Community Research and Development Information Service - CORDIS

H2020

OrganiCity Report Summary

Project ID: 645198
Funded under: H2020-EU.2.1.1.3.

Periodic Reporting for period 1 - OrganiCity (OrganiCity – Co-creating smart cities of the future)

Reporting period: 2015-01-01 to 2015-12-31

Summary of the context and overall objectives of the project

In its first year, the OrganiCity consortium has built the Experimentation-as-a-Service facility as planned. Based on co-creation processes in the three clusters of London, Santander and Aarhus, and with contribu-tions from the other partners, the facility has been defined and instantiated. The system architecture integrates both local systems and provides a federation and linking across sites based on the Open & Agile Smart Cities mechanisms.
Furthermore, a set of co-creation tools have been developed and made ready for the first round of experimentation: the Scenario Tool, the Urban Data Observatory, Tinkerspace, Smartphone Experimentation, Opportunistic Connectivity Service, Crowd-sourced Data Annotation and Tangible Interaction using the DUL Radio.
The open calls have been co-created with the communities in the three clusters, and the legal and support frameworks around the experimentation have been established. There is an Experiment Agreement to govern the responsibilities and rights of the experimenters using the OrganiCity facility, and there is a stakeholder landscape in and around each cluster which is ready to engage in the open call experiments. Ethics and privacy is baked into the facility and processes.
By the end of the first period, the OrganiCity Experimentation-as-a-Service facility is thus ready to use, and the consortium is preparing the first round of open calls.

Work performed from the beginning of the project to the end of the period covered by the report and main results achieved so far

