where renewable energy can provide local, decentralized power sources that reduce reliance on external energy grids. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Level of Digitalization in the Energy Sector Percentage of Households/Buildings Connected to a Smart Grid System (%) This metric for rural areas, reflect the community's ability to manage energy more efficiently, integrate renewable sources, and improve reliability. It also facilitates the transition to a more modern and sustainable energy landscape, ensuring that rural areas can thrive in an increasingly energy-conscious world. Level of Digitalization in the Energy Sector Households and organizations involved in energy communities (%) Rural areas often face challenges related to energy access and dependence on external suppliers. Energy communities, where households and organizations collectively produce, share, or manage energy (often from renewable sources), D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 101 can foster local energy autonomy. This metricr is highly relevant in rural settings because it reflects a community’s move toward sustainable energy, local collaboration, and resilience. Level of Digitalization in the Energy Sector Percentage of households with smart electricity meters (%) This metric directly targets households, which are often the main consumers of electricity in rural areas. It tracks the adoption of smart metering at the individual level, providing insight into energy efficiency and consumer behavior. Level of Digitalization in the Energy Sector Percentage of public buildings in the village equipped with smart energy meters (%) This metric measures the proportion of public buildings (such as schools, hospitals, municipal offices, and community centers) in a village that are equipped with smart energy meters. Smart meters provide realtime data on energy consumption, enabling better energy management and efficiency. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Level of Digitization and Automation in Agricultural Systems Percentage of Agricultural Firms Using Digital Platforms for Information and Market Access (%) The Percentage of Agricultural Firms Using Digital Platforms for Information and Market Access measures the extent to which agricultural businesses are adopting digital tools to access crucial data— such as weather forecasts, crop management tips, and best practices—as well as to connect directly with buyers and suppliers. Level of Digitization and Automation in Agricultural Systems Percentage of total agricultural trade conducted via digital platforms (%) The metric offers insights into the economic impact of these digital tools. By tracking how much agricultural trade occurs through online D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 102 platforms, this indicator shows the sector's shift towards e-commerce, which simplifies access to larger markets, improves pricing fairness, and reduces reliance on traditional intermediaries. Level of Digitization and Automation in Agricultural Systems Percentage of Livestock Firms Utilizing Automated Systems for Dairy, Cleaning, and Feeding (%) This metric measures the percentage of livestock firms that have implemented automated systems in critical areas like dairy operations, cleaning processes, and feeding systems, offering a comprehensive view of how automation is reshaping livestock management. By consolidating these key functions into a single metric, the indicator provides a clearer picture of the scale and depth of technological adoption in the livestock sector. Level of Investment in Innovative Agriculture Annual percentage of regional budget spent on innovative agriculture initiatives (%) This metric measures the proportion of the regional budget that is dedicated to supporting innovative agricultural initiatives, such as research and development, sustainable practices, technology adoption, and training programs. It reflects the municipality's commitment to fostering a progressive agricultural sector that is responsive to modern challenges. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Level of Technical ICT Skills in the Labor Force Percentage of labour force employed in occupations in the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) sector (%) The Percentage of Labor Force Employed in ICT reflects the region’s ability to attract new industries, retain skilled workers, and foster innovation and digital transformation, which are key to ensuring sustainable and resilient ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 103 development in rural communities. Level of Technical ICT Skills in the Labor Force Percentage of the labour force employed in occupations in the Education and Research & Development sectors (%) The Percentage of Labor Force Employed in Education and R&D reflects the region’s ability to attract new industries, retain skilled workers, and foster innovation and digital transformation, which are key to ensuring sustainable and resilient development in rural communities. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Level of Technical ICT Skills in the Labor Force Proportion of e-service companies with core business related to GIS serving the public and private sector % of companies GIS services enable better spatial analysis and visualization, supporting informed decision-making for urban planning, environmental management, and public health. This indicator measures the percentage of e-service companies that primarily focus on GIS technologies and provide services public entities, private companies, and other organizations. ITU 4901 Level of Technical ICT Skills in the Labor Force Proportion of companies which provide network-based services (including e‑commerce, elearning, eentertainment, cloud computing etc.). % of companies Number of registered companies providing online serviced (including e-commerce, e-learning, eentertainment, cloud computing, etc.). ITU 4901 Level of Technical ICT Skills in the Labor Force Proportion of e-service companies with core business related to big data storage and analysis