Next Article in Journal
Blockchain Technology Adoption for Improved Environmental Supply Chain Performance: The Mediation Effect of Supply Chain Resilience, Customer Integration, and Green Customer Information Sharing
Next Article in Special Issue
Can Ecological Governance Policies Promote High-Quality Economic Growth? Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment in China
Previous Article in Journal
Using the Transparency of Supply Chain Powered by Blockchain to Improve Sustainability Relationships with Stakeholders in the Food Sector: The Case Study of Lavazza
Previous Article in Special Issue
Do Urban Innovation Policies Reduce Carbon Emission? Empirical Evidence from Chinese Cities with DID
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Influential Factors, Enablers, and Barriers to Adopting Smart Technology in Rural Regions: A Literature Review

by
Salem Ahmed Alabdali
1,2,*,
Salvatore Flavio Pileggi
2 and
Dilek Cetindamar
2
1
Department of Management Information Systems, Jazan University, Jazan 45142, Saudi Arabia
2
School of Computer Science, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW 2007, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(10), 7908; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107908
Submission received: 29 March 2023 / Revised: 3 May 2023 / Accepted: 9 May 2023 / Published: 11 May 2023

Abstract

:
Smart Technology is a quickly and constantly evolving concept; it has different applications that cover a wide range of areas, such as healthcare, education, business, agriculture, and manufacturing. An effective application of these technologies increases productivity and performance within complex systems. On one side, trends show a lack of appeal for rural environments as people prefer to move to cities, looking for better opportunities and lifestyles. On the other side, recent studies and reports show that the attractiveness of rural areas as places with opportunities is increasing. Sustainable solutions are needed to enhance development in the rural context, and technological innovation is expected to lead and support the stability for people and organizations in rural regions. While Smart City is progressively becoming a reality and a successful model for integrating Smart Technology into different aspects of everyday life, its effective application in a rural context according to a Sustainable Development approach is not yet completely defined. This study adopts comparative and categorial content analysis to address the different applications and the specific characteristics of rural regions, which often present significant peculiarities depending on the country and the context. The main goal is to investigate and discuss how the Smart City model may be adopted and effectively applied within rural contexts, looking at major gaps and challenges. Additionally, because of the complexity of the topic, we provide an overview of the current adoption of Smart Technology in the different applications in rural areas, including farming, education, business, healthcare, and governance. The study highlights the huge difficulties in rural life and the potentiality of Smart Technology to enhance their Sustainable Development, which is still challenging. While the holistic analysis clearly points out a gap, there is no specific strategic roadmap to re-use or adapt existing models, such as Smart City. The study does not address fine-grained indicators.

1. Introduction

There is no unique and universally accepted definition for Smart Technology. It is often understood as the capability to automatically adopt and modify the behavior of a given system to fit with the environment through sensing and analyzing the data to enhance performance [1]. Smart Technology relies on various services, devices, and ICT capabilities [2,3], as well as it supports different applications in a wide range of domains, such as healthcare, education, business, agriculture, and manufacturing [4,5,6]. In general terms, an effective application of these technologies increases productivity and performance within complex systems. Additionally, it is often associated with an increased quality of life as it contributes to better meeting human needs [7].
Rural regions can be defined as a region located outside the main urban area; they are normally characterized by limited capabilities and resources compared with cities [8]. Rural regions typically present low-density population and relatively high distance from large urban centers [9]. Because of their intrinsic characteristics, such regions present several specific socio-economic issues, such as, for example, fewer job opportunities and a lower level of service [10]. Despite the development efforts, rural regions still continue facing many challenges [11,12]. Recent studies show a lack of appeal for rural environments as people prefer to move to cities, looking for better opportunities and lifestyle [13]. On the other side, recent studies show an increasing attractiveness of rural areas. Regardless of possible changes in the mainstream trend in the next future, there is currently an appreciable continuous and increasing focus on cities, which is causing additional pressure on the city’s resources and infrastructures [14]. Another relevant factor to consider is the generic current digital gap existing between urban and rural regions [15].
Sustainable solutions are needed in order to enhance the development in the rural context and, indeed, technological innovation is expected to lead and support stability in rural regions for people and organizations in the near future [16]. However, while Smart City is progressively becoming a reality and a successful model for integrating Smart Technology into different aspects of everyday life [17], its effective application in a rural context according to a Sustainable Development approach is not yet completely defined. This lack of research means that implementation is even more complicated as the most specific and characterizing features, as well as the challenges of rural regions, are not always properly considered. These features may include socio-economic aspects, further environmental barriers, and government policies, among others [18].
Sustainable development is commonly defined as growth that satisfies the present wants without jeopardizing future generations’ capabilities to meet their needs [19]. Sustainable development is currently a key concept when looking at rural regions [20,21]. Many studies suggest that technological innovation plays a critical role in enhancing sustainable rural development, especially in less developed countries [22,23]. Rural regions are expected to somehow adapt models from Smart Cities and convert them into successful strategic solutions [24]. According to United Nations, rural regions may be relevant in a context of global development (United Nations, 2022) and, therefore, specific policies are needed to reach a balance with urban areas to define a more integrated development strategy.
In this study, we address the specific characteristics of rural regions, which often present significant peculiarities depending on the country and context. The main goal is to investigate and discuss how Smart City models may be adapted and effectively applied within rural contexts, considering major gaps and challenges. Additionally, because of the complexity of the topic, we provide an overview of the current adoption of Smart Technology in the different domains in rural areas, including farming, education, business, healthcare, and governance.
As extensively discussed in the paper, this research shows a fundamental lack of studies that explicitly target the rural context. In this paper we identify and discuss the related body of knowledge by providing an overview of rural regions’ characteristics and peculiarities. Such distinctive aspects are discussed in context considering the unique challenges for people living and organizations stability. The study implicitly assumes Smart City to be a successful model and, therefore, as a driving factor in defining mainstream to sustainable development. The focus is on influential factors, enablers, and barriers, which are critical to define and implement in strategic pathways.
Structure of the paper. The paper follows with a concise review of key background concepts (Section 2), and then, methodology and approach are briefly discussed in Section 3. The core part of the paper includes Section 4 and Section 5, which deal, respectively, with an overview of the adoption of Smart Technology within rural areas and the discussion of the main gaps and challenges.

2. Key Concepts and Background

This study explores the nexus of three main concepts: rural region, Sustainable Development, and Smart Technology. In this section, we separately discuss these topics to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the context of the study.

2.1. Rural Regions

The characteristics of rural regions may differ from one place to another, and, indeed, multiple definitions are currently adopted in the literature. For instance, a rural region can be defined as “a region that is located outside the main urban area, normally characterized by limited capabilities and resources if compared with cities” [8]. Alternatively, “a region that has low population density with an open landscape” [25] or “an isolated place from the urban city which makes access to public services not easy” [26].
Generally speaking, each country may have different criteria and indicators to identify rural regions [27]. For example, in the USA, India, and Australia, a rural region is defined by a population threshold: under 2500 people within 2 km for the USA, population under 5000 in India, and a population of 200–1000 people in Australia [28].
Rural regions are usually characterized by limited resources and infrastructure capacities [29], mostly because of their isolation from urban centers [30,31].
Rural regions are also known because of their limited economic and social influence [32,33]. Indeed, from a socio-economic perspective, the primary activities in rural areas are limited to specific sectors [34], such as forestry, agriculture, and livestock, and very rarely include advanced services [35,36]. This focus has a holistic effect on rural areas from a social point of view, defining a specific and relatively simple lifestyle that usually assumes are people living in small communities in scattered areas [37]. Last but not least, demographically, rural regions present a high percentage of older people, who normally appreciate that kind of lifestyle and usually have more traditional values [38]. That clearly contrasts the trends for younger people, who prefer to move to cities for education and better job opportunities [39].
Many empirical studies address rural areas, focusing on the main issues and challenges. These studies provide in-depth information and describe how recently rural areas became unattractive environments for many people, especially the youngest, and for most organizations. These trends defined an apparently unstoppable movement toward cities, looking for better opportunities and lifestyles [14,40]. In clear contrast, recent policies (e.g., Rural 3.0, a framework for rural development [41]) define rural regions as “places of opportunities”, shifting the future prospects to a challenge/opportunity vision.
As said, rural regions may differ from one country to another as they present unique characteristics and peculiarities. The United Nations (UN) classifies countries on the base of their population and defines urban areas as places with a population of 5000 or more and a density of at least 400 persons per square kilometer [42,43,44,45]. Moreover, the UN adopts macro indicators to classify countries into three main categories depending on the level of development: more developed countries, less developed countries, and least developed countries [43]. Details are provided in Table 1.
Table 2 provides a concise overview of rural areas’ characteristics by examining the classification previously proposed.
The analysis of the main characteristics of rural regions intrinsically shape the three pillars of sustainable development (social-cultural, economic, environmental) as defined by the United Nations [74].

2.1.1. Healthcare

Rural regions usually present a limited healthcare infrastructure, including healthcare centers, hospitals, and specialized practitioners [75]. This is a key issue that significantly affects residents who frequently travel long distances for healthcare purpose [76]. This becomes especially critical as rural areas have a higher proportion of aged people who are less likely to follow typical recommendations in terms of prevention [31,77].

2.1.2. Education

The education system presents specific issues that are less likely to affect urban areas and, therefore, present additional challenges [78,79]. In general terms, there is a lack of specific funding and attention by governments [80,81,82]. Additionally, as for healthcare, distances may be relevant, and related costs may be significant in the context of the local economy. Furthermore, assuring high-quality educators in rural areas is becoming more and more challenging because of the previously mentioned lack of appeal and resources [83].

2.1.3. Economy

Several factors contribute to generating economic pressure and depression in rural areas, such as the migration of skilled people and young workers and the generally underdeveloped job market, especially in industry and services [84,85]. Agricultural activities are the most significant resource as they do not require specific skills. Such activities typically do not offer high salaries [86,87]. In general, economic growth for individuals, families and organizations is much less likely than in urban areas [88].

2.1.4. Lifestyle and Social Environment

Many factors characterize life in rural settings. For instance, there is some limitation in terms of technology adoption [89], and working conditions may be difficult, if not extreme, especially in developing countries [90,91]. The digital gap between urban and rural regions is affecting the stability of individuals and organizations [92,93]. Indeed, most developed areas are increasingly benefiting from the exploitation of technology in industries [15], while rural regions are not following the same pattern [94,95]. Business experience, knowledge, high qualifications, and technology skills usually are not available within rural regions [96]. Gaining competitiveness is a major need and challenge [97]. Last but not least, the negative stereotype about living in rural areas does not positively contribute to the situation [98], nor do local economic trends, such as the decreasing level of income and job opportunities [15,99].

2.2. Sustainable Development

Sustainable Development refers to “growth that satisfies the present wants without jeopardizing future generations’ capabilities to meet their needs” [19,100]. In general terms, Sustainable Development is a global challenge that, by definition, involves all countries, regardless of their current development [101]. According to United Nations, Sustainable Development aims to achieve different goals (Sustainable Development Goals, SDGs): contrast/eradicate poverty and hunger, increase well-being and healthcare, establish high-quality education and gender equality, provide clean and affordable energy, promote economic growth, innovation, and industry infrastructure, establish sustainable communities and cities, promote equality, responsible production and consumption, climate change policies, quality of life, justice, and collaboration [102].
Looking at the agenda and related goal [100], goals 8 (“Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all”) and 12 (Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns) present a clear association with rural areas.
Sustainable Development can benefit individuals and society, as well as organizations, by optimizing resources and capabilities for current and future generations; it becomes a critical driver for less developed countries [103,104,105] to increase performance and productivity [106]. Many countries are showing progress in attaining sustainable goals by defining strategic plans to achieve the general goals in the next future [107]. Most efforts in that direction usually involve cities rather than rural regions, especially in developing countries [108]. The intersection between Sustainable Development in the specific context of rural regions’ is an object of research interest [109]. It can ensure sustainable growth in different sectors, such as agriculture, education, and energy [110].
As previously mentioned, rural regions are characterized by limited capabilities. Recent studies discuss the potentiality of Sustainable Development to attain a growth based on sustainable principles, such as conservation/preservation, long term, equity, partnerships enhancement, charge capacities respect [111,112].
Sustainable Development is also expected to improve business viability and increase economic efficiency [113]; it is becoming more relevant for both high-populated regions and large rural lands [114]. Sustainable Development is also considered to be a major player in community development [115,116], especially for those communities that have more limited resources and capabilities [34].
Sustainable development is, therefore, seen as a strategic solution to address major challenges, such as poverty, literacy, and unemployment [117]. In this context, many studies predict a major development for rural regions in the next future [118]. These developments should somehow reduce the gap with urban areas to enable the viability and sustainability of rural communities [119].
Sustainable Development largely relies on technology [120,121], as many recent studies demonstrate in different contexts [122,123]. That is similar to urban areas where an effective application of technology contributes to a better education, healthcare, and manufacturing [124,125,126].

2.3. Smart Technology

Smart Technology provides “the capability to automatically adopt and modify the behaviour of a given system to fit with the environment through sensing and analysing the data to enhance the performance” [1]. In practice, it refers to applications that interact with humans to achieve their goals [127]. Typically, it results from adopting multiple technologies (Artificial Intelligence, Internet of Things, Big Data, and Cloud Services) and networked artifacts connected to the Web [16].
Technology plays a more and more relevant role in our digitalized life [128]. Smart Technology exploits the interaction between humans and technology and is being employed to solve many everyday life problems in different sectors, such as energy [129]. Furthermore, it can be used to improve the performance and the efficiency of many systems [130], for instance providing a competitive advantage for firms [131]. Recent advances are leading to a generic increase in performance for business operations, as well as a reduction in time, labor requirements, and expenses [132].
The following subsections briefly discuss the primary technologies that enable smart systems and their applications [133].