2.2 Explanation of the work carried out per Work Package
2.2.1 Work Package 1 Co-Creating OrganiCity
The main objective of WP1 is to establish contact to and engage with communities in the three clusters. The communities are highly diverse and include citizens, SMEs, industry, researchers, grassroot organiza-tions, authorities, etc. Through engagements, we will co-create the OrganiCity facility with these communities communities and extract requirements for the technical development of the OrganiCity tools and facility in general. WP1 is broken down in three tasks with each their focus. T1.1 is focusing on establishing contact with communities through face-to-face engagements, social media, events, experiments, etc. The task will initially leverage from existing communities, it will make sure to establish a pipeline for future engagements, and thereby create the space for co-creating the facility. The main aim of T1.2 is to extract knowledge from the communities, and create both scenarios and technical requirements for further OrganiCity developments. T1.3 is about developing an architectural vision and technical guidelines for the OrganiCity facility. The vision and guidelines will feed into WP2 and WP3 and inform the development process.
WP1 is on track, and we are currently following the schedule. Through the amendment phase, we have chosen to prolong the task according to the overall timeline, and to include a direct engagement with ex-perimenters when they are conducting and developing their experiments.
Task 1.1 OrganiCitizens : Task 1.1 was launched with efforts to better understand the communities of potential “OrganiCitizens” that are located in the three cluster cities and beyond. We started out with a mapping exercise – an internal survey across the consortium partners, calling for input on the communities whom partner organisations had previously engaged with or whom were known for their thorough experience in citizen engagement activities. In total, 24 communities were identified and categorised (Tech/Data, City Gov., Service Creation/Delivery, Enterprise and Citizen/Community/Research). The next step was to conduct qualitative research interviews with a selection of these communities across the clusters. Ten interviews were conducted by video conference and many insights were gained alongside key contrasts between the different cities involved. This research was then synthesized into seven design principles for engagement to be implemented across all OrganiCities and linked to the learnings from our adjacent communities. Deliverable 1.1 “We are All OrganiCitizens” captures this process and the design principles. It also includes the broader “engagement journey” for “experimentation-as-a-service”. This engagement journey was designed based on our qualitative research and upon leading commercial and government engagement strategies for co-creation. In addition, this task included the development of a social media engagement strategy and an analysis of the online presence and channels that should be used in the project. This engagement journey and initial social media activities is built on further in WP6 throughout the lifetime of OrganiCity.
Task 1.1 built thus on an “engagement journey”, conducted through a wide range of citizen engagement activities which has the objective to support the transition from discussion to co-creation to experimentation. The citizen engagement activities have consisted of workshops, speaking engagements, online discussions, and attendance and promotion of OrganiCity at hackathons and other public events. These activities also support the activity within communities of defining use cases, which has commenced in task 1.2.
Moving forward, we will intensify these engagement efforts as part of the announcement of the first OrganiCity open call (executed by WP5). We will continue to use our established channels to keep the communities informed on opportunities to engage with OrganiCity. The results of the first open call will guide us to iterate the strategy and our dissemination plan towards the second OrganiCity open call. At that point, we will widen the reach of our audience and grow awareness across other networks by showcasing the results of the experiments during the first open call and the experiences of the experimenters.
Task 1.2 OrganiCitizen use cases and derivation of requirements
In T1.2, we have engaged with a variety of communities over the last year. These engagements have hap-pened in all clusters, and span activities such as workshops, hackathons, meetups, social media initiatives, and presentation events. Additionally, we have established a methodology for collecting knowledge from communities. In particular, we have chosen to use what we call “scenarios” as knowledge base. From each community engagement, the aim is to generate scenarios that capture knowledge gained from the specific engagement. In T1.2 we intend to make that knowledge publicly available, and have, for this purpose, developed the so-called “scenario tool”. The scenario tool is a website (scenarios.organicity.eu - not fully publicly available yet), which will go live when the first open call is announced. We have used many efforts on developing version one of the tool, and we have currently 129 scenarios (as of February 23, 2016). This is a tangible preliminary outcome of WP1, and it has been agreed that the tool will be closely connected to WP5 activities.
The next steps in T1.2 are to wrap up the scenario tool in a version 1. We are currently working on refining how to evaluate scenarios. Additionally, we are setting up a support team for fixing bugs when end-users start to use the tool actively. We are gearing up to being active community engagers when the open calls starts up. The aim is to support experimenters actively through providing support for the OrganiCity facility, and the different tools that are being developed in OrganiCity. Furthermore, we aim for direct engagements, where we can support experimenters by developing generic tools that can be used directly in the experiments. Through these engagements, the main aim is to provide strong feedback to the developments of the OrganiCity facility. Finally, we are going to further develop the methodology for extracting functional and non-functional requirements from community engagements and scenarios, and feed them into the pool of requirements driving WP2 and WP3.