serving Public and Private Sectors % of companies This metric measures the percentage of eservice companies whose primary focus is on big data storage and analytical services, catering to public entities, private businesses, and other organizations. ITU 4901 Presence of Circular Agricultural Practices Annual total collected municipal food waste sent to a processing facility for composting per capita (Number in tonnes) This metric measures the annual total of municipal food waste collected and sent to processing facilities for composting, ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 104 normalized by the population size. It reflects the effectiveness of municipal waste management systems in diverting food waste from landfills. Presence of Circular Agricultural Practices Annual Agricultural Waste Collected for Composting per Hectare (kg) This metric measures the annual total of agricultural waste collected and sent to processing facilities for composting, normalized by the hectare of agricultural land. It reflects the effectiveness of waste management practices within the agricultural sector and highlights the potential for resource recovery. Precsence of Circular Agricultural Practices Percentage of the villages’ solid waste that is biologically treated and used as compost or biogas % in tonnes (%) This metric measures the percentage of household waste collected and sent to processing facilities for composting or used to reate biogas. It reflects the effectiveness of waste management practices within the agricultural sector and highlights the potential for resource recovery ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Status of Precision Agriculture Technologies Percentage of total farmland managed with precision agriculture technologies (%) Precision agriculture technologies (PAT) optimize the use of agricultural inputs (e.g., fertilizers, fuel) by accounting for the spatial and temporal variability of the field. The metric allows for the assessment of how extensively these advanced tools are being adopted across agricultural operations. Status of Precision Agriculture Technologies Number of firms adopted precision agriculture technologies per 1,000 Agricultural Firms (Number) (Number) Precision agriculture technologies (PAT) optimize the use of agricultural inputs (e.g., fertilizers, fuel) by accounting for the spatial and temporal variability of the field. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 105 By tracking this metric, policymakers and stakeholders can gauge the level of technological advancement in agriculture and its role in driving economic growth and rural development. Status of Precision Agriculture Technologies Percentage of total farmland products produced using Soilless Agricultural Production Systems (%) This metric tracks the adoption of soilless agricultural systems, such as hydroponics, aeroponics, or aquaponics, in relation to the firms’ productivity and number of agricultural firms. Percentage and Normalizing help to understand the penetration rate of these innovative farming techniques within the agricultural sector. Status of Precision Agriculture Technologies Number of Soilless Agricultural Production Systems per 1,000 Agricultural Firms (Number) (Number) This metric tracks the adoption of soilless agricultural systems, such as hydroponics, aeroponics, or aquaponics, in relation to the firm's productivity and number of agricultural firms. Percentage and Normalizing help to understand the penetration rate of these innovative farming techniques within the agricultural sector. Status of Precision Agriculture Technologies Percentage of Rural Agricultural Land Using Smart Irrigation Systems (%) This metric measures the proportion of agricultural land in rural areas that has adopted smart irrigation technologies, such as drip irrigation, soil moisture sensors, and automated watering systems D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 112 utilities) and have their data openly available to the public. Open data refers to data that is freely accessible, machine-readable, and usable by anyone, often related to business operations, performance, service quality, or other community-related activities. Level of intersectionality in rural governance practices. Percentage of Government Decisions or Policies Influenced by Data-Driven Processes (%) This metric captures the degree to which government decisions—particularly at local levels—are informed by systematic data analysis, reflecting the adoption of datadriven governance practices. It measures the proportion of decisions or policies made by the government that leverage data analysis or data-driven insights. Level of intersectionality in rural governance practices. Number of sectors/agencies involved in the digital policy-making process (Number) (Number) This metric captures the diversity of sectors (e.g., agriculture, health, education, tourism) contributing to digital policy formation. A higher number of sectors involved signals a cross-sectoral approach, helping to create digital policies that address varied needs within the rural community and encourage sectoral collaboration. Level of Investment for smart transition Percentage of Public Spending and Budget Allocation for the SMART Transition in Rural Communities (%) (%) This metric reflects the portion of a community’s total public spending directed toward projects and programs that enhance digital infrastructure, energy efficiency, smart mobility, Level of Investment for smart transition Percentage of digital infrastructure or service projects co-funded by (%) This metric assesses the proportion of digital infrastructure and service projects that D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 113 private entities or partnerships (%) receive financial backing from private entities, demonstrating the level of private sector investment in rural digital development. A higher percentage indicates a supportive investment environment, leveraging publicprivate partnerships (PPPs) to overcome funding constraints in rural areas. Level of Online Service Accessibility Percentage of VIllages Services Accessible Online (%) (%) This metric assesses the digital accessibility of municipal services by evaluating the share of services available through online platforms. The indicator calculates the proportion of all municipal services (such as permits, tax payments, and information requests) that are available for access or processing through online portals or digital platforms. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators; ITU 4903 Level of Online Service Accessibility Percentage of Village Services Integrated with Regional/National Digital Platforms (%) (%) The metric represents the proportion of village services accessible through or interconnected with larger digital networks. It captures the share of local services (such as public administration, healthcare, emergency response, and tourism) that are digitally connected to regional or national platforms, enabling centralized access, interoperability, and streamlined service delivery. Level of Online Service Accessibility Percentage of Village Governmental Institutions with a Geographic Information System (GIS) operative units (%) This metric measures the percentage of governmental institutions in villages that have established a dedicated Geographic Information System (GIS) department or unit responsible for D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 114 managing spatial data and analysis. Proportion of e-service companies with core business related to GIS serving the public, companies, government and other organizations. % of companies ITU 4901 D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 115 Services of General Interest: Indicators and metrics Indicator list Table 21. Service of General Interest - Indicators and their prioritization Dimensions Subdimensions Indicators Definitions Total score Veto Factor Services of General Interest Healthcare Level of Digitalization of Healthcare Systems Assesses the extent to which digital technologies are integrated into healthcare systems in rural communities to improve access, efficiency, and quality of care. Education Level of Digitalization in Rural Schools Evaluates the integration and usage of digital technologies in rural educational institutions to enhance learning outcomes and accessibility. General Services Level of Digital Accessibility in Services of General Interest Measures the availability and ease of use of digital tools for accessing general public services in rural areas, such as administrative processes and utilities. Self-assessment Before proceeding with the ranking process, participants are encouraged to carefully consider the following questions: ● What is the relative significance of each indicator in achieving the objectives of the selected project? ● How does each specific indicator contribute to the success and long-term sustainability of the project? Rank each pair of indicators in the pairwise matrix below based on preference, using the scoring system provided. The scale ranges from 1 to 3: D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 116 ● “One” indicates that the two indicators are equally important; ● “Two” indicates that one indicator is moderately more important than the other; ● “Three” indicates that one indicator is significantly more important than the other. For each pair of indicators choose a value from 1 to 3. A 3 or 2 to the left column chart shows that the statement on the left is significantly or moderately more important than the one on the right, while a 2 or 3 to the right column chart indicates that the statement on the right is moderately or significantly more important than the one on the left. Table 22. Service of General Interest - pairwise matrix 3 2 1 2 3 Level of Digitalization of Healthcare Systems Level of Digitalizatio n in Rural Schools Level of Digitalization of Healthcare Systems Level of Digital Accessibility in Services of General Interest Level of Digitalization in Rural Schools Level of Digital Accessibility in Services of General Interest Completing all pairwise comparisons, participants calculate the total score for each indicator using “points” across the rows. The values should be added with a positive or negative sign based on the indicator's position in the matrix. After finalizing the ranking of indicators, reflect on the essential indicators that directly impact the project's core objectives and feasibility. ● Any indicator that directly influences the project's success or its ability to meet legal, technical, or environmental requirements should be considered as a Veto Factor. ● If any indicator is flagged as a Veto Factor, it must be treated with utmost importance in the decision-making process, even if its ranking in the pairwise comparison is lower than others. ● When completing the ranking and prioritization of indicators, stakeholders should ensure that the Veto Factor is integrated into the final decision. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 117 Metrics, units, importance and sources Table 23. Service of General Interest - Metrics and their units Status indicators Metric Units Importance/Definition Sources Level of digitalization of healthcare system Percentage of healthcare structures offering telehealth services (%) By tracking the percentage of healthcare structures offering telehealth, we can assess how accessible essential medical services are for rural residents, even in remote locations. This metric also helps gauge efforts to provide equitable healthcare solutions for rural populations and measure progress in providing healthcare solutions that make more efficient use of limited resources. (Mohammadzadeh et al., 2023) Level of digitalization of healthcare system Number of IoT Mobile Remote Devices for Health Monitoring available per 100.000 population (%) This metric measures the proportion of devices in rural areas that utilize the Internet of Things (IoT) for health monitoring purposes normalized per 100.000 population. These devices can include wearable technology (e.g., smartwatches, fitness trackers, sensors) and other health-related IoT devices