2.3.1. Internet of Things (IoT)

Internet of Things (IoT) refers to devices that operate independently to perform relevant tasks [134]. Typical examples are the dynamic regulation of heating or surveillance and alarm systems [134]. IoT assumes embedded computation capabilities within devices that can communicate autonomously with other devices and systems according to a Machine-to-Machine (M2M) model [135]. Additionally, the IoT paradigm may assume interaction with humans [136]. IoT technology has gained enormous popularity and is becoming a core component for a wide range of applications in several domains, including industry, agriculture, and entertainment, among others [134,137]. Recent advances in IoT ecosystems impact many aspects of modern industry by increasing the performance of typical systems, such as supply chains, asset tracking, and machine operations [138].
IoT is also expected to play a role in Sustainable Development, specifically in the energy and health sectors, and more generally, by enabling more sustainable environments for people and organizations [139,140,141]. This also applies to rural regions [142].

2.3.2. Artificial Intelligence (AI)

AI is inspired by human intelligence to perform complex tasks that require substantial computational capabilities [143]. AI is becoming increasingly sophisticated [144] to address rising issues, including healthcare, transportation, and manufacturing, among others. Its capability and consequent application to solving real-world problems are expected to further increase [145,146]. For instance, its integration with robotic technology produces a new generation of services based on drones and fully autonomous vehicles [147]. Of course the potentiality of AI is also contributing to achieving large-scale global sustainability goals [148,149]. Holistically, it contributes to defining new sustainability models according to the United Nations vision for Sustainable Development [148,150,151], and it has a clear impact on rural regions, especially in developing countries [152].

2.3.3. Cloud Computing

Cloud Computing is the ability to remotely access data and computation capabilities hosted or provided by third-party systems [153]. This has led to the progressive affirmation of Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) and on-demand computation [154]. The resulting pervasive system is commonly called the ‘cloud’ [155]. Overall, Cloud Computing uses high-speed connections to provide high computing capabilities and sophisticated scalable storage systems [156].
In general terms, Cloud Computing may support sustainable solutions [157] in several ways, such as providing centralized data storage services that may result in total cost savings by sharing resources and reducing energy consumption [158,159]. Cloud-based solutions also provide a competitive advantage by providing access to data and services remotely and adding more flexibility to systems [160,161].

2.3.4. Big Data

Big Data is defined as a large amount of data that overcomes the capability of a single database; it is usually complex [162] and difficult to process through traditional methods [163]; it implies the need for advanced storage systems and huge computation capabilities and analytics [164]. Big Data may result from web activity and content [165,166] and is commonly associated with five key characteristics: Volume, Speed, Variety, Variability, and Value [167]. Big Data plays an important role in better understanding people and related social trends, as well as organizations and their businesses. Such value can be converted into innovative, sustainable solutions [168,169,170,171]. The United Nations has emphasized the role of Big Data in building a sustainable future by considering different aspects, such as energy, economics, and education [172], as well as healthcare [173].

3. Methodology and Approach

This review has been conducted by adopting categorical content analysis [174] to identify and discuss the body of knowledge related to the complex nexus of Smart Technology, rural regions and Sustainable Development. The method considers different attributes, such as publication type, research field and adopted methodology. This study has been conducted by looking at the most recent contributions to the literature, from 2012 to 2022. Papers have been retrieved from popular scientific databases, such as MDPI (Basel, Switzerland), Taylor and Francis (New York, NY, USA), Google Scholar, IEEExplore, Scopus, Springer link, Wiley Library, and ACM (New York, NY, USA).
We used a combination of keywords related to the background concepts to identify the topic as follows:
Smart Technology (Internet of Things, Artificial Intelligence, Big Data, Cloud Computing)
Smart City (Urban Area, Smart City Model, Open Data, Urban Planning)
Sustainable Development (Sustainability, Green Technology, Environment, Natural Resources)
Rural Regions (Remote Area, Rural Development, Rural Migration, Tiny Community, Farming, Open Landscape)
Finally, 83 contributions were selected out of the 234 retrieved. Selection was based on the studies’ relevance to the objectives and on the direct/indirect focus on rural regions. This selection also reflects on the contribution that Smart Technology adoption has contributed to the field, although the relationship to rural areas is not always explicit. Only peer-reviewed papers written in English were considered. As the topic is very broad, the analysis in this paper has been organized according to an application perspective to further increase conceptualization and conciseness.

4. Smart Technology: From Cities to Rural Areas

The main purpose of this section is to address (i) the relationship between Smart City and Rural Areas and (ii) to discuss the application domains, specifically in Rural Areas, by considering a development driven by Smart Technology. Those goals are the object of the following sub-sections.

4.1. From Smart City to Rural Areas

Smart City is commonly defined as an integration of Smart Technology with city elements (people, information, and other technology) to promote sustainable development practices that address the urbanization growth challenges [175,176]. According to this approach, people, information, and technology must be integrated to define a smart ecosystem that enhances quality of life [177,178,179]. Initially, Smart City was oriented to sustainable urban development with the goal of integrating and optimizing the use of resources [180]. More recently, the Smart City model has been applied more broadly to improve different aspects of life [181].
The Smart City approach has been widely accepted as a successful model for Smart Technology adoption. This model is often considered a reference to be adapted to address different challenges [182]. It is probably the case for rural regions that need to enhance their sustainability and foster development [183]. Therefore, there is a potential for the Smart City model to be adapted in rural regions to address major sustainable development challenges [183,184,185,186].
As far as the authors know, there is no application-oriented model that explicitly targets rural regions. Although applications may be considered the same as for Smart City (e.g., [187]), the Smart City model cannot be directly applied to rural regions due to the significant differences and peculiarities. Hence, existing solutions are expected to be adapted and customized to face sustainability challenges, improve quality of life, foster the economy, support social welfare, and enhance the stability in rural communities for people and organizations [185,188,189,190].
The United Nations reports that over 45% of the world’s population still resides in rural areas, so rural development remains a compelling challenge as many macro indicators points out low performance in rural development. For instance, it is estimated that the 80% of the world’s poverty comes from the population who live in the rural regions [191]. Additionally, the United Nations explicitly addressed concerning trends looking at the main pillars [74].

4.2. Rural Areas: Application Domains

This section provides an overview of typical applications of Smart Technology in the context of rural region as presented in the literature. As there is not a systematic way to measure the relevance of the different applications in context, the focus is on applications that have been explicit objects of study in recent years.
The target country and the publication year are attributes of interest, as well as the focus on rural regions, which can be explicit or indirect. For each selected contribution, the method adopted in the original study is reported (acronyms are in Abbreviations).

4.2.1. Smart Farming

Smart Farming can be defined as an integration of Smart Technology with agricultural equipment to manage and automate farming activities [192]. Studies on the topic are reported in Table 3. The recent development of Smart Technology has made considerable changes to traditional farm activities, which are usually time and effort intensive [193].
Smart Farming aims to mitigate human intervention by automating the agricultural processes [194]. The significance of Smart Farming has recently increased due to its important role in addressing the global challenges of sustainable food supply [195]. These challenges result from the increased global population and food prices caused by a decreasing number of workers in traditional farms [196].
The applications of Smart Farming can contribute to enhancing sustainable development [197,198,199]. Smart Farming can provide numerous advantages to the agricultural industry, including increased crop yield, time and labor savings, reduced costs, and improved crop quality and quantity [200,201,202,203,204]. In general terms, adopting Smart Farming can offer unique benefits in rural regions by promoting a sustainable development approach [205]. In this context, Smart Technology in rural agriculture can perform multiple tasks automatically instead of using traditional approaches, which are time and energy intensive [206,207,208].
Smart Farming impacts different tasks, such as irrigation, fertilization, temperature control, and harvesting [201,209,210,211,212]. Moreover, Smart Farming can involve cattle activities by monitoring the nutrition process and health status of the entire herd [213]. In addition, it has the potential to improve e-commerce in a rural context by exploring new markets and enhancing the ability to connect with potential buyers, monitor market patterns, receive real-time pricing data, and gain deeper insights into consumer preferences, enabling the farmers to customize their products accordingly [214,215,216,217,218].
Table 3. Studies on Smart Farming.
Table 3. Studies on Smart Farming.
Ref.Country/YearContributionDomain
Smart City (SC)/Rural Areas (RA)
Method
[219]Africa
2012
The influential factors of SF adoption are labor training, assets, economic aspect, awareness, and knowledge.RADA
[220]Malaysia
2013
Lack of knowledge and educational background are influential factors in ST by farmers.SCSI
[201]India
2018
Application of IoT technology in farming to reduce the cost and increase the quantity of cropSCCS
[221]Brazil
2019
Major factors for SF adoption are educational background, social barriers, and economic aspects.SCDA
[222]Germany
2019
Educational background is an essential factor in SF adoption.SCI
[223]South Africa
2021
Exploring SF applications, benefits and challenges.SCLR
[224]Europe
2021
Technical incentives, financial support, and local and public authorities are factors can impact the adoption of Smart Technology.RAQ
[225]Kuwait
2023
Explanation of how ST improves the productivity of farming with a minimum cost.SCLR
As urbanization continues, more people move from rural areas to urban cities in search for better employment opportunities. This trend causes a decrease in the number of farmers [226]. That is likely to happen in more developed countries, where cities are the preferred places for majority of people.
It also causes a decline in the number of farms and a reduction in the amount of land being used for agriculture, which might be converted to non-agricultural uses. The consequences of this action could be reflected in increases in food prices and additional challenges for supply chains [227].

4.2.2. Smart Healthcare

Smart Healthcare is defined as a process of integrating Smart Technology within healthcare to improve the efficiency and quality of services, including better medical solutions and the development of proactive steps, through patient data analysis [228]. A summary of the papers on the topic is reported in Table 4.
Smart Healthcare usually relies on cutting-edge technology [229,230,231,232]. The role of this type of technology is oriented to supporting treatment, such as improving the interaction between patients and doctors, monitoring and forecasting the patient’s condition, illness prevention and diagnosis, medical decision-making, and minimization of human mistakes in complex operations [229,233,234,235,236].
Smart Healthcare is also expected to play a significant role in creating more sustainable systems by improving access to services (telehealth), optimizing healthcare resources and their efficiency, and promoting preventive healthcare [237,238,239].
There is concrete evidence of effectiveness documented in the literature for opportunities like smart wearable devices [83,191,192,193] and Cloud solutions for data storage [240,241]. Big Data and AI are advancing the capability of diagnosis and interpretation and, more holistically, to medical research development [242]. Moreover, recent studies show the contribution of AI and Robotics in critical surgery operations [243,244,245].
The Smart Healthcare model could play a key role in addressing and bridging the gap with cities, given the historical shortage of qualified structures and services [23,246,247,248]. For example, a solid implementation of remote and more integrated services defines an explicit mainstream for development [249]. Smart Technology can facilitate remote access to patients’ data, especially for older people who require periodic check-ups [250,251]. Additionally, it can contribute to healthcare by predicting health developments so that more proactive solutions can be devised [252,253].
Table 4. Studies on Smart Healthcare.
Table 4. Studies on Smart Healthcare.
Ref.Country/YearContributionDomain
Smart City (SC)/Rural Areas (RA)
Method
[254]New Zealand
2013
Challenges of ST integration in the medical operations.SCCSY
[255]Australia
2017
Explore the weaknesses and strengths of ST in healthcare.SCS
[256]Jordan
2019
Role of Cloud Computing in enhancing mobile health services.SCCSY
[257]Italy
2019
Technology acceptance and ease of use are the main challenges for smart healthcare adoption.SCS
[258]India
2019
Internet of Things in patient treatmentSCER
[231]Pakistan
2020
Privacy and security issues are the main challenges for Smart Healthcare adoption.SCS
[259]Israel
2020
Funding and experience are major factors for Smart Healthcare adoption.SCR
[260]Jordan
2021
Exploring the role of ST in the healthcareSCR
As people move from rural regions to urban cities in increasing numbers, rural regions are experiencing a further crisis in terms of healthcare facilities, providers, and resources [261]. This is consolidating gaps, especially in more and less developed countries. It reflects a more general focus on populated areas and a consequent lack of attention to rural regions. On the other side, in the least developed countries, rural regions usually receive healthcare services that are comparable to those offered in urban areas [262,263].