Task 1.3 Develop an architecture and implementation guidelines
In task T1.3, we build upon the scenarios and general requirements derived in T1.1 and T1.2 to provide a first high-level design for the architecture of the OrganiCity facility. The foundation of the facility is provid-ed by three cities, Aarhus, London and Santander, which are being integrated into the overall OrganiCity facility. We reviewed and investigated the main assets corresponding to these three sites. The main characteristics of such assets are, in the case of Aarhus, an open data framework that allows access to different city information such as environmental, demographic or traffic. In the case of London an IoT deployment, as well as historical and real time data, are provided. Finally, for the case of Santander a massive IoT dedeployment (inherited from the SmartSantander project) as well as real time and historical data are made available. These assets are being exposed via a number of tools and frameworks, from open data repositories like CKAN instances to FIWARE enablers, such as the Orion Context Broker for exposing live data. In the case of London a proprietary data platform is being used that provides a REST API to access and query real time and historical data end points from IoT devices and several open data instances and APIs. Aarhus integrates such data directly into CKAN. Our initial approach was to treat the federation of static open data platforms and IoT middleware separately across the three different city instances. At the second year of the project, a more integrated approach for all data sources will be investigated.
The OrganiCity facility aims to augment the assets provided by the three sites with a set of co-creation tools for collaborative city making. These tools are not developed from scratch but leverage existing ones of project partners as starting points in WP3. Among them, the mobile experimentation tool aims at supporting third party experimentation on top of nomadic and ubiquitous devices such as smartphones or tablets. In addition, the opportunistic network relay building block provides the possibility to either experiment or collect static sensor data and then relay it in an opportunistic way as an alternative to traditional networking approaches. Facilitating the user interface between the experimenter and the facility as a tailored version of the SmartCitizen dashboard had been selected. Finally, aiming at easing the work of less experienced experimenter the Tinkerspace platform will allow these users to design and run experiments relying on a very intuitive graphical framework of a similar form to LEGO in simplicity and component building. Additionally, hardware/middleware platforms such as SENSINACT, Eventbus and TSmarT, DULradio have also been considered for further integration.
We have provided a concrete set of requirements for the main functional features of the OrganiCity plat-form such as platform management, user authentication/authorization and experimentation support. With all these considerations, an initial architecture accommodating a prioritized list of requirements was postulated. Essentially, it specifies a uniform API, which exposes observations making use of the data model agreed within the consortium. This API interacts with each site’s methods and enablers through the implementation of particular required adaptors. The SmartCitizen dashboard allows the depiction of the values gathered from the different sites. Further work in terms of the management of historical data will be carried out in WP2 and eventually WP3. We translated the initial ideas of the consortium about the OrganiCity facility and requirements gathered by the user community into an overall architectural vision for the project. It served as an initial guideline for the research and development activities in the technical work packages of the project dealing with the delivery of an integrated experimentation as a service facility (WP2) and co-creation tools (WP3).
A first major challenge was the integration of heterogeneous assets from different city eco-systems, such as different open data platforms, IoT middleware and devices into a common experimentation platform. Addressing the resulting interoperability challenges requires an agreement on APIs and information models for the description of heterogeneous assets and data exchanged through these APIs. In the task we had outlined a strategy of how this can be achieved for the three participating consortium cities Aarhus, London and Santander.
The specification efforts in this task went hand in hand with the detailed design and implementation efforts in WP2 and WP3. An alignment of APIs to expose assets at the three different sites has been performed in WP2 and more detailed specification are currently being developed taking into consideration the overall guidance provided in the task. The same alignment took place in WP3 with respect to the overall tools with a major initial focus on the urban data observatory.
In order to ensure a broader reach of the proposed integration approach to other city-ecosystems in the world, OrganiCity had deliberately chosen to align the specification with the Open & Agile Smart City initia-tive, which it is spearheading with other European organizations and cities. This initiative has already gath-ered a commitment from more than 60 cities in Europe and other parts of the world. The alignment with OASC recommendations will ensure that OASC cities can easily contribute their assets to the OrganiCity facility to make sure that OrganiCity becomes a facility for innovative city making, but especially a move-ment. The OrganiCity project will ensure that experiences in Santander, London and Aarhus are shared with other cities and that learnings and recommendations from other cities can be reflected on the facility architecture. The OASC will serve as primary engagement channel with the cities community.
This work performed in the first year was a starting point for an initial architectural vision. During the sec-ond year the OrganiCity facility architecture must evolve in order to take into consideration experiences from implementation facility use by the community.