that track various health metrics such as heart rate, physical activity, and other vital signs. (Mohammadzadeh et al., 2023) Digital Literacy Initiatives Ratio of Digital Literacy Initiatives with Partnerships Between Schools and Research Institutions/Tech Companies to Other Educationes (Ratio) (Ratio) This metric measures the ratio of digital literacy initiatives that involve partnerships between schools and research institutions or tech companies to the total number of educational initiatives D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 118 implemented in rural communities. A higher ratio suggests that schools are prioritizing innovative and resource-rich programs that can provide students with essential digital skills Level of Digital Accessibility in Services of general interest Percentage of rural post offices offering digital services, such as online parcel tracking or digital payments (%) This metric measures the proportion of rural post offices that provide digital services, such as online parcel tracking, digital payments, and other electronic services. As rural areas often face challenges related to service accessibility, this indicator highlights the efforts of post offices (always physically in the area) to modernize and improve service delivery through digital means. Level of Digital Accessibility in Services of general interest Number of digital kiosks or access points for public services in rural areas per 100.000 population (Number) This metric quantifies the number of digital kiosks or access points available for public services in rural areas, normalized per 100.000 residents. These kiosks may provide access to government services, information, and online resources. Level of Digital Accessibility in Services of general interest Percentage of public services that can be booked online (%) This metric measures the percentage of public services (such as healthcare appointments, booking of public swimming pools, library reservations, and other municipal services) that offer online booking options. It reflects the level of digital accessibility and convenience provided ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 119 by public institutions to the community. Level of Digital Accessibility in Services of general interest Percentage of public library technology programs designed for senior citizens (%) This metric measures the proportion of technology programs offered by public libraries that are specifically designed for senior citizens. These programs may include digital literacy workshops, computer training, internet safety sessions, and access to technology resources tailored to the needs of older adults. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Level of Digital Accessibility in Services of general interest Percentage of Rural Banks Offering Digital Banking Services (%) This metric measures the proportion of banks in rural areas that provide digital banking services, including mobile banking, online account management, and electronic fund transfers. Level of Digital Accessibility in Services of general interest Monthly number of visits to online databases offered by public libraries per 100.000 population (Total population/Total number of visits) ×100.000 The Public Library Online Visit metric measures the monthly number of visits to the online databases provided by public libraries, normalized per 100.000 people in the villages population. This metric highlights the level of usage of digital library resources by the community and provides insights into how well public libraries are adapting to the growing demand for digital access to information. DigComp Framework; ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Level of Digitalization in Rural Schools Percentage of Schools in Rural Areas with High-Speed Internet Connectivity (%) This metric measures the proportion of schools in rural areas equipped with highspeed internet access, defined as a connection D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 120 sufficient to support modern educational tools, online resources, video conferencing, and digital learning platforms. High-speed internet is generally classified as a minimum download speed of 25 Mbps and upload speed of 3 Mbps, although definitions may vary by region. Level of Digitalization in Rural Schools Number of students per school digital learning devices (laptop, computers, tablets) (Student/Devices) The Digital Learning Devices metric measures the ratio of students to digital learning devices, such as laptops, computers, and tablets, available in a school. This metric helps assess the availability of technology for educational purposes and the level of access students have to these critical tools for learning. DigComp Framework; ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators for smart cities; (OECD, 2022) Level of Digitalization in Rural Schools Percentage of teachers who received formal training in using ICT for teaching, primary and secondary education (%) This metric measures the percentage of teachers in primary education in a given areas who have received formal training in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for the purpose of enhancing their teaching practices. This metric tracks the extent to which teachers are equipped with the skills to integrate ICT into their teaching methods, reflecting the overall readiness of educators to work with digital tools in classrooms. DigComp Framework; (OECD, 2022) Level of Digitalization in Rural Schools Average number of digital skills training (Number) This metric measures the availability and DigComp Framework; (OECD, 2022) D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 121 programs offered per school within a rural area, accessibility of digital skills training programs offered directly within rural schools, reflecting the degree to which these programs are accessible to students regardless of school location or geographic area size. By focusing on each school individually, this metric provides a more accurate picture of digital skills support within the rural education