4.2.3. Smart Energy

Smart Energy can be defined as the ability to adopt Smart Technology to optimize energy production, distribution, and consumption to create more sustainable and reliable energy systems for both the consumer and the environment [264]. A summary of studies in the field is reported in Table 5. The Smart Energy approach assumes the integration of Smart Technology with the energy system and aims to provide sustainable energy production and consumption at the lowest costs [265,266].
Smart Technology in the energy sector has recently expanded to reduce the construction of power stations that normally cause an increase in pollution [267].
The application of Smart Energy is gradually becoming part of our daily life. For instance, smart meters can dynamically optimize energy consumption [268,269]; electrical appliances can avoid peak hours to reduce costs [270]; outdoor lights can be controlled automatically to adapt to actual needs [271].
Moreover, with the recent increase in global demand, Smart Technology is expected to contribute to sustainable energy systems [272], which should be efficient, affordable, and aligned with environmental challenges [273]. Smart Energy Systems are expected to push the diversification of energy production toward an optimized use of renewable energy systems [274,275,276,277] and contribute to a decrease in the number of power stations [278].
From a rural region perspective, the application of Smart Energy is expected to enhance sustainability to provide systems that are clean, reliable, and affordable. Large and open areas normally characterize the ability of rural regions to generate clean energy in a way that is friendly to the environment at a lower cost [279,280,281]. Solar and wind energy systems are potential applications for Smart Energy to supply rural communities that use smart inverters to optimize energy production [282,283,284,285].
The characteristics of rural regions make them suitable for generating renewable energy: firstly, they have a surplus of open spaces, which is often necessary for renewable energy resources. Secondly, there is less obstruction for the sun and wind, allowing for better performance. Thirdly, rural regions have lower population densities than urban areas, meaning fewer concerns about disrupting habitats exist. Fourthly, lower electricity demand makes it easier to meet the local energy needs with renewable technologies [286].
Another example is a smart microgrid, which is a small, self-contained energy system that can operate independently to easily provide minor communities with energy supply. Its primary focus is to provide reliable and sustainable energy access to isolated areas [287,288].
Table 5. Studies on Smart Energy.
Table 5. Studies on Smart Energy.
Ref.Country/YearContributionDomain
Smart City (SC)/Rural Areas (RA)
Method
[289]USA
2016
Lack of knowledge and high cost are the main challenges to Smart Energy adoption.SCS
[290]UAE
2018
Lack of knowledge, awareness, and regulationsand high cost are the main barriers to Smart Energy adoptionSCR
[291]USA
2018
Role of artificial intelligence in enhancing sustainable operating systems of Smart EnergySCS
[292]Indonesia
2019
Role of IoT to automate operations in the smart energy systems.SCER
[293]Italy
2020
Individual knowledge, behavior, and resistance to change are main influential factors in Smart Energy adoptionSCQ
[294]Turkey
2022
Experiences, cost, political drivers, lack of knowledge, and regulations are the main barriers to Smart Energy implementation.SCDA
[295]Spain
2022
Integrating legacy energy systems with a Smart Energy approach is the main influential factorRAR
The migration trends still play a key role as, in general terms, cities are becoming larger and more dense with an intrinsic additional pressure on the urban energy networks. This is particularly evident in both more and less developed countries that are characterized by highly densely populated cities [296]. On the other side, the decreasing population in rural regions might cause difficulties for energy supply over scattered areas and cause rising costs.
This scenario is different in the least developed countries, where rural regions are highly populated, and people live in big communities that are concentrated in a few places. Moreover, rural regions in the least developed countries can have more options for energy supplies, such as the common energy network, renewable energy, and traditional sources [297].

4.2.4. Smart Education

Smart Education can be defined as the ability to adopt Smart Technology in the education system to enhance effective, suitable, and sustainable learning approaches through innovative methods for more efficient outcomes [298]. Studies are reported in Table 6. It focuses on integrating smart learning technology into the education system [299,300,301,302]. It can provide an accessible and lifelong learning system with contemporary lifestyles [303,304,305,306,307]. Smart Technology can generate, store, analyze, and visualize massive data from a given domain to provide the best learning content [308,309].
Smart Education is usually characterized by an innovative environment that integrates Smart Technology in its infrastructure to provide interaction in real-time to the learners [310,311]. It also known as a self-directed and self-motivated system that is often enriched by resources that can provide learners with many advantages, such as connection, openness, and independence [312].
Smart Education is an appealing system compared to traditional education because of the novelty in teaching styles. Smart Education usually includes unique learning methods, such as gamification, interactive and collaborative groups, tactile-auditory presentation, and simulations [313,314].
Smart Education systems are expected to contribute to sustainable education systems that should be more efficient and accessible, and providing contemporary teachers with a more sustainable teaching lifestyle and allow for learners to gain the necessary knowledge and skills [315,316,317,318,319].
From a rural region perspective, the application of Smart Education is expected to enhance sustainability to provide accessible, comfortable, and sustainable learning systems that can address the challenges of disparity with urban areas. This is especially true for students with limited access to educational resources or constraints to move rural [320,321].
From a practical perspective, Smart Education can provide an accessible and comfortable way of learning through content and resources accessed via e-portfolio platforms that can be connected to remotely with common devices [309,322,323,324,325,326,327,328], enhancing remote activity [309,329,330,331]. For instance, augmented reality technology (AR) has a specific potential impact on rural education settings by enhancing actual practices and avoiding expensive travel [332,333,334,335,336].
Table 6. Studies on Smart Education.
Table 6. Studies on Smart Education.
Ref.Country/YearContributionDomain
Smart City (SC)/Rural Areas (RA)
Method
[299]Malaysia
2016
Enablers for Smart Education are group collaboration, smart classrooms, and advanced technology.SCCSY
[337]UK
2016
Role of Smart Technology in managing students and controlling the learning systemSCQR
[338]Japan
2017
Role of Smart Technology applications to improve learning efficiency in the education sector.SCES
[339]India
2018
Artificial intelligence and Cloud Computing are main enabler in E- learning systems. SCCS
[340]USA
2018
Cost, organizational culture, resistance to change, and strategy are barriers of Smart EducationSCSI
[341]Vietnam
2019
Strategy, implementation cost, and privacy and security are the main barriers to smart Education adoption.SCR
[342]France
2019
Role of IoT technology in the education sector to enhance the efficiency of teaching and learning.SCR
[343]USA
2020
Required resources, cultural shifts, inclusiveness, and effort are the main barriers to Smart Education adoption.SCS
[344]Korea
2020
Cultural background and social barriers are the main influential factors for Smart Education adoptionSCDA
[345]Zambia
2021
Internet access, lack of skills, and lack of infrastructure are the main disablers factors for Smart Education adoption SCQI
Education is essential for human life. In both more and less developed countries, most educational resources and infrastructures are in cities [346], while there is a tangible gap with rural areas. The most influential factor in more and less developed countries is the drain of qualified educators to urban areas [347]. In the least developed countries, there is a much less tangible gap as the few resources are normally available in rural regions [80], where the quality of education is comparable to that available in cities [348].

4.2.5. Smart Government

There is no unique and universally accepted definition for Smart Government, as it is still a relatively new and emerging domain. Still, it is often understood as adopting Smart Technology and innovative solutions to enhance the efficiency of government services, performance, and responsiveness [349]. Table 7 provides an overview of studies in the field. Smart Government has also been defined as a set of information technology applications that target public people and organizations to connect, analyze and process a huge volume of data and deliver services in real-time [350].
The Smart Government approach focuses on integrating new, emerging technology into its systems to improve government services and make them more efficient, effective, and sustainable [351]. Smart Government aims to find innovative solutions that allow for easier methods of connecting with the public that are increasingly responsive in the shortest time possible [352,353,354]. By utilizing Smart Technology, Smart Government can understand the different needs of people and organizations through the analysis of vast volumes of data from their transactions [355]. This can increase the efficiency of transparency of services and help create policies that are relevant to real-life situations [356,357].
Smart Government is expected to contribute to sustainable development by ensuring the minimum level of quality of life through leverage of Smart Technology to create programs, policies, and services that promote sustainable practices. These practices can become a sociotechnical approach to sustainably address the gap challenges between government and other stakeholders [358,359,360].
From the rural region perspective, the application of Smart Technology is expected to enhance sustainability by leveraging Smart Technology and innovative solutions to address the connection challenges between rural areas and the government. Therefore, the adoption of Smart Government has a potential impact on rural regions through enhanced online services that may encourage development. Moreover, Smart Government is expected provide accessible ways for rural residents to engage with government decisions making [351,361,362,363]. Rural people can then challenge to the government to provide better solutions that look to improve the quality of life and increase the prosperity of their regions [364,365].
Table 7. Studies on Smart Government.
Table 7. Studies on Smart Government.
Ref.Country/YearContributionDomain
Smart City (SC)/Rural Areas (RA)
Method
[366]Italy
2014
The political regulations and institutional policies are the main barriers for Smart Government adoption.SCBA
[357]Austria
2018
Digital infrastructure is the main enabler for smart government adoption.SCDA
[367]Switzerland
2018
IT infrastructure, awareness, strategy and leadership are influential factors for Smart Government adoption.SCI
[351]New Zealand
2019
Role of IoT and AI technology in providing high-quality services for citizens, business companies, and organizations.SCCS
[351]Singapore
2019
Data privacy and security, system maintenance, and system scalability are challenges to Smart Government.SCCS
[350]Switzerland
2019
Smart Government barriers include lack of legal foundations, policy, technical infrastructure, innovation, and cost-benefit considerations.SCI
[368]USA
2019
Legislation, cybersecurity, and difficulty in big data analysis are the major challenges for Smart Government solutions.SCCS
[369]Germany
2019
Role of IoT technology in creating significant value to enhance public services.SCAS
[370]Pakistan
2020
Role of IoT technology in improving e-government services to be more responsive and transparent.SCQR
[371]Estonia
2020
Smart mobile applications are the main enabler in the transition phase to Smart GovernmentSCCS
Considering the current level of urbanization, in both more and less developed countries, governments can manage and provide services to their citizens in a relatively easy way in major cities [372]. Rural regions require a smart approach to receive a comparable level of service [373]. Again, in the least developed countries, the gap between urban and rural areas is much less evident [374].

4.2.6. Smart SMEs

Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) are classified based on business capacity and number of employees [375]. Smart SME can be defined as the approach of a SME business to adopt Smart Technology into its business strategy to optimize the daily business operations, services, and production [376]. A list of studies on the topic is reported in Table 8.
Smart SMEs focus on integrating Smart Technology into business systems to increase the efficiency of business performance [377,378,379]. This process can improve decision-making that is based on data analytics and help improve weakness of the business and anticipate coming risks [380,381,382,383].
The Smart SMEs approach could bring many benefits to traditional business. Smart Technology might address business challenges and optimize business performance, such as cost reduction. It could enhance the quality of services and products and better understand customer needs [384,385].
SMEs are shaping most segments of the global business sector and have a significant impact that directly influences the gross domestic product (GDP). This is particularly true in developing and less developed countries, according to the World Bank [224]. Therefore, the significance of SMEs is growing due to their role as major job creators that require low capital to start the businesses [386].
Smart SMEs are expected to contribute to business sustainability to remain competitive in the market, ensure long-term economic growth, and support national economic growth that can improve the society’s social welfare. Moreover, Smart SMEs can efficiently improve resources to maximize production with minimal waste [387,388].
From the rural region perspective, the application of Smart SMEs is expected to enhance business sustainability and economic growth for rural communities [389,390]. For instance, rural SMEs can adopt Smart Technology, such as Cloud Computing, to overcome the unaffordable costs of buying new business software, especially those with limited IT capability [98,391]. Moreover, Smart Technology can help rural SMEs manage their business resources effectively to automate different activities that require more workers. Smart SMEs can also provide stable job opportunities for skilled people and educated people that cause them to remain in rural areas rather than moving away [392,393,394].
Table 8. Studies on Smart SMEs.
Table 8. Studies on Smart SMEs.
Ref.Country/YearContributionDomain
Smart City (SC)/Rural Areas (RA)
Method
[395]Kenya
2013
Financial support is the main barrier to Smart SME adoption.SCS
[396]Malaysia
2017
Knowledge and IT infrastructure are the main enablers for Smart SME adoption.SCR
[397]India
2018
Funding, social resistance, and IT infrastructure are the main barriers to Smart SME adoption.SCI
[398]Japan
2019
External pressure and high costs are the main challenges for Smart SME adoption.SCS
[399]Romania
2021
Financial support and skills are influential factors for Smart SME adoption.SCQ
[400]Greece
2021
Managerial support and strategy are the main challenges for Smart SME adoption.SCS
[401]Singapore
2022
Funding, knowledge, skills, and human resources are the main enablers factors for Smart SME adoption.SCCS
[402]Lithuania
2022
Organizational policies, knowledge and digital readiness are the determinants of Smart SME adoption.SCSLR
In urban and rural areas, SME presents an intrinsic and significant gap [403]. This is very evident in both more and less developed countries, where SME performance and probability of success in major cities clearly overcomes that in a rural context. This occurs because SMEs can become more competitive in highly populated areas due to larger markets and number of potential customers, the ability to produce goods and services at lower costs, the availability of labor, and the infrastructure required to operate efficiently. SMEs are not likely to have the same opportunities in rural regions [404].
Because of the different characteristics of rural regions, SME businesses might find relatively more favorable conditions in this context in least developed countries [99,405].

4.2.7. Smart Manufacturing

Smart Manufacturing adopts Smart Technology to optimize manufacturing processes and, accordingly, increase efficiency [406]. Identified studies in the field are in Table 9. Smart Manufacturing integrates the different resources to enable connection and collaboration, which results in increased productivity at a lower cost [407,408]. The Smart Manufacturing approach focuses on managing multi-manufacturing activities within the manufacturing ecosystem [409,410], which aims to automate operations, reduce costs, and increase productivity [411,412,413,414].
In general terms, Smart Manufacturing fosters a Sustainable Development approach by improving efficiency and driving product innovation [415]. That is relevant in rural regions where a smart approach is expected to contribute to innovative solutions that can overcome current challenges, such as the lack of skilled workers [416,417]. By enhancing industries’ performance in rural regions, Smart Manufacturing contributes to enhancing resilience and adaptivity to gain a competitive advantage [418,419].
Additionally, a tangible impact is expected on employment, given the current critical difficulty in attracting people. Smart Technology can play a significant role in automating processes that require or involve a large number of workers [420,421,422]. Similarly, Smart Manufacturing can holistically improve the socio-economic condition of communities by creating job opportunities for educated people in a more attractive context. It has a direct effect on improving stability and driving economic growth.
Finally, Smart Manufacturing can provide training opportunities for rural residents who graduate from universities or schools and seek training opportunities in the local community [423,424].
Table 9. Studies on Smart Manufacturing.
Table 9. Studies on Smart Manufacturing.
Ref.Country/YearContributionDomain
Smart City (SC)/Rural Areas (RA)
Method
[408]Germany
2015
Role of Smart Technology in increasing production in manufacturing industries. SCDA
[411]Germany
2016
Role of Smart Technology in improving competitiveness and sustainable development.SCDA
[409]China
2018
Role of Big Data in enhancing manufacturing production. SCCS
[425]USA
2019
Resource integration, IT skills, regulations, and training are the main enablers for Smart Manufacturing.SCLR
[406]Germany
2020
Artificial Intelligence and Big Data are enablers for Smart Manufacturing.SCDA
[424]USA
2022
Technological awareness, funding, and IT infrastructure are the main challenges for Smart Manufacturing.SCSR
In general terms, high population density is favorable to manufacturing [426], and the shortage in the labor market may negatively affect a business, particularly in more developed countries. Smart Manufacturing has an opportunity to become determinant in the rural regions of the least developed countries, where population density is high and labor resources are usually available [427]. Smart Manufacturing solutions are expected to be designed as a function of the population density and other available resources [428].