Contributions from partners to the work in 2015 and future work:
Alexandra Institute A/S (AI)
AI is the WP1 and T1.2 lead, and is involved in all tasks. In year one AI has conducted and participated in workshops, hackathons, open call events, etc. Additionally, AI has been development lead on the scenario tool, the main author of D1.4, and has developed the methodology for capturing community knowledge and translated this knowledge into technical requirements for the OrganiCity facility developments. Additionally, AI has participated in the discussions around architectural vision and guidelines for the technical OrganiCity developments.
In year two AI is focusing on community engagements through more workshops, different types of events, and supporting experimenters. Furthermore, AI will maintain and further develop the scenario tool and drive the expansion of the scenario portfolio. Finally, AI is focusing on generating technical requirements for the OrganiCity facility.

Aarhus University (AU)
AU is involved in all three tasks T1.1, T1.2 and T1.3. In year one, AU has, through its active role in the part-nership Smart Aarhus and the national Danish Smart Cities network, as well as its presence in diverse social media channels supported the high level of engagement with relevant communities. Information on OrganiCity has been disseminated at Internet Week Denmark Aarhus (http://internetweekdenmark.com) and AU has been present at workshops, roundtables and other events to spread awareness of OrganiCity. AU has contributed to the Community Engagement Landscape Survey, provided insights to the engagement principles and the journey and provided input to D1.1 and D1.4 in T1.2. AU has contributed to gathering use cases and end-user requirements and in T1.3 in translating these requirements into concrete service functions and high-level interfaces for the facility.
In year two, AU will further strengthen its community engagement, through ethnographic studies, as well as through actively contributing to workshops and events that promote and explain the OrganiCity facility. AU will also contribute to the architectural proposal for the OrganiCity facility and ensure alignment with the work being done in WP5 and WP6.

Intel Corporation (INTEL)
In year one INTEL has contributed to deliverable D1.2, participated in all co-creation workshops at the London Cluster, contributed to requirement Analysis under Technical perspectives of use-cases and interactions with the London communities in order to provide input for further analysis to T1.2, T1.3 and WP2, WP3. Additionally, INTEL has engaged the research/academia community at several workshops and conferences. Furthermore, INTEL has contributed to D1.4, and contributed to the methodology of creating and analysing OrganiCity scenarios, as well as the design and development of the scenario tool (API method implementation, database design and so on). INTEL has contributed to D1.6 (lead on the creation and editing of this deliverable), and finally, INTEL has contributed to the technological analysis of existing infrastructures of Cluster Sites and base ground technologies, and tools provided by the members of the consortium. Formal Requirement ana
lysis based on the input of T1.1, T1.2 with respect also to the OrganiCity technological ecosystem. Initial architectural proposal for the OrganiCity Facility.
In year two INTEL is going to conduct practical community engagements at the London cluster site, focusing on research/scientific communities and SMEs. Finally, INTEL will work on the evolution of the OrganiCity Facility architecture based on developments in WP3, WP2, and experiments executed on top of OrganiCity facility during the 1st open call process.

Future Cities Catapult Ltd. (FCC)
FCC is T1.1 lead, was main contributor on D1.1, and has in year one conducted desk research informing engagement strategy across three cluster cities with special consideration for existing engagement, adja-cent networks and prior activities. FCC has designed, recruited and delivered two challenge based “OrganiCity Futures” workshops in London to co-create future scenarios for the city with participant citizens. FCC has shared OrganiCity futures scenarios (derived from the workshop) with the consortium partners and the scenarios tool project. Furthermore, FCC has created UI design for the online “OrganiCity Scenarios” tool, and conducted Alpha-testing of the OrganiCity Scenarios tool as part of an agile development process. Finally, FCC has contributed to the scenarios and co-creation process reports to D1.4.
In year two FCC is going to continue to develop the engagement strategy by conducting workshops and ethnographic studies to further understand community needs, continue building the stakeholder community, and promoting the future use of the OrganiCity facility, and develop the scenario portfolio so that the scenarios are well developed and clear. Finally, FCC will feed into discussions around the architecture of the platform and derive concrete service functions from the work that was carried out in previous tasks.

Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine (IC)
In year one IC has promoted OrganiCity through social media/posters at the college, and advertised open calls for experiments. Additionally, IC has contributed to the discussion about the architecture definition and local facilities integration.
In year two IC is going to continue advertising open calls opportunities through various channels, and work with interested parties to provide guidance on using OrganiCity facilities.
Tecnologías, Servicios Telemáticos y Sistemas, S.A. (TST)
TST is only involved in T1.2, and has participated in discussions around the scenario tool, contributed to D1.4 (and was one of the reviewers) and D1.6, and has been main responsible for the production server for the scenario tool.
In year two TST is going to continue the discussion online as well as offline, contribute to deliverables, and participate in discussion around the extracted requirements for the OrganiCity facility.
Luleå University of Technology (LTU)
LTU is only involved in T1.2, and has, in year one, participated in meetings and contributed to discussions around community engagements. Additionally, LTU has contributed to D1.4.
In year two LTU continues to participate in meetings and contribution to discussions and methods on user and community engagements to derive requirements for the project to drive the future use of the OrganiCity facility. LTU will mainly focus on methods with a focus on community needs and co-creation.

Computer, Technology, Institute & Press (CTI)
In year one CTI has engaged with local communities in Patras in order to provide requirements and feed-back from additional communities apart from those originating in the three OrganiCity clusters. Additionally, CTI has generated scenarios from citizen user groups located in OrganiCity clusters and Patras. CTI has focused on hackerspace communities and local municipality authorities, and has conducted workshops with local user groups. Lastly, CTI has taken part in the definition of the overall OrganiCity architecture, with focus on translating user requirements from various user groups, taking into consideration FIRE facilities, tools and IoT platforms.
In year two CTI is going to conduct further engagements with local communities in Patras, in order to pro-vide additional requirements and feedback from local communities apart from those originating in the 3 OrganiCity clusters, also based on the developments around OrganiCity open calls. CTI will produce scenarios and feedback from citizen user groups, put additional focus on hackerspace communities and local municipality authorities, expanding to the educational community and local active citizen groups. CTI will organise additional workshops with local user groups. Finally, CTI will continue to participate in the definition of the overall OrganiCity architecture.

University of Cantabria (UC)
In year one UC has contributed to D1.1 with insights, and debate about principles of engagement strategy. UC has conducted different engagements like meetups and workshops, and defined engagement scenarios based on use cases in order to extract requirements. UC has contributed to D1.4, through describing practical community engagement in the Santander cluster (technology meetups and Pace of the city), and elaborating community scenarios and requirements extraction. UC has contributed to the OrganiCity Functional/Non-Functional Requirements document, contributed to D1.6, participated in the design of the high level architecture of the OrganiCity platform based on the integration of Fiware enablers such as Orion Context Broker, Cygnus, STH, and Cosmos Big Data with other reusable components brought to the project by other partners. Finally, UC has contributed to initial specification of the OrganiCity Resource Model, assets directory API and historical API, and contributed to the OrganiCity architecture proposal.
In year two UC is going to organise meetings and activities to promote the OrganiCity platform within the Santander innovation ecosystem, targeting different audiences, review the OrganiCity facility requirements, tuning up those already defined as well as adding new ones, and analyse integration of user scenario tool with community management of WP2. Finally, UC are going to participate in the definition of the main aspects of the OrganiCity architecture to be implemented in WP2 and WP3, and will contribute to the design of the OrganiCity facility architecture.

City of Aarhus (AAR)
In year one, AAR has participated in WP1 discussions online and offline, contributed to D1.1, D1.4, as well as to community engagements through presentations, workshops, and social media campaigns.
In year two, AAR continues to participate in WP1 discussions, evolve the channels for community engage-ments as well as strengthening the relationships with existing communities, and activate new ones. AAR will actively participate in co-creation with communities and contribute to the further developments of the OrganiCity facility. Finally, AAR will organise additional community events.

City of Santander (SAN)
In year one, SAN has been contributing to D1.4 and conducted community engagements primarily through interviews. SAN has developed the interview guides, designed and described local use cases, and participated in discussions primarily around T1.1 and T1.2.
In year two, SAN will organise new local events for capturing and keeping the attention of communities, and continue to participate in WP1 discussions online as well as offline. SAN will contribute to D1.2 with knowledge gained through local engagements. Additionally, SAN will gather scenarios, and extract end-user needs as well as technical requirements for further developments.