system. Level of Digitalization in Rural Schools Ratio of Educational Programs to Online Programs (Ratio) This metric calculates the proportion of all educational programs that are conducted online. It reflects the extent to which educational offerings in rural areas are accessible digitally. The ratio provides a clearer sense of how much of the educational programming is moving online relative to the overall programming in rural areas Level of Digitalization in Rural Schools Percentage of Rural Schools Offering Hybrid (Online and In-Person) Classes (%) This metric measures the percentage of rural schools that provide hybrid learning options, combining both online and in-person instruction. Hybrid learning allows students the flexibility to attend classes in multiple formats, supporting accessibility for rural populations with logistical or connectivity constraints. Level of Digitalization in Rural Schools Percentage of Schools Implementing (%) This metric measures the percentage of schools using D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 128 monitoring stations are computed. Degree of digitalizations of monitoring systems (Air) Application of ICT based monitoring system for particles and toxic substances (%) Proportion of rural area covered by outdoor ICT based monitoring system for particles and toxic substances. This indicator captures to what extent ICT monitors the air pollution (PM10, PM2.5, toxic substances etc.). % ITU 4901 Degree of digitalizations of monitoring systems (ecosystems) Annual frequency of ecosystem remote sensing monitoring (Ratio) In rural contexts, this metric helps local authorities and communities manage natural resources, detect environmental changes, and support conservation efforts. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Degree of digitalizations of monitoring systems (Nois) Proportion of the rural area with applied ICT based noise monitoring. (%) Proportion of the rural area with applied ICT based noise monitoring. This indicator measures how ICT is used to monitor how the inhabitants are exposed to acoustical noise within rural areas, especially focusing on noise sensitive areas. ITU 4901 Degree of digitalizations of monitoring systems (Waste) Percentage of the villages population that has a door-to-door garbage collection with an individual telemetering of household waste quantities (%) (%) In rural areas, where waste collection routes may be longer and less frequent, telemetering enhances efficiency by allowing for collections based on actual need. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Degree of digitalizations of monitoring systems (Wastewater) Percentage of the wastewater pipeline network monitored by a real-time data tracking sensor system (%) This metric measures the proportion of the wastewater pipeline network within a given area equipped with real-time tracking sensors. These systems continuously monitor key parameters like flow rates, pressure, and potential contaminants, enabling rapid response to issues such as leaks, blockages, or contamination. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 129 Degree of digitalizations of monitoring systems (water) Number of real-time ICT-based environmental water quality monitoring stations per 100.000 population (Number) A remotely operated, real-time ICT-based system can help to monitor climate change impacts on environment (e.g., air and water quality). Such systems can also provide real-time observations, data processing, and analysis, giving people timely information on the safety of a city’s environmental quality. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Degree of digitalizations of monitoring systems (Water) Density of Outdoor ICTBased Water Quality Monitoring Systems per Surface Water Area (Number per km²) (Number) This metric measures the number of outdoor installations of ICTbased water quality monitoring systems deployed per square kilometer of surface water, including lakes, rivers, wetlands, and estuaries. These systems provide realtime data on water quality, helping track key environmental metrics such as pH levels, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and contaminant presence. Degree of digitalizations of monitoring systems (Water) Percentage of drinking water under water quality monitoring by a real-time water quality monitoring station (%) This metric represents the proportion of the drinking water supply monitored continuously by real-time water quality monitoring stations. These stations track critical parameters, such as pH, turbidity, contaminant levels, and chemical composition, to ensure water safety and compliance with health standards. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Degree of digitalizations of monitoring systems (Weather ) Number of Public Weather Stations per Square Kilometer (number/km²) This metric measures the density of public weather monitoring stations, which is crucial for tracking local climate conditions, predicting extreme weather events, and providing accurate forecasts. D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 130 Degree of digitalizations of monitoring systems Proportion of the sewage system monitored using ICT NOTE – Monitoring includes both inspection and controlling. % of the sewage system This metric measures the percentage of a rural area’s sewage infrastructure that is actively monitored through Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). In rural communities, sewage systems often cover large areas with limited resources available for maintenance and repair. Monitoring through ICT is essential for efficient and proactive management, helping to identify issues before they escalate into costly repairs or environmental hazards. (ITU 4901) Degree of digitalizations of monitoring systems (Air) Number of real-time ICT-based air quality monitoring stations per 100.000 population (Number) A remotely operated, real-time ICT-based system can help to monitor climate change impacts on environment (e.g., air and water quality). Such systems can also provide real-time observations, data processing, and analysis, giving people timely information on the safety of a city’s environmental quality. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Degree of digitalizations of monitoring sistems (Nois) Number of outdoor installations with applied ICT based noise monitoring per km² (Number) ICT based systems refer to noise monitoring systems with sensors, which transmit measurements to a database where daily alerts and information are available and yearly summaries for each monitoring station are computed. ITU 4903 Degree of digitalizations of monitoring sistems (Waste) Percentage of Waste Drop-Off Centers (Containers) Equipped with Telemetering (%) This metric measures the proportion of waste collection points, containers, or drop-off centers that are equipped with telemetering systems. Telemetering technology ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 131 enables real-time monitoring of container fill levels, optimizing waste collection schedules and reducing unnecessary trips. Degree of integrated water resources management implementation % of the drainage system Proportion of the drainage systems monitored in real-time using ICT. Calculate as: Numerator: The sum of the total drainage areas that are covered by the monitoring nodes. Denominator: The total drainage area of the river basin closed to the outlet (lake or ocean). Monitoring includes both inspection and controlling. Water quantity observation stations are used as a reference for evaluating an index representing the density of the natural and artificial drainage system monitoring network. Each observation node is associated with a drainage area either for natural drainage (rivers, lakes) or for artificial systems (sewers, urban storm drains, etc.) ITU 4901, ITU 4903 Level of risk reduction sistems implemented Percentage of population reached by early warning and evacuation systems mesure / news on portable devices (%) This metric measures the proportion of a rural area’s population that receives early warning alerts and evacuation instructions via portable devices, such as mobile phones or tablets. These alerts are typically part of emergency systems designed to inform residents about imminent natural disasters or other safety threats. Reaching residents through portable devices ensures that even in dispersed communities, people are aware of impending threats and know how to respond swiftly. Level of risk reduction sistems implemented Presence of GIS app to risk reduction and preventions (for instance to detect and map forest fires, foods impact, toxic cloud etc, and improve response and public safety) (%) This metric assesses whether a Geographic Information System (GIS) application is available and utilized within a rural area to support risk reduction and prevention efforts. Such GIS applications enable the detection, mapping, and real-time D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 132 monitoring of hazards, including forest fires, flood impacts, toxic clouds, and other environmental risks. By providing visual, location-based data, GIS applications allow for more informed decision-making, improving response times and enhancing public safety protocols. Smart Waste and Recycling Management Percentage of the villages’ electronic waste that is recycled (%) (%) The proportion of electronic waste generated in the village that is processed and recycled rather than disposed of in landfills. E-waste recycling reduces environmental pollution and allows for resource recovery, minimizing the negative impacts on rural landscapes and ecosystems. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Smart Waste and Recycling Management Percentage of waste drop-off centres (containers) equipped with telemetering (%) (%) Measures the share of waste drop-off centers or containers that use telemetering technology, enabling remote monitoring of container fill levels and optimized waste collection. Telemetering in waste management reduces unnecessary collection trips, lowering operational costs and carbon emissions, contributing to a more efficient waste management system. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Smart Waste and Recycling Management Percentage of treated wastewater being reused (%) (%) The proportion of treated wastewater that is repurposed for activities like irrigation, industrial processes, or other non-potable uses. Using treated wastewater helps conserve freshwater resources, supports agricultural activities in water-scarce areas, and is an essential practice for sustainable water management. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators D2.1 Smartness Assessment methodology 133 Status of the Smart Water Resource Management Percentage of the community’s water distribution network monitored by a smart water system (%) (%) This metric measures the proportion of the community’s water distribution network that is monitored via a smart water system, which may include sensors, leak detection, and remote control capabilities. Smart monitoring allows for proactive maintenance and reduces water loss, crucial for sustainability and resource efficiency in rural areas. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Status of the Smart Water Resource Management Percentage of households with smart water meters (%) (%) The percentage of households in the community that have smart water meters installed, providing realtime data on water usage. Smart meters enable households to monitor and reduce their water consumption, promoting water conservation and helping manage resources effectively in rural areas. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators Status of the Smart Water Resource Management Percentage of buildings in the community with smart water meters (%) (%) Measures the percentage of buildings (residential, commercial, or public) equipped with smart water meters for monitoring and managing water consumption. Equipping buildings with smart meters provides data for more effective water use planning, which supports communitywide resource efficiency and reduces waste. ISO 37122:2019 - Indicators