4.2.8. Smart Living

Smart Living is a generic concept that refers to the application of Smart Technology to improving lifestyle so that it is more convenient, efficient, and sustainable [429]. A summary of contributions on the topic is reported in Table 10. In general terms, Smart Living plays an important role in enhancing sustainable development [430]. It leverages technology for most life aspects to improve the quality of life and sustainability for social communities to make daily life more efficient and more accessible [431,432].
Because of its broad purpose, Smart Living includes different sub-categories/applications, which are briefly discussed in this section.
Smart Homes refers to the application of Smart Technology to domestic environments to better address people’s needs [433,434]. For instance, it can involve lighting, heating, and ventilation, as well as energy and security management; automation and remote control are also typical functions [435]. These applications allow residents to control various appliances and devices in their home via smartphones or voice commands. For instance, doors are automatically unlocked using facial recognition, lights are managed through presence sensors, temperature is automatically adjusted to a comfortable level, etc. [436,437].
Smart Waste Management is the corresponding Smart Technology adoption to foster a sustainable approach in this area [438]. Smart Waste Management is a key and central concept for public health, people’s well-being, and the environment [439]. An example of Smart Waste Management applications include Smart Bins [440], which can optimize overhead costs. For instance, trucks can collect bins where the waste level is over 80%, and they can be directed via GPS to reach their destination using the shortest possible route to reduce consumption and costs [441].
Smart Safety Systems address general safety issues by incorporating sensor data and data analysis into safety operations to deal with and anticipate threats [442]. The most intuitive example is a smart approach to surveillance [443,444,445]. Smart Climate and Environment System refers to an advanced use of technology to address the challenges of climate change and environmental degradation by enhancing sustainable development for a livable future [446,447]. In the last decade, climate change and environmental degradation have hugely impacted agriculture, landscape, and natural resources [448,449]. Smart Technology has therefore gained more and more relevance to face sustainability challenges [432], for instance, given the enhanced capabilities in terms of monitoring and analysis [447,450].
Smart Living is evidently a critical concept also in the rural context, where it is expected to play a significant role in enhancing sustainable development and improving the people’s quality of life [18,190,451,452].
Table 10. Studies on Smart Living.
Table 10. Studies on Smart Living.
Ref.Country/YearContributionDomain
Smart City (SC)/Rural Areas (RA)
Method
[453]China
2011
Role of Cloud Computing platform in adopting Smart Homes. SCES
[454]Sweden
2012
Role of IoT in Smart Environmental and Climate Systems.SCI
[455]UK
2013
Security, awareness, and cost are main barriers for Smart Home adoption.SCI
[456]UK
2013
Automation, integration, reliability, cost and security are the main influential factors for Smart Home.SCI
[457]The Netherland
2014
ICT infrastructure, knowledge, and cost are the main challenges for Smart Homes.SCI
[458]USA
2014
Safety and security policies are the main challenges to Smart Safety System.SCES
[459]India
2015
ICT infrastructure and funding are the main enablers of Smart Homes.RADA
[460]England
2015
Complexity, funding, and knowledge are the main influential factors for Smart Home.SCSR
[461]India
2016
Role of IoT and data analytics to adopt Smart Safety Systems.RADA
[462]USA
2016
Reliability and funding are the main influential factors for Smart Safety Systems.SCI
[463]Norway
2016
Legacy systems and ICT infrastructure are the main challenges for Smart Homes. SCSR
[464]UK
2017
Complexity and awareness are the main influential factors for Smart Homes.SCS
[465]West Africa
2018
Information availability, organizational awareness, and lack of technology are the influential factors for Smart Climate Systems.RAR
[466]Sweden
2018
Automation is the main challenge for Smart Home.SCMS
[428]Europe
2019
Demographic factors and knowledge are the main influential factors of Smart Living. SCCS
[133]Canada
2019
Lack of knowledge and awareness are the main challenges of Smart Living.SCI
[467]France
2019
Regulations, funding, privacy and are main influential factors to Smart Safety Systems.SCSR
[468]UAE
2019
Awareness, trust, enjoyment are the main influential factors for Smart Home.SCOM
[469]Lithuania
2019
Awareness, knowledge, and lack of skills are the barriers to Smart Living.SCCS
[470]China
2019
Lack of regulations and financial incentives are the main influencing factors to Smart Environmental Systems.SCMM
[471]Poland
2020
ICT infrastructure is the main barrier to Smart Living.RAAS
[472]Indonesia
2020
ICT infrastructure and funding, and knowledge are the main factors in Smart Living.RAI
[473]Malaysia
2020
Role of IoT in Smart Home.SCSMP
[469]Australia
2021
ICT infrastructure is the main enabler for Smart Living.SCQI
[280]Korea
2021
Complexity and funding are the main barriers to Smart Home.SCSR
[474]Sweden
2022
Privacy and security are the main challenges of Smart Home.SCCS
Smart Living is likely to be successfully implemented in the more and less developed countries, where the population density is high in urban areas [475]. More and less developed countries present a generic competitive advantage because of the availability of infrastructure and resources. In contrast, this is perceived to be much more challenging in rural regions of more and less developed countries due to the lack of infrastructure and ICT availability [476]. In the least developed countries, Smart Living could find opposite conditions [477], as mentioned in previous discussions.

5. Gap Identification and Challenges

According to the literature review conducted, the adoption of Smart Technology in rural regions and the associated challenges can be considered an open issue within the more generic body of knowledge related to Smart Technology.
Overall, there is a relatively limited number of studies in the field, as the main focus is on Smart Cities (Figure 1). Indeed, rural regions present some peculiarities that distinguish them from urban environments, resulting in a different lifestyle with specific issues and needs. Therefore, Smart Technology needs to be developed and deployed according to a different strategy that meets the actual requirements.
Because of its relative maturity, Smart City has allowed a critical comparative analysis to identify major gaps and challenges.
Based on the analysis of the 83 selected papers, significant research gaps have been identified as follows:
  • Despite their variety and extension, there is a fundamental lack of study in the rural context to investigate how to effectively adopt Smart Technology by looking at the different applications.
  • Poor understanding of the determinants for Smart Technology adoption.
  • Lack of specific strategies and specialized models for the implementation of smart solutions in the rural context.
  • Scarcity of comparative studies that address similarities and differences between Rural Regions and Smart Cities. It is a crucial step to convert the experience into a strategic solution to foster sustainable development.
  • Most rural studies are conducted in a specific context (e.g., within western economies), and more holistic discussions of results and models that consider different contexts are rare.
  • Lack of case studies to identify influential factors, enablers, and barriers.
  • Focus is often on Smart Farming, and there is a lack of investigation and discussion on more integrated approaches and different applications.
  • Lack of knowledge towards rural motivation, behavior, and attitude to use Smart Technology, especially for those with limited technology awareness.
A summary of major barriers and limitations is reported in Figure 2. The valuable insight that emerged from the literature review also includes a clearer understanding of major challenges.
Such challenges can be summarized as follows:
  • It is difficult to characterize rural regions within different countries and identify their peculiarities, especially in less developed countries. Additionally, there is no universally accepted definition for rural areas.
  • It is difficult to directly re-use or adapt models from urban or other contexts to fit rural characteristics.
  • As there are no precise determinants for Smart Technology adoption in the rural context, and it is unrealistic to define one single strategy that is effective in general terms and widely accepted.
  • Rural organizations seem to perceive Smart Technology as problematic because of the many barriers that do not allow a proper understanding of the potential. This results in resistance to change.
  • Understanding and overcoming underlining social and cultural factors may be challenging.
  • Key stakeholders in rural regions may have some resistance to sharing information with researchers because of socio-political issues. This may lead to incomplete, if not misleading, information.
  • There is a limited understanding of policies and regulations.
  • Because of significant heterogeneity, defining and generalizing solutions from the different existing patterns is challenging.
  • Studies within a rural context can be time-consuming.

6. Conclusions

In general terms, the adoption of Smart Technology in rural regions is expected to enhance a sustainable development looking at the more consolidated Smart City experience. In the farming sector, Smart Technology is expected to increase production and improve quality by automating processes, thereby reducing the need for human intervention, and providing a sustainable way for high production. In healthcare, the contribution of Smart Technology is mostly to bridge the gap with urban areas in terms of quality of services. In the energy sector, smart grids and renewable energy can be used to enhance a sustainable, reliable, and affordable energy supply to rural communities. Major challenges in education can be addressed by improving the accessibility of rich content. From a governmental perspective, Smart Technology can act as a socio-technical mitigator to address gaps and promote a better involvement and engagement of rural communities by enabling a more effective understanding of actual needs. SME should gain a competitive advance to enhance business sustainability and economic growth by an effective management of business resources. It should result also in creating additional job opportunities for skilled workers in the rural area. In the manufacturing sector, Smart Technology is expected to drive automation for critical processes that traditionally require a large number of employees. This can further foster qualified and specialized jobs. Looking holistically at lifestyle and society, Smart Technology can help to reduce the disparities with urban areas and to improve quality of life within rural communities.
However, the effective adoption of Smart Technology in rural regions is still challenging. Indeed, the limited attention on rural regions results in a difficulty in understanding the real needs, peculiarities, and critical issues in the context of limited resources. While the holistic analysis clearly points out a gap, there is no specific strategic roadmap to re-use or adapt existing models, such as Smart City. On the other side, there is the need to approach challenges according to a specific socio-economic approach that is aimed to establish effective policies that can materialize a positive perception of rural regions.
In summary, this paper suggests two major avenues of investigation to researchers. First, future research might focus on investigating the key challenges faced by rural communities when adopting Smart Technology through the lens of social influence, cultural background, technological orientation, organizational readiness, political drivers, and technological considerations. Second, researchers might consider exploring how Smart City experiences can be used as a strategic solution to address the challenges of sustainable development in rural regions. By exhausting these key research avenues, researchers might find ways of unlocking the potential opportunities Smart Technology could offer to rural regions.
Additionally, the topic may be considered from different perspectives. For instance, in a context of inequality reduction [478]. Such directions may require fine-grained analysis based on specific indicators.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the anonymous reviewers for the valuable and constructive feedback. It has allowed a consistent improvement of the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

MethodAcronym
Descriptive AnalysisDA
Case StudyCSY
Survey InterviewSI
Qualitative Case StudyQCSY
Literature ReviewLR
Comparison StudySC
SurveyS
Qualitative Case StudyQCSY
Systematic Literature ReviewSLR
Systematic Quantitative ReviewSQLR
MeasurementM
ReviewR
InterviewI
Experimental StudyER
QuestionerQ
Smart TechnologyST
Comparison AnalysisCA
Qualitative InterviewQI
Quantitative ResearchQR
Analysis StudyAS
Systematic ReviewSR
ObservationsM
Quantitative MethodsQM
Exploratory StudyES