University of Lübeck (UZL)
In year one UZL has been heavily involved in the development of the scenario tool. The activities have spanned from initial technical requirements analysis to architectural guidelines to the actual implementa-tion of the tool (all the way from deep backend to deep frontend). UZL has participated in writing D1.4 and D1.6, and participated deeply in T1.3 discussions around architectural vision and guidelines.
In year two UZL will primarily focus on finalizing the scenario tool and being part of the support team around the tool. Finally, UZL will continue to contribute to deliverables, and participate in discussions around T1.3.
Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia (IAAC)
In year one IAAC has participated in analysing and reporting community information and usage metrics about the Smart Citizen project (D1.1), and provided a detailed feedback report about the community engagement on the SmartCitizen project (D1.1). Additionally, IAAC has provided analysis and report of the current software architecture used on the Smart Citizen project: Software stack, data model and system architecture (D1.6).
In year two, IAAC is going to provide detailed reporting on user engagement strategies based on the work developed by the different Smart Citizen project activities on the Making Sense framework. Finally, IAAC will provide an assessment of the architecture and implementation guidelines based on the OrganiCity 1st reported experience, and expand the report of the current software architecture used on the Smart Citizen project based on the upcoming developments.

French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA)
In year one CEA has contributed to use case definitions and requirements extraction for the service co-creation feature of the OrganiCity facility, and contributed to D1.4. Additionally, CEA has contributed to the definition of the OrganiCity architecture, providing implementation guidelines for the data collection layer. CEA has provided description of the sensiNact platform and its associated tools, and has contributed to D1.6.
In year two CEA is going to contribute to future iterations on scenarios and requirements as well as identi-fying new scenarios. Finally, CEA will contribute to the future work on architecture and implementation guidelines, with a deep attention to stay in line with WP2 and WP3.
As an overall conclusion, WP1 is on track and all partners are contributing as expected. Additionally, all clusters are greatly active in conducting community engagements and co-creating knowledge that feed into the OrganiCity consortium. In T1.1 (in collaboration with WP6) we have developed the visual identity of OrganiCity (including web site graphics, PowerPoint templates, flyers etc.), and defined the overall engagement strategy. We have conducted a number of practical community engagements spanning from workshops, presentations, hackathons, social media events etc. We have developed the initial architectural vision and guidelines for the work carried out in WP2 and WP3. In addition, we have developed a new knowledge and community engagement tool called the scenario tool. The preliminary version of the scenario tool is a result of work produced in previous EU projects like OUTSMART and CityPulse. The scenario tool is quite comprehensive and has been built from scratch using open source frameworks and platforms. The scenario tool has been built in such a way that it is relatively simple to extend, and other initiatives can tap directly into the data, which we generate (through REST API’s). We have recently initiated a collaboration with IEEE regarding sharing of scenarios. This work will continue in the coming years, and we hope that we can collaborate on similar initiatives in the near future.

At this point of time, we do not see any major deviations in the work carried out in WP1. In year one we have submitted three deliverables, and all have been approved by the European Commission. In year two, WP1 has planned one deliverable (D1.2) which is an update of D1.1. The deliverable is scheduled for M21.

2.2.2 Work Package 2 Framework Component Provisioning and Integration
Task 2.1. Specification of the OrganiCity Experimentation-as-a-Service model and APIs
The goal of task 2.1 is to define the OrganiCity EaaS model and API. For this purpose, general experimentation use cases have been defined, to describe the experimentation life cycle workflow. This has helped identifying the core components of the architecture. This architecture has been refined in an iterative process, which has investigated the relationships between modules. Then several EaaS API have been specified, and some of them are already documented and available. Moreover, the work on deliverable 2.1 has started; it formalizes the work previously described. In addition to regular work, two technical meetings have been organised: one in Santander (24-26/06/2015, hosted by UC) and one in Athens (19-23/10/2015, hosted by CTI).