References

  1. Nielsen, B.F.; Baer, D.; Lindkvist, C. Identifying and supporting exploratory and exploitative models of innovation in municipal urban planning; key challenges from seven Norwegian energy ambitious neighborhood pilots. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2019, 142, 142–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Popkova, E.G.; Sergi, B.S. “Smart Technologies” for Society, State and Economy; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; Volume 155. [Google Scholar]
  3. Chong, C.-Y.; Kumar, S. Sensor networks: Evolution, opportunities, and challenges. Proc. IEEE 2003, 91, 1247–1256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Cioffi, R.; Travaglioni, M.; Piscitelli, G.; Petrillo, A.; De Felice, F. Artificial intelligence and machine learning applications in smart production: Progress, trends, and directions. Sustainability 2020, 12, 492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Chen, T. Assessing factors critical to smart technology applications to mobile health care—The fgm-fahp approach. Health Policy Technol. 2020, 9, 194–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Issa, T.; Kommers, P.; Issa, T.; Isaias, P.; Issa, T.B. Smart Technology Applications in Business Environments; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  7. Issa, T.; Isaías, P.; Kommers, P. The impact of smart technology on users and society. J. Inf. Commun. Ethics Soc. 2016, 14, 310–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Apostolopoulos, N.; Liargovas, P.; Stavroyiannis, S.; Makris, I.; Apostolopoulos, S.; Petropoulos, D.; Anastasopoulou, E. Sustaining rural areas, rural tourism enterprises and EU development policies: A multi-layer conceptualisation of the obstacles in Greece. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Smailes, P.J.; Argent, N.; Griffin, T.L. Rural population density: Its impact on social and demographic aspects of rural communities. J. Rural Stud. 2002, 18, 385–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Commins, P. Poverty and social exclusion in rural areas: Characteristics, processes and research issues. Sociol. Rural. 2004, 44, 60–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Domon, G. Landscape as resource: Consequences, challenges and opportunities for rural development. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2011, 100, 338–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Middleton, J.W.; McCormick, M.; Engel, S.; Rutkowski, S.B.; Cameron, I.D.; Harradine, P.; Johnson, J.L.; Andrews, D. Issues and challenges for development of a sustainable service model for people with spinal cord injury living in rural regions. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2008, 89, 1941–1947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Beauchemin, C.; Schoumaker, B. Migration to cities in Burkina Faso: Does the level of development in sending areas matter? World Dev. 2005, 33, 1129–1152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Mlambo, V.H. An overview of rural-urban migration in South Africa: Its causes and implications. Arch. Bus. Res. 2018, 6, 63–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Goswami, P.; Mahapatra, R.; Divyasukananda, S.; Partha, G. Bridging the digital gap in rural India VIVEKDISHA: A novel experience. In Proceedings of the 2013 National Conference on Communications (NCC), New Delhi, India, 15–17 February 2013; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  16. Davies, A. IOT, smart technologies, smart policing: The impact for rural communities. In Smart Village Technology; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 25–37. [Google Scholar]
  17. Su, K.; Li, J.; Fu, H. Smart city and the applications. In Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Electronics, Communications and Control (ICECC), Ningbo, China, 9–11 September 2011; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  18. Adamowicz, M.; Zwolińska-Ligaj, M. The “Smart Village” as a way to achieve sustainable development in rural areas of Poland. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Emas, R. The concept of sustainable development: Definition and defining principles. Brief GSDR 2015, 2015, 10.13140. [Google Scholar]
  20. Scoones, I. Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. J. Peasant. Stud. 2009, 36, 171–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Van der Ploeg, J.D.; Renting, H.; Brunori, G.; Knickel, K.; Mannion, J.; Marsden, T.; De Roest, K.; Sevilla-Guzmán, E.; Ventura, F. Rural development: From practices and policies towards theory. In The Rural; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 201–218. [Google Scholar]
  22. Van Der Ploeg, J.D.; Renting, H. Impact and potential: A comparative review of European rural development practices. Sociol. Rural. 2000, 40, 529–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Guo, J.; Li, B. The application of medical artificial intelligence technology in rural areas of developing countries. Health Equity 2018, 2, 174–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Terluin, I.J. Differences in economic development in rural regions of advanced countries: An overview and critical analysis of theories. J. Rural Stud. 2003, 19, 327–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Howley, C.B. The meaning of rural difference for bright rednecks. J. Educ. Gift. 2009, 32, 537–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Putri, L.P.; Russell, D.J.; O’sullivan, B.G.; Meliala, A.; Kippen, R. A critical review of definitions of rural areas in Indonesia and implications for health workforce policy and research. Health Res. Policy Syst. 2022, 20, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Novotný, L.; Hruška, V.; Egedy, T.; Mazur, M. Defining rural areas of Visegrad countries. Stud. Obsz. Wiej./Rural Stud. 2015, 39, 21–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Dasgupta, P.; Morton, J.; Dodman, D.; Karapinar, B.; Meza, F.; Rivera-Ferre, M.G.; Toure Sarr, A.; Vincent, K.E. Rural Areas; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  29. Lekic, O.; Milovanovic, A. Sustainability of Rural Areas—Exploring Values, Challenges and Socio-Cultural Role. Sustainability and Resilience—Socio-Spatial Perspective; Fikfak, A., Kosanović, S., Konjar, M., Anguillari, E., Eds.; TU Delft Open: Delft, The Netherlands, 2018; pp. 171–184. [Google Scholar]
  30. Ryser, L.; Halseth, G. Resolving mobility constraints impeding rural seniors’ access to regionalized services. J. Aging Soc. Policy 2012, 24, 328–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Li, C.; Lin, L.; Gan, C.E. China credit constraints and rural households’ consumption expenditure. Financ. Res. Lett. 2016, 19, 158–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Carlsson, F.; Johansson-Stenman, O.; Nam, P.K. Funding a new bridge in rural Vietnam: A field experiment on social influence and default contributions. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2015, 72, 178–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Tambotoh, J.J.; Manuputty, A.D.; Banunaek, F.E. Socio-economics factors and information technology adoption in rural area. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2015, 72, 178–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Górecka, A.; Jezic, Z.; Kardum, B. Smart villages and rural development. Acta Sci. Pol. Oeconomia 2022, 20, 39–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Neumeier, S.; Pollermann, K. Rural tourism as promoter of rural development-Prospects and limitations: Case study findings from a pilot projectpromoting village tourism. Eur. Countrys. 2014, 6, 270–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Neudert, R.; Allahverdiyeva, N.; Mammadov, N.; Didebulidze, A.; Beckmann, V. Diversification of livestock-keeping smallholders in mountainous rural regions of Azerbaijan and Georgia. Land 2020, 9, 267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Arcury, T.A.; Gesler, W.M.; Preisser, J.S.; Sherman, J.; Spencer, J.; Perin, J. The effects of geography and spatial behavior on health care utilization among the residents of a rural region. Health Serv. Res. 2005, 40, 135–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Joshi, M.R. Factors determining quality of life of elderly people in rural Nepal. J. Gerontol. Geriatr. Res. 2020, 9, 2167-0374.20. [Google Scholar]
  39. Han, Z.; Liu, Y.; Zhong, M.; Shi, G.; Li, Q.; Zeng, D.; Zhang, Y.; Fei, Y.; Xie, Y. Influencing factors of domestic waste characteristics in rural areas of developing countries. Waste Manag. 2018, 72, 45–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Davoudi, S. Urban-rural relationships: An introduction and brief history. In Built Environment; Alexandrine: Abingdon, UK, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  41. OECD. Rural 3.0—A Framework for Rural Development. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/cfe/regionaldevelopment/Rural-3.0-Policy-Note.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  42. Aijaz, R. Measuring urbanisation in India. ORF Issue Brief 2017, 218, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
  43. World Urbanization Prospects—Population Division (No Date) United Nations. United Nations. Available online: https://population.un.org/wup/ (accessed on 17 April 2023).
  44. UN. UN Urbazation. 2023. Available online: https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization#number-of-people-living-in-urban-areas (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  45. United Nations. World Population Prospects. 2023. Available online: https://population.un.org/wpp/ (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  46. He, Q.; Cui, Y.; Liang, L.; Zhong, Q.; Li, J.; Li, Y.; Lv, X.; Huang, F. Social participation, willingness and quality of life: A population-based study among older adults in rural areas of China. Geriatr. Gerontol. Int. 2017, 17, 1593–1602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Silverstein, M.; Cong, Z.; Li, S. Intergenerational transfers and living arrangements of older people in rural China: Consequences for psychological well-being. J. Gerontol. Ser. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2006, 61, S256–S266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Vos, R. Agricultural and Rural Transformations in Asian Development: Past Trends and Future Challenges. 2018. Available online: https://www.wider.unu.edu/publication/agricultural-and-rural-transformations-asian-development (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  49. De Brauw, A.; Mueller, V.; Lee, H.L. The role of rural–urban migration in the structural transformation of Sub-Saharan Africa. World Dev. 2014, 63, 33–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Jorgenson, A.K.; Burns, T.J. Effects of rural and urban population dynamics and national development on deforestation in less-developed countries, 1990–2000. Sociol. Inq. 2007, 77, 460–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Fleischer, A.; Tchetchik, A. Does rural tourism benefit from agriculture? Tour. Manag. 2005, 26, 493–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Shabu, T. The relationship between urbanization and economic development in developing countries. Int. J. Econ. Dev. Res. Investig. 2010, 1, 30–36. [Google Scholar]
  53. Liu, Y.; Wang, Y. Rural land engineering and poverty alleviation: Lessons from typical regions in China. J. Geogr. Sci. 2019, 29, 643–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Tao, R.; Lin, J.Y.; Liu, M.; Zhang, Q. Rural taxation and government regulation in China. Agric. Econ. 2004, 31, 161–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. White, B. Agriculture and the generation problem: Rural youth, employment and the future of farming. IDS Bull. 2012, 43, 9–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Nchuchuwe, F.F.; Adejuwon, K.D. The challenges of agriculture and rural development in Africa: The case of Nigeria. Int. J. Acad. Res. Progress. Educ. Dev. 2012, 1, 45–61. [Google Scholar]
  57. Guèye, E. The role of family poultry in poverty alleviation, food security and the promotion of gender equality in rural Africa. Outlook Agric. 2000, 29, 129–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Shedenova, N.; Beimisheva, A. Social and economic status of urban and rural households in Kazakhstan. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013, 82, 585–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Brashares, J.S.; Golden, C.D.; Weinbaum, K.Z.; Barrett, C.B.; Okello, G.V. Economic and geographic drivers of wildlife consumption in rural Africa. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 13931–13936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Miani, A.M.; Dehkordi, M.K.; Siamian, N.; Lassois, L.; Tan, R.; Azadi, H. Toward sustainable rural livelihoods approach: Application of grounded theory in Ghazni province, Afghanistan. Appl. Geogr. 2023, 154, 102915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Patel, B.; Chavda, K. Rural entrepreneurship in India: Challenge and problems. Int. J. Adv. Res. Comput. Sci. Manag. Stud. 2013, 1, 28–37. [Google Scholar]
  62. Miruka, C.; Kabegambire, M. Challenges Inhibiting the Transformation of Subsistence Farming into Thriving Agri-business in Rural Uganda. Ghana J. Dev. Stud. 2015, 11, 67–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Muilu, T.; Rusanen, J. Rural young people in regional development—The case of Finland in 1970–2000. J. Rural Stud. 2003, 19, 295–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Ramírez, A.S.; Estrada, E.; Ruiz, A. Mapping the health information landscape in a rural, culturally diverse region: Implications for interventions to reduce information inequality. J. Prim. Prev. 2017, 38, 345–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Herselman, M. ICT in rural areas in South Africa: Various case studies. Inf. Sci. Proc. 2003, 945–955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Anukam, K.C.; Reid, G. African traditional fermented foods and probiotics. J. Med. Food 2009, 12, 1177–1184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Collinson, M.A. Striving against adversity: The dynamics of migration, health and poverty in rural South Africa. Glob. Health Action 2010, 3, 5080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Gcora, N.; Gopeni, A.; Tuswa, M.; Lwoga, E.T.; Chigona, W. The challenges rural women face in using Telecentres: The case of the Eastern Cape Province. In Proceedings of the 9th IDIA Conference, Nungwi, Zanzibar, 8–10 November 2015. [Google Scholar]
  69. Rangan, H.; Gilmartin, M. Gender, traditional authority, and the politics of rural reform in South Africa. Dev. Chang. 2002, 33, 633–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Nation, M.; Fortney, T.; Wandersman, A. Race, place, and neighboring: Social ties among neighbors in urban, suburban, and rural contexts. Environ. Behav. 2010, 42, 581–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Callois, J.-M.; Aubert, F. Towards indicators of social capital for regional development issues: The case of French rural areas. Reg. Stud. 2007, 41, 809–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Kanagawa, M.; Nakata, T. Analysis of the energy access improvement and its socio-economic impacts in rural areas of developing countries. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 62, 319–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Velaga, N.R.; Beecroft, M.; Nelson, J.D.; Corsar, D.; Edwards, P. Transport poverty meets the digital divide: Accessibility and connectivity in rural communities. J. Transp. Geogr. 2012, 21, 102–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. United Nations. Three Pillars of Sustainable Development. 2023. Available online: https://shorturl.at/tF024 (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  75. Mars, M. Telemedicine and advances in urban and rural healthcare delivery in Africa. Prog. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2013, 56, 326–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Awoyemi, T.; Obayelu, O.; Opaluwa, H. Effect of distance on utilization of health care services in rural Kogi State, Nigeria. J. Hum. Ecol. 2011, 35, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Casey, M.M.; Call, K.T.; Klingner, J.M. Are rural residents less likely to obtain recommended preventive healthcare services? Am. J. Prev. Med. 2001, 21, 182–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Stelmach, B.L. A Synthesis of International Rural Education Issues and Responses. Rural Educ. 2011, 32, 32–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Gibbs, R. The challenge ahead for rural schools. In Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy; University of Tennessee, Energy, Environment and Resources Center: Knoxville, TN, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  80. Du Plessis, P.; Mestry, R. Teachers for rural schools—A challenge for South Africa. S. Afr. J. Educ. 2019, 39, S1–S9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Lamkin, M.L. Challenges and changes faced by rural superintendents. Rural Educ. 2016, 28, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Sherwood, T. Where Has All the” Rural” Gone? Rural Education Research and Current Federal Reform. J. Res. Rural. Educ. 2000, 16, 159–167. [Google Scholar]
  83. Pateman, T. Rural and urban areas: Comparing lives using rural/urban classifications. Reg. Trends 2011, 43, 11–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Mendola, M. Rural out-migration and economic development at origin: A review of the evidence. J. Int. Dev. 2012, 24, 102–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Mendola, M. Rural Out-Migration and Economic Development at Origin; Sussex Centre for Migration Research, University of Sussex: Brighton, UK, 2006; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar]
  86. De Janvry, A.; Sadoulet, E. Income strategies among rural households in Mexico: The role of off-farm activities. World Dev. 2001, 29, 467–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Adefila, J. Contributions of rural non-farm economic activities to household income in Lere Area, Kaduna State of Nigeria. Int. J. Asian Soc. Sci. 2014, 4, 654–663. [Google Scholar]
  88. Musitelli, F.; Romano, A.; Møller, A.P.; Ambrosini, R. Effects of livestock farming on birds of rural areas in Europe. Biodivers. Conserv. 2016, 25, 615–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. White, P. Creative industries in a rural region: Creative West: The creative sector in the Western Region of Ireland. Creat. Ind. J. 2010, 3, 79–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Vermaak, H.J.; Kusakana, K.; Koko, S.P. Status of micro-hydrokinetic river technology in rural applications: A review of literature. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 29, 625–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Khan, E.U.; Martin, A.R. Review of biogas digester technology in rural Bangladesh. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 62, 247–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Li, Y.; Ranieri, M. Educational and social correlates of the digital divide for rural and urban children: A study on primary school students in a provincial city of China. Comput. Educ. 2013, 60, 197–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Fong, M.W. Digital divide between urban and rural regions in China. Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries. 2009, 36, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Grimes, S. The digital economy challenge facing peripheral rural areas. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2003, 27, 174–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Zhang, Y.; Love, D.J.; Krogmeier, J.V.; Anderson, C.R.; Heath, R.W.; Buckmaster, D.R. Challenges and opportunities of future rural wireless communications. IEEE Commun. Mag. 2021, 59, 16–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Li, Y.; Westlund, H.; Liu, Y. Why some rural areas decline while some others not: An overview of rural evolution in the world. J. Rural Stud. 2019, 68, 135–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Sarumathi, S.; Mohan, K. Role of Micro Finance in Women’s Empowerment (An Empirical study in Pondicherry region rural SHG’s). J. Manag. Sci. 2011, 1, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  98. Thota, S.; Nag, A.; Divyasukhananda, S.; Goswami, P.; Aravindakshan, A.; Rodriguez, R.; Mukherjee, B.; Nandi, S. Computing for Rural Empowerment: Enabled by Last-Mile Telecommunications (Extended Version). IEEE Commun. Mag. 2016, 54, 102–109. [Google Scholar]
  99. Siemens, L. Challenges, responses and available resources: Success in rural small businesses. J. Small Bus. Entrep. 2010, 23, 65–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. United Nations. The United Nations (2015) Agenda 2030; The United Nations Agenda. 2023. Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  101. Salvia, A.L.; Leal Filho, W.; Brandli, L.L.; Griebeler, J.S. Assessing research trends related to Sustainable Development Goals: Local and global issues. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 208, 841–849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Bleischwitz, R.; Spataru, C.; VanDeveer, S.D.; Obersteiner, M.; van der Voet, E.; Johnson, C.; Andrews-Speed, P.; Boersma, T.; Hoff, H.; van Vuuren, D.P. Resource nexus perspectives towards the United Nations sustainable development goals. Nat. Sustain. 2018, 1, 737–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Ahmed, A.; Stein, J.A. Science, technology and sustainable development: A world review. World Rev. Sci. Technol. Sustain. Dev. 2004, 1, 5–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Aivazidou, E.; Banias, G.; Lampridi, M.; Vasileiadis, G.; Anagnostis, A.; Papageorgiou, E.; Bochtis, D. Smart technologies for sustainable water management: An urban analysis. Sustainability 2021, 13, 13940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Nižetić, S.; Djilali, N.; Papadopoulos, A.; Rodrigues, J.J. Smart technologies for promotion of energy efficiency, utilization of sustainable resources and waste management. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 231, 565–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Berawi, M.A. The role of industry 4.0 in achieving Sustainable Development Goals. Int. J. Technol. 2019, 10, 644–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Mitlin, D.; Satterthwaite, D. Sustainable development and cities. In Sustainability the Environment and Urbanisation; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 23–61. [Google Scholar]
  108. Johnson, K.M.; Lichter, D.T. Rural depopulation: Growth and decline processes over the past century. Rural Sociol. 2019, 84, 3–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Juma, L.O.; Khademi-Vidra, A. Community-based tourism and sustainable development of rural regions in Kenya; Perceptions of the citizenry. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4733. [Google Scholar]
  110. Horlings, L.; Kanemasu, Y. Sustainable development and policies in rural regions; insights from the Shetland Islands. Land Use Policy 2015, 49, 310–321. [Google Scholar]
  111. Mulder, K.; Ferrer, D.; Van Lente, H. What is sustainable technology? In What is Sustainable Technology? Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  112. Kamp, L. Engineering education in sustainable development at Delft University of Technology. J. Clean. Prod. 2006, 14, 928–931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Sobczyk, W. Sustainable development of rural areas. Probl. Ekorozw.-Probl. Sustain. Dev. 2014, 9, 119–126. [Google Scholar]
  114. Haider, L.J.; Boonstra, W.J.; Peterson, G.D.; Schlüter, M. Traps and sustainable development in rural areas: A review. World Dev. 2018, 101, 311–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Patnaik, S.; Sen, S.; Mahmoud, M.S. Smart Village Technology: Concepts and Developments; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  116. Benavides-Vaello, S.; Strode, A.; Sheeran, B.C. Using technology in the delivery of mental health and substance abuse treatment in rural communities: A review. J. Behav. Health Serv. Res. 2013, 40, 111–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Vasu, D.; Srivastava, R.; Patil, N.G.; Tiwary, P.; Chandran, P.; Singh, S.K. A comparative assessment of land suitability evaluation methods for agricultural land use planning at village level. Land Use Policy 2018, 79, 146–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Malecki, E.J. Digital development in rural areas: Potentials and pitfalls. J. Rural Stud. 2003, 19, 201–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Stanef, M.R.; Manole, A.M.; Militaru, M. Lifelong learning–A way to reduce development gaps between rural and urban areas. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 46, 4508–4512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Chavez, A.; Littman-Quinn, R.; Ndlovu, K.; Kovarik, C.L. Using TV white space spectrum to practise telemedicine: A promising technology to enhance broadband internet connectivity within healthcare facilities in rural regions of developing countries. J. Telemed. Telecare 2016, 22, 260–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Gulati, S. Technology-enhanced learning in developing nations: A review. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2008, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Ruxwana, N.L.; Herselman, M.; Conradie, D.P. ICT applications as e-health solutions in rural healthcare in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. Health Inf. Manag. J. 2010, 39, 17–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Wang, X.; Day, R.; Murrant, D.; Marín, A.D.; Botello, D.C.; González, F.L.; Radcliffe, J. A capabilities-led approach to assessing technological solutions for a rural community. Energies 2021, 14, 1398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. González-Zamar, M.-D.; Abad-Segura, E.; Vázquez-Cano, E.; López-Meneses, E. IoT technology applications-based smart cities: Research analysis. Electronics 2020, 9, 1246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Chen, B.; Wan, J.; Shu, L.; Li, P.; Mukherjee, M.; Yin, B. Smart factory of industry 4.0: Key technologies, application case, and challenges. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 6505–6519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Xiaohua, W.; Zhenmin, F. Sustainable development of rural energy and its appraising system in China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2002, 6, 395–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Yu, H.; Shen, Z.; Miao, C. A goal-oriented development tool to automate the incorporation of intelligent agents into interactive digital media applications. Comput. Entertain. 2008, 6, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Noble, S.M.; Mende, M.; Grewal, D.; Parasuraman, A. The Fifth Industrial Revolution: How harmonious human–machine collaboration is triggering a retail and service [R] evolution. J. Retail. 2022, 98, 199–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Vermesan, O.; Friess, P. Internet of Things: Converging Technologies for Smart Environments and Integrated Ecosystems; River Publishers: Gistrup, Denmark, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  130. Nižetić, S.; Šolić, P.; González-de-Artaza, D.L.-d.I.; Patrono, L. Internet of Things (IoT): Opportunities, issues and challenges towards a smart and sustainable future. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 274, 122877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Barkhuus, L.; Polichar, V.E. Empowerment through seamfulness: Smart phones in everyday life. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 2011, 15, 629–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Wu, J.; Guo, S.; Huang, H.; Liu, W.; Xiang, Y. Information and communications technologies for sustainable development goals: State-of-the-art, needs and perspectives. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2018, 20, 2389–2406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Spicer, Z.; Goodman, N.; Olmstead, N. The frontier of digital opportunity: Smart city implementation in small, rural and remote communities in Canada. Urban Stud. 2021, 58, 535–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Dudhe, P.; Kadam, N.; Hushangabade, R.M.; Deshmukh, M.S. Internet of Things (IOT): An overview and its applications. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Energy, Communication, Data Analytics and Soft Computing (ICECDS), Chennai, India, 1–2 August 2017; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  135. Sohraby, K.; Minoli, D.; Occhiogrosso, B.; Wang, W. A review of wireless and satellite-based m2m/iot services in support of smart grids. Mob. Netw. Appl. 2018, 23, 881–895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Mittal, Y.; Toshniwal, P.; Sharma, S.; Singhal, D.; Gupta, R.; Mittal, V.K. A voice-controlled multi-functional smart home automation system. In Proceedings of the 2015 Annual IEEE India Conference (INDICON), New Delhi, India, 17–20 December 2015; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  137. Suppatvech, C.; Godsell, J.; Day, S. The roles of internet of things technology in enabling servitized business models: A systematic literature review. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2019, 82, 70–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Gubbi, J.; Buyya, R.; Marusic, S.; Palaniswami, M. Internet of Things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2013, 29, 1645–1660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Espinosa, Á.V.; Ruiz, J.L.; Mata, F.M.; Estevez, M.E. Application of IoT in Healthcare: Keys to Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals. Sensors 2021, 21, 2330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Maksimovic, M. Greening the future: Green Internet of Things (G-IoT) as a key technological enabler of sustainable development. In Internet of Things and Big Data Analytics Toward Next-Generation Intelligence; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 283–313. [Google Scholar]
  141. Zarei, M.; Mohammadian, A.; Ghasemi, R. Internet of things in industries: A survey for sustainable development. Int. J. Innov. Sustain. Dev. 2016, 10, 419–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Ahmed, N.; De, D.; Hussain, I. Internet of Things (IoT) for smart precision agriculture and farming in rural areas. IEEE Internet Things J. 2018, 5, 4890–4899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Hancock, J.T.; Naaman, M.; Levy, K. AI-mediated communication: Definition, research agenda, and ethical considerations. J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun. 2020, 25, 89–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Holzinger, A. Human-Computer Interaction and Knowledge Discovery (HCI-KDD): What is the benefit of bringing those two fields to work together? In Proceedings of the International Conference on Availability, Reliability, and Security, Regensburg, Germany, 2–6 September 2013; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  145. Méndez, J.I.; Mata, O.; Ponce, P.; Meier, A.; Peffer, T.; Molina, A. Multi-sensor system, gamification, and artificial intelligence for benefit elderly people. In Challenges and Trends in Multimodal Fall Detection for Healthcare; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 207–235. [Google Scholar]
  146. Zou, J.; Schiebinger, L. Ensuring that biomedical AI benefits diverse populations. eBioMedicine 2021, 67, 103358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Makridakis, S. The forthcoming Artificial Intelligence (AI) revolution: Its impact on society and firms. Futures 2017, 90, 46–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Goralski, M.A.; Tan, T.K. Artificial intelligence and sustainable development. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2020, 18, 100330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Vinuesa, R.; Azizpour, H.; Leite, I.; Balaam, M.; Dignum, V.; Domisch, S.; Felländer, A.; Langhans, S.D.; Tegmark, M.; Nerini, F.F. The role of artificial intelligence in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  150. Di Vaio, A.; Palladino, R.; Hassan, R.; Escobar, O. Artificial intelligence and business models in the sustainable development goals perspective: A systematic literature review. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 121, 283–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Pedro, F.; Subosa, M.; Rivas, A.; Valverde, P. Artificial Intelligence in Education: Challenges and Opportunities for Sustainable Development. 2019. Available online: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000366994 (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  152. Liengpunsakul, S. Artificial intelligence and sustainable development in China. Chin. Econ. 2021, 54, 235–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Qian, L.; Luo, Z.; Du, Y.; Guo, L. Cloud computing: An overview. In 2009 IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  154. Satyanarayana, S. Cloud computing: SAAS. Comput. Sci. Telecommun. 2012, 76–79. [Google Scholar]
  155. Wang, B.; Qi, Z.; Ma, R.; Guan, H.; Vasilakos, A.V. A survey on data center networking for cloud computing. Comput. Netw. 2015, 91, 528–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Kim, W. Cloud computing: Today and tomorrow. J. Object Technol. 2009, 8, 65–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Oke, A.E.; Kineber, A.F.; Al-Bukhari, I.; Famakin, I.; Kingsley, C. Exploring the Benefits of Cloud Computing for Sustainable Construction in Nigeria. 2021. Available online: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JEDT-04-2021-0189/full/html (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  158. Peñalvo, F.J.G.; Sharma, A.; Chhabra, A.; Singh, S.K.; Kumar, S.; Arya, V.; Gaurav, A. Mobile Cloud Computing and Sustainable Development: Opportunities, Challenges, and Future Directions. Int. J. Cloud Appl. Comput. (IJCAC) 2022, 12, 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  159. Alam, T.; Tajammul, M.; Gupta, R. Towards the sustainable development of smart cities through cloud computing. In AI and IoT for Smart City Applications; Springer: Singapore, 2022; pp. 199–222. [Google Scholar]
  160. Nowicka, K. Cloud computing in sustainable mobility. Transp. Res. Procedia 2016, 14, 4070–4079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Buyya, R.; Beloglazov, A.; Abawajy, J. Energy-efficient management of data center resources for cloud computing: A vision, architectural elements, and open challenges. arXiv 2010, arXiv:1006.0308. [Google Scholar]
  162. Veglis, A.; Saridou, T.; Panagiotidis, K.; Karypidou, C.; Kotenidis, E. Applications of Big Data in Media Organizations. Soc. Sci. 2022, 11, 414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. De Mauro, A.; Greco, M.; Grimaldi, M. A formal definition of Big Data based on its essential features. Libr. Rev. 2016, 65, 122–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Mohamed, A.; Najafabadi, M.K.; Wah, Y.B.; Zaman, E.A.K.; Maskat, R. The state of the art and taxonomy of big data analytics: View from new big data framework. Artif. Intell. Rev. 2019, 53, 989–1037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Zikopoulos, P.; Eaton, C. Understanding Big Data: Analytics for Enterprise Class Hadoop and Streaming Data; McGraw-Hill Osborne Media: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  166. Schneider, R.D. Hadoop for Dummies Special Edition; John Wiley & Sons Canada: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  167. Sagiroglu, S.; Sinanc, D. Big data: A review. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems (CTS), San Diego, CA, USA, 20–24 May 2013; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  168. Kharrazi, A.; Qin, H.; Zhang, Y. Urban big data and sustainable development goals: Challenges and opportunities. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Barbeito-Caamaño, A.; Chalmeta, R. Using big data to evaluate corporate social responsibility and sustainable development practices. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 2831–2848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Baek, H.; Park, S.-K. Sustainable development plan for Korea through expansion of green IT: Policy issues for the effective utilization of big data. Sustainability 2015, 7, 1308–1328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. El-Haddadeh, R.; Osmani, M.; Hindi, N.; Fadlalla, A. Value creation for realising the sustainable development goals: Fostering organisational adoption of big data analytics. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 131, 402–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Gijzen, H. Big data for a sustainable future. Nature 2013, 502, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Pesqueira, A.; Sousa, M.J.; Rocha, Á. Big data skills sustainable development in healthcare and pharmaceuticals. J. Med. Syst. 2020, 44, 197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Arden, S.V.; Pentimonti, J.M.; Cooray, R.; Jackson, S. A categorical content analysis of highly cited literature related to trends and issues in special education. J. Learn. Disabil. 2018, 51, 589–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Schaffers, H.; Komninos, N.; Pallot, M. Smart Cities as Innovation Ecosystems Sustained by the Future Internet. 2012. Available online: https://www.urenio.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012-FIREBALL-White-Paper-Final.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  176. Barrionuevo, J.M.; Berrone, P.; Ricart, J.E. Smart cities, sustainable progress. IESE Insight 2012, 14, 50–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Albino, V.; Berardi, U.; Dangelico, R.M. Smart cities: Definitions, dimensions, performance, and initiatives. J. Urban Technol. 2015, 22, 3–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Nam, T.; Pardo, T.A. Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions. In Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference: Digital Government Innovation in Challenging Times, College Park, MD, USA, 12–15 June 2011. [Google Scholar]
  179. Bakıcı, T.; Almirall, E.; Wareham, J. A smart city initiative: The case of Barcelona. J. Knowl. Econ. 2013, 4, 135–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Hajduk, S. The concept of a smart city in urban management. Bus. Manag. Educ. 2016, 14, 34–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Shrivastava, P.; Ivanaj, S.; Ivanaj, V. Strategic technological innovation for sustainable development. Int. J. Technol. Manag. 2016, 70, 76–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Mutule, A.; Domingues, M.; Ulloa-Vásquez, F.; Carrizo, D.; García-Santander, L.; Dumitrescu, A.-M.; Issicaba, D.; Melo, L. Implementing smart city technologies to inspire change in consumer energy behaviour. Energies 2021, 14, 4310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Shcherbina, E.; Gorbenkova, E. Smart city technologies for sustainable rural development. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  184. Naldi, L.; Nilsson, P.; Westlund, H.; Wixe, S. What is smart rural development? J. Rural Stud. 2015, 40, 90–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Prause, G.; Boevsky, I. Smart rural development. Agric. Econ. Manag. 2015, 60, 63–69. [Google Scholar]
  186. Rochman, G.P.; Chofyan, I.; Sakti, F. Understanding the smart society in rural development. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  187. Pop, M.D.; Proștean, O. Identification of significant metrics and indicators for smart mobility. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  188. Cowie, P.; Townsend, L.; Salemink, K. Smart rural futures: Will rural areas be left behind in the 4th industrial revolution? J. Rural Stud. 2020, 79, 169–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Brewer, E.; Demmer, M.; Du, B.; Ho, M.; Kam, M.; Nedevschi, S.; Pal, J.; Patra, R.; Surana, S.; Fall, K. The case for technology in developing regions. Computer 2005, 38, 25–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Zhang, X.; Zhang, Z. How do smart villages become a way to achieve sustainable development in rural areas? Smart village planning and practices in China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. World Bank. Rural Poverty. 2023. Available online: https://shorturl.at/jxyW4 (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  192. Pivoto, D.; Waquil, P.D.; Talamini, E.; Finocchio, C.P.; Dalla Corte, V.F.; de Vargas Mores, G. Scientific development of smart farming technologies and their application in Brazil. Inf. Process. Agric. 2018, 5, 21–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Abdullahi, H.S.; Mahieddine, F.; Sheriff, R.E. Technology impact on agricultural productivity: A review of precision agriculture using unmanned aerial vehicles. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Wireless and Satellite Systems, Bradford, UK, 6–7 July 2015; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  194. Grogan, A. Smart farming. Eng. Technol. 2012, 7, 38–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Symeonaki, E.G.; Arvanitis, K.G.; Piromalis, D.D. Cloud computing for IoT applications in climate-smart agriculture: A review on the trends and challenges toward sustainability. In Proceedings of the Innovative Approaches and Applications for Sustainable Rural Development: 8th International Conference, HAICTA 2017, Chania, Crete, Greece, 21–24 September 2017; Selected Papers 8. Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  196. Ciccarese, L.; Silli, V. The role of organic farming for food security: Local nexus with a global view. Future Food J. Food Agric. Soc. 2016, 4, 56–67. [Google Scholar]
  197. Musa, S.F.P.D.; Basir, K.H.; Luah, E. The role of smart farming in sustainable development. Int. J. Asian Bus. Inf. Manag. (IJABIM) 2022, 13, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Musa, S.F.P.D.; Basir, K.H. Smart farming: Towards a sustainable agri-food system. Br. Food J. 2021, 123, 3085–3099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Raja, L.; Vyas, S. The study of technological development in the field of smart farming. In Smart Farming Technologies for Sustainable Agricultural Development; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2019; pp. 1–24. [Google Scholar]
  200. Moysiadis, V.; Sarigiannidis, P.; Vitsas, V.; Khelifi, A. Smart farming in Europe. Comput. Sci. Rev. 2021, 39, 100345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Dagar, R.; Som, S.; Khatri, S.K. Smart farming–IoT in agriculture. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Inventive Research in Computing Applications (ICIRCA), Coimbatore, India, 11–12 July 2018; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  202. Farooq, M.S.; Riaz, S.; Abid, A.; Abid, K.; Naeem, M.A. A Survey on the Role of IoT in Agriculture for the Implementation of Smart Farming. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 156237–156271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Madushanki, A.R.; Halgamuge, M.N.; Wirasagoda, W.S.; Syed, A. Adoption of the Internet of Things (IoT) in agriculture and smart farming towards urban greening: A review. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 2019, 10, 11–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Joshi, A.; Dandekar, I.; Hargude, N.; Shrotri, A.; Dandekar, A. Application of Internet of the Things (IOT) for the Water Conservation and Entrepreneurship in the Rural Area. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Pune Section International Conference (PuneCon), Pune, India, 18–20 December 2019; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  205. Mohamed, E.S.; Belal, A.A.; Abd-Elmabod, S.K.; El-Shirbeny, M.A.; Gad, A.; Zahran, M.B. Smart farming for improving agricultural management. Egypt. J. Remote Sens. Space Sci. 2021, 24, 971–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  206. Dlodlo, N.; Kalezhi, J. The internet of things in agriculture for sustainable rural development. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Emerging Trends in Networks and Computer Communications (ETNCC), Windhoek, Namibia, 17–20 May 2015; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  207. Doshi, J.; Patel, T.; Bharti, S.K. Smart Farming using IoT, a solution for optimally monitoring farming conditions. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2019, 160, 746–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Lohchab, V.; Kumar, M.; Suryan, G.; Gautam, V.; Das, R.K. A review of iot based smart farm monitoring. In Proceedings of the 2018 Second International Conference on Inventive Communication and Computational Technologies (ICICCT), Coimbatore, India, 20–21 April 2018; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  209. Fennell, S.; Kaur, P.; Jhunjhunwala, A.; Narayanan, D.; Loyola, C.; Bedi, J.; Singh, Y. Examining linkages between smart villages and smart cities: Learning from rural youth accessing the internet in India. Telecommun. Policy 2018, 42, 810–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Ferguson, A.G. Rise of Big Data Policing. In Rise of Big Data Policin; New York University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  211. Verma, N.K.; Usman, A. Internet of Things (IoT): A relief for Indian farmers. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC), Seattle, WA, USA, 13–16 October 2016; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  212. Virk, A.L.; Noor, M.A.; Fiaz, S.; Hussain, S.; Hussain, H.A.; Rehman, M.; Ahsan, M.; Ma, W. Smart farming: An overview. In Smart Village Technology; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 191–201. [Google Scholar]
  213. Gokul, V.; Tadepalli, S. Implementation of smart infrastructure and non-invasive wearable for real time tracking and early identification of diseases in cattle farming using IoT. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on I-SMAC (IoT in Social, Mobile, Analytics and Cloud)(I-SMAC), Palladam, India, 10–11 February 2017; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  214. Feng, Z. Rural E-commerce development under the background of big data. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Big Data Analytics for Cyber-Physical-Systems, Shanghai, China, 28–29 December 2020; Springer: Singapore, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  215. Peisker, A.; Dalai, S. Data analytics for rural development. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2015, 8, 50–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Patil, V.C.; Al-Gaadi, K.A.; Biradar, D.P.; Rangaswamy, M. Internet of things (Iot) and cloud computing for agriculture: An overview. In Proceedings of the Agro-Informatics and Precision Agriculture (AIPA 2012), Hyderabad, India, 1–3 August 2012; pp. 292–296. [Google Scholar]
  217. Sarker, M.N.I.; Wu, M.; Chanthamith, B.; Yusufzada, S.; Li, D.; Zhang, J. Big data driven smart agriculture: Pathway for sustainable development. In Proceedings of the 2019 2nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Big Data (ICAIBD), Chengdu, China, 25–28 May 2019; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  218. Wang, Z.; Xue, M.; Wang, Y.; Song, M.; Li, S.; Daziano, R.A.; Wang, B.; Ma, G.; Chen, K.; Li, X.; et al. Big data: New tend to sustainable consumption research. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 236, 117499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  219. Muzari, W.; Gatsi, W.; Muvhunzi, S. The impacts of technology adoption on smallholder agricultural productivity in sub-Saharan Africa: A review. J. Sustain. Dev. 2012, 5, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Abdul Razak, N.; Abdul Malik, J.; Saeed, M. A development of smart village implementation plan for agriculture: A pioneer project in Malaysia. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computing and Informatics (ICOCI 2013), Kuching, Malaysia, 28–30 August 2013. [Google Scholar]
  221. Pivoto, D.; Barham, B.; Waquil, P.D.; Foguesatto, C.R.; Corte, V.F.D.; Zhang, D.; Talamini, E. Factors influencing the adoption of smart farming by Brazilian grain farmers. Int. Food Agribus. Manag. Rev. 2019, 22, 571–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  222. Knierim, A.; Kernecker, M.; Erdle, K.; Kraus, T.; Borges, F.; Wurbs, A. Smart farming technology innovations—Insights and reflections from the German Smart-AKIS hub. NJAS-Wagening. J. Life Sci. 2019, 90–91, 100314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  223. De Abreu, C.L.; van Deventer, J.P. The application of artificial intelligence (AI) and internet of things (IoT) in agriculture: A systematic literature review. In Proceedings of the Southern African Conference for Artificial Intelligence Research, Stellenbosch, South Africa, 5–9 December 2022; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  224. Fanelli, R.M. Barriers to Adopting New Technologies within Rural Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). Soc. Sci. 2021, 10, 430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  225. Elbasi, E.; Mostafa, N.; AlArnaout, Z.; Zreikat, A.I.; Cina, E.; Varghese, G.; Shdefat, A.; Topcu, A.E.; Abdelbaki, W.; Mathew, S.; et al. Artificial Intelligence Technology in the Agricultural Sector: A Systematic Literature Review. IEEE Access 2022, 11, 171–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  226. Iheke, O.R.; Ihuoma, U. Effect of urbanization on agricultural production in Abia State. Int. J. Agric. Sci. Res. Technol. Ext. Educ. Syst. 2016, 5, 83–89. [Google Scholar]
  227. Satterthwaite, D.; McGranahan, G.; Tacoli, C. Urbanization and its implications for food and farming. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2010, 365, 2809–2820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  228. Bhardwaj, V.; Joshi, R.; Gaur, A.M. IoT-based smart health monitoring system for COVID-19. SN Comput. Sci. 2022, 3, 137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  229. Tian, S.; Yang, W.; Le Grange, J.M.; Wang, P.; Huang, W.; Ye, Z. Smart healthcare: Making medical care more intelligent. Glob. Health J. 2019, 3, 62–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  230. Zeng, X.; Deng, H.-T.; Wen, D.-L.; Li, Y.-Y.; Xu, L.; Zhang, X.-S. Wearable Multi-Functional Sensing Technology for Healthcare Smart Detection. Micromachines 2022, 13, 254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  231. Alshehri, F.; Muhammad, G. A comprehensive survey of the Internet of Things (IoT) and AI-based smart healthcare. IEEE Access 2020, 9, 3660–3678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  232. Nasr, M.; Islam, M.; Shehata, S.; Karray, F.; Quintana, Y. Smart healthcare in the age of AI: Recent advances, challenges, and future prospects. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 145248–145270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  233. Gong, F.F.; Sun, X.Z.; Lin, J.; Gu, X.D. Primary exploration in establishment of China’s intelligent medical treatment. Mod. Hosp. Manag. 2013, 11, 28–29. [Google Scholar]
  234. Solanas, A.; Casino, F.; Batista, E.; Rallo, R. Trends and challenges in smart healthcare research: A journey from data to wisdom. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 3rd International Forum on Research and Technologies for Society and Industry (RTSI), Modena, Italy, 11–13 September 2017; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  235. Catarinucci, L.; De Donno, D.; Mainetti, L.; Palano, L.; Patrono, L.; Stefanizzi, M.L.; Tarricone, L. An IoT-aware architecture for smart healthcare systems. IEEE Internet Things J. 2015, 2, 515–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  236. Martin, J.L.; Varilly, H.; Cohn, J.; Wightwick, G.R. Preface: Technologies for a smarter planet. IBM J. Res. Dev. 2010, 54, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  237. Xue, X.; Zeng, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Lee, S.; Yan, Z. A Study on an Application System for the Sustainable Development of Smart Healthcare in China. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 111960–111974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Khan, F.A.; Asif, M.; Ahmad, A.; Alharbi, M.; Aljuaid, H. Blockchain technology, improvement suggestions, security challenges on smart grid and its application in healthcare for sustainable development. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 55, 102018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  239. Papa, A.; Mital, M.; Pisano, P.; Del Giudice, M. E-health and wellbeing monitoring using smart healthcare devices: An empirical investigation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 153, 119226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  240. Camacho-Collados, M.; Liberatore, F. A decision support system for predictive police patrolling. Decis. Support Syst. 2015, 75, 25–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  241. Jain, A. Digitalisation: The era of transformation in India. Int. J. Res. Cult. Soc. 2018, 2, 252–259. [Google Scholar]
  242. Awan, M.J.; Bilal, M.H.; Yasin, A.; Nobanee, H.; Khan, N.S.; Zain, A.M. Detection of COVID-19 in chest X-ray images: A big data enabled deep learning approach. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 10147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  243. Balaji, S.; Patil, M.; McGregor, C. A cloud based big data based online health analytics for rural nicus and picus in india: Opportunities and challenges. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 30th International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS), Thessaloniki, Greece, 22–24 June 2017; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  244. Smys, S.; Raj, J.S. Internet of things and big data analytics for health care with cloud computing. J. Inf. Technol. 2019, 1, 9–18. [Google Scholar]
  245. Ting, H.-W.; Chien, T.-Y.; Lai, K.R.; Pan, R.-H.; Wu, K.-H.; Chen, J.-M.; Chan, C.-L. Differences in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage cases between urban and rural regions of taiwan: Big data analytics of government open data. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 1548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  246. Kuziemsky, C.; Maeder, A.J.; John, O.; Gogia, S.B.; Basu, A.; Meher, S.; Ito, M. Role of artificial intelligence within the telehealth domain. Yearb. Med. Inform. 2019, 28, 035–040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  247. Haleem, A.; Javaid, M.; Khan, I.H. Current status and applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in medical field: An overview. Curr. Med. Res. Pract. 2019, 9, 231–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  248. Khairnar, V.D.; Saroj, A.; Yadav, P.; Shete, S.; Bhatt, N. Primary healthcare using artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Innovative Computing and Communications, Ostrava, Czech Republic, 21–22 March 2019; Springer: Singapore, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  249. Rohokale, V.M.; Prasad, N.R.; Prasad, R. A cooperative Internet of Things (IoT) for rural healthcare monitoring and control. In Proceedings of the 2011 2nd International Conference on Wireless Communication, Vehicular Technology, Information Theory and Aerospace & Electronic Systems Technology (Wireless VITAE), Chennai, India, 28 February–3 March 2011; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  250. Lin, C.-W.; Syed-Abdul, S.; Clinciu, D.L.; Scholl, J.; Jin, X.; Lu, H.; Chen, S.S.; Iqbal, U.; Heineck, M.J.; Li, Y.-C. Empowering village doctors and enhancing rural healthcare using cloud computing in a rural area of mainland China. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 2014, 113, 585–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  251. Rajput, D.S.; Basha, S.M.; Xin, Q.; Gadekallu, T.R.; Kaluri, R.; Lakshmanna, K.; Maddikunta, P.K.R. Providing diagnosis on diabetes using cloud computing environment to the people living in rural areas of India. J. Ambient. Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2022, 13, 2829–2840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  252. Rahman, M.; Kashem, M.A.; Nayan, A.A.; Akter, M.; Rabbi, F.; Ahmed, M.; Asaduzzaman, M. Internet of things (IoT) based ECG system for rural health care. arXiv 2022, arXiv:2208.02226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  253. Semwal, N.; Mukherjee, M.; Raj, C.; Arif, W. An IoT based smart e-health care system. J. Inf. Optim. Sci. 2019, 40, 1787–1800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  254. Baig, M.M.; GholamHosseini, H. Smart health monitoring systems: An overview of design and modeling. J. Med. Syst. 2013, 37, 9898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  255. Baker, S.B.; Xiang, W.; Atkinson, I. Internet of things for smart healthcare: Technologies, challenges, and opportunities. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 26521–26544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  256. Al-Azzam, M.K.; Alazzam, M.B. Smart city and smart-health framework, challenges and opportunities. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 2019, 10, 171–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  257. Bettiga, D.; Lamberti, L.; Lettieri, E. Individuals’ adoption of smart technologies for preventive health care: A structural equation modeling approach. Health Care Manag. Sci. 2020, 23, 203–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  258. Gupta, P.; Agrawal, D.; Chhabra, J.; Dhir, P.K. IoT based smart healthcare kit. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Computational Techniques in Information and Communication Technologies (ICCTICT), New Delhi, India, 11–13 March 2016; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  259. Shilo, S.; Rossman, H.; Segal, E. Axes of a revolution: Challenges and promises of big data in healthcare. Nat. Med. 2020, 26, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  260. Ghazal, T.M.; Hasan, M.K.; Alshurideh, M.T.; Alzoubi, H.M.; Ahmad, M.; Akbar, S.S.; Al Kurdi, B.; Akour, I.A. IoT for smart cities: Machine learning approaches in smart healthcare—A review. Futur. Internet 2021, 13, 218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  261. Fejfar, D.; Guo, A.; Kelly, E.; Tidwell, J.B.; Ochieng, O.; Cronk, R. Healthcare provider satisfaction with environmental conditions in rural healthcare facilities of 14 low- and middle-income countries. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2021, 236, 113802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  262. Strasser, R.; Kam, S.M.; Regalado, S.M. Rural health care access and policy in developing countries. Annu. Rev. Public Health 2016, 37, 395–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  263. Douthit, N.; Kiv, S.; Dwolatzky, T.; Biswas, S. Exposing some important barriers to health care access in the rural USA. Public Health 2015, 129, 611–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  264. Lund, H.; Østergaard, P.A.; Connolly, D.; Mathiesen, B.V. Smart energy and smart energy systems. Energy 2017, 137, 556–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  265. Şerban, A.C.; Lytras, M.D. Artificial intelligence for smart renewable energy sector in europe—Smart energy infrastructures for next generation smart cities. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 77364–77377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  266. RRaval, M.; Bhardwaj, S.; Aravelli, A.; Dofe, J.; Gohel, H. Smart energy optimization for massive IoT using artificial intelligence. Internet Things 2021, 13, 100354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  267. Shwetha, B.; Balasangameshwara, J. Demand-side management in smart electricity grids: A review. Int. J. Intell. Enterp. 2021, 8, 436–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  268. Hargreaves, T.; Nye, M.; Burgess, J. Making energy visible: A qualitative field study of how householders interact with feedback from smart energy monitors. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 6111–6119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  269. Hargreaves, T.; Nye, M.; Burgess, J. Keeping energy visible? Exploring how householders interact with feedback from smart energy monitors in the longer term. Energy Policy 2013, 52, 126–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  270. Goulden, M.; Bedwell, B.; Rennick-Egglestone, S.; Rodden, T.; Spence, A. Smart grids, smart users? The role of the user in demand side management. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2014, 2, 21–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  271. Shaikh, A.; Thapar, M.; Koli, D.; Rambade, H. IOT based smart electric pole. In Proceedings of the 2018 Second International Conference on Electronics, Communication and Aerospace Technology (ICECA), Coimbatore, India, 29–31 March 2018; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  272. Paramati, S.R.; Shahzad, U.; Doğan, B. The role of environmental technology for energy demand and energy efficiency: Evidence from OECD countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 153, 111735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  273. Shi, C.; Feng, X.; Jin, Z. Sustainable development of China’s smart energy industry based on artificial intelligence and low-carbon economy. Energy Sci. Eng. 2020, 10, 243–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  274. Khan, T.; Yu, M.; Waseem, M. Review on recent optimization strategies for hybrid renewable energy system with hydrogen technologies: State of the art, trends and future directions. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2022, 47, 25155–25201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  275. Ellabban, O.; Abu-Rub, H.; Blaabjerg, F. Renewable energy resources: Current status, future prospects and their enabling technology. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 39, 748–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  276. Erdinc, O.; Paterakis, N.G.; Catalão, J.P. Overview of insular power systems under increasing penetration of renewable energy sources: Opportunities and challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 52, 333–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  277. Dincer, I. Renewable energy and sustainable development: A crucial review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2000, 4, 157–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  278. Mathiesen, B.V.; Lund, H.; Connolly, D.; Wenzel, H.; Østergaard, P.A.; Möller, B.; Nielsen, S.; Ridjan, I.; Karnøe, P.; Sperling, K.; et al. Smart Energy Systems for coherent 100% renewable energy and transport solutions. Appl. Energy 2015, 145, 139–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  279. Mbungu, N.T.; Naidoo, R.M.; Bansal, R.C.; Vahidinasab, V. Overview of the optimal smart energy coordination for microgrid applications. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 163063–163084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  280. Kim, H.; Choi, H.; Kang, H.; An, J.; Yeom, S.; Hong, T. A systematic review of the smart energy conservation system: From smart homes to sustainable smart cities. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 140, 110755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  281. Dincer, I.; Acar, C. Smart energy systems for a sustainable future. Appl. Energy 2017, 194, 225–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  282. Setiawan, A.A.; Purwanto, D.H.; Pamuji, D.S.; Huda, N. Development of a solar water pumping system in Karsts Rural Area Tepus, Gunungkidul through student community services. Energy Procedia 2014, 47, 7–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  283. Kaya, O.; Klepacka, A.M.; Florkowski, W.J. Achieving renewable energy, climate, and air quality policy goals: Rural residential investment in solar panel. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 248, 109309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  284. Alotaibi, D.M.; Akrami, M.; Dibaj, M.; Javadi, A.A. Smart energy solution for an optimised sustainable hospital in the green city of NEOM. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2019, 35, 32–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  285. Akinyele, D.; Rayudu, R.; Nair, N. Global progress in photovoltaic technologies and the scenario of development of solar panel plant and module performance estimation—Application in Nigeria. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 48, 112–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  286. Shamsuzzoha, A.; Grant, A.; Clarke, J. Implementation of renewable energy in Scottish rural area: A social study. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 185–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  287. Liu, G.; Li, Z.; Xue, Y.; Tomsovic, K. Microgrid Assisted Design for Remote Areas. Energies 2022, 15, 3725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  288. Jain, M.; Gupta, S.; Masand, D.; Agnihotri, G.; Jain, S. Real-time implementation of islanded microgrid for remote areas. J. Control Sci. Eng. 2016, 2016, 5710950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  289. Raimi, K.T.; Carrico, A.R. Understanding and beliefs about smart energy technology. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2016, 12, 68–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  290. Shareef, H.; Ahmed, M.S.; Mohamed, A.; Al Hassan, E. Review on home energy management system considering demand responses, smart technologies, and intelligent controllers. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 24498–24509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  291. Fallah, S.N.; Deo, R.C.; Shojafar, M.; Conti, M.; Shamshirband, S. Computational intelligence approaches for energy load forecasting in smart energy management grids: State of the art, future challenges, and research directions. Energies 2018, 11, 596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  292. Ahdan, S.; Susanto, E.R.; Syambas, N.R. Proposed Design and Modeling of Smart Energy Dashboard System by Implementing IoT (Internet of Things) Based on Mobile Devices. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 13th International Conference on Telecommunication Systems, Services, and Applications (TSSA), Bali, Indonesia, 3–4 October 2019; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  293. Perri, C.; Giglio, C.; Corvello, V. Smart users for smart technologies: Investigating the intention to adopt smart energy consumption behaviors. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 155, 119991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  294. Gündoğdu, F.K. Analyzing critical barriers of smart energy city in Turkey based on two-dimensional uncertainty by hesitant z-fuzzy linguistic terms. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2022, 113, 104935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  295. Lamnatou, C.; Chemisana, D.; Cristofari, C. Smart grids and smart technologies in relation to photovoltaics, storage systems, buildings and the environment. Renew. Energy 2021, 185, 1376–1391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  296. Yang, Y.; Liu, J.; Lin, Y.; Li, Q. The impact of urbanization on China’s residential energy consumption. Struct