Task 2.2 Base components instantiation and provisioning
Task 2.2, which focuses on the base component instantiation and provisioning has started during last 2015 quarter. With inputs from Task 2.1, an initial architecture of the OrganiCity facility has been proposed, including the main components that are envisaged. A study on the implementation of the user management service has been carried out, keeping in mind the flexibility of integration into the OrganiCity facility. A development server is now up and running, as well as the production one, which will host the definitive OrganiCity infrastructure.
Task 2.3 Integration of advanced co-creation enablers and tools
Will start in M13.

Contributions from partners to the work in 2015 and future work:

French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA)
CEA is the work package leader and in charge of coordinating the overall WP activities. As technical contri-butions within the Task 2.1 CEA has participated to the specification of the EaaS model, EaaS workflow and EaaS Facility architecture with a focus on the OrganiCity platform management, which includes both site management and user management, as well as some operation related to experiments management. Regarding Task 2.2, CEA has prepared the plan of the first implementation and deployment of the OrganiCity facility, which will be conducted in year two.
During year two, and regarding task 2.1, CEA will refine the Experimentation as a Service model, especially regarding the experimentation involving its sensiNact platform. CEA will also iterate on the definition of APIs related to platform management. Regarding task 2.2, CEA will continue the developments in the instantiation of the OrganiCity EaaS platform. CEA will also provide support to experimenters during open calls, especially answering questions related to sensiNact. Regarding task 2.3, CEA will adapt sensiNact to provide as seamless as possible integration of this tools in the OrganiCity EaaS facility.

University of Cantabria (UC)
UC is involved in all the WP2 tasks and is leader of task 2.2. For task 2.1, UC has organised Santander’s technical meeting (24-26/06/15) which has provided the initial insights about OrganiCity facility concepts and tools and facility architecture. UC has also defined the assets data model, based on the Orion Context Broker entity model and integrated SmartSantander assets within the Orion Context Broker, by using the UL2.0 IoT agent. Thanks to this work, UC has contributed to the specification of the OrganiCity EaaS model and APIs, and created the “General experimentation use case” document in order to describe the experi-mentation life cycle workflow. With the role of task leader on task 2.2, UC has proposed the initial architecture of the OrganiCity facility, including the main components that are envisaged in order to support the Experimentation as a Service on top of the platform and facilitating the federation of different OrganiCity sites.
For year two, and regarding task 2.1, UC will contribute to the specification of the OrganiCity EaaS model and APIs that supports the experimentation life cycle and OrganiCity Sites federation. With task 2.2, UC will contribute to the OrganiCity EaaS facility
implementation, including the experimenter portal. UC will also work on the federation of assets belonging to the City of Santander coming from SmartSantander facility, and to the open data platform. In this task, UC will also provide technical support to experimenters when running the open calls. Regarding task 2.3, UC will contribute to the integration of tools and enablers within the OrganiCity EaaS platform.

University of Lübeck (UZL)
UZL is involved in all the WP2 tasks and is leader of task 2.1. With task 2.1, UZL has participated to the specification of the EaaS model, EaaS workflow, and EaaS Facility architecture. With a deep analysis of the platform, UZL has collaborated in specifying the EaaS APIs and started the work on the deliverable 2.1. Reg

Progress beyond the state of the art and expected potential impact (including the socio-economic impact and the wider societal implications of the project so far)

The core impact of the OrganiCity facility will first be fully realised when experimentation enabled through the first open call, launched in 2016, has taken place. Impact so far has been achieved through community engagement and awareness activities, especially within the context of the Open & Agile Smart Cities initiative, in which OrganiCity has been a key driver.

Related information

Record Number: 186686 / Last updated on: 2016-07-14
Follow us on: RSS Facebook Twitter YouTube Managed by the EU Publications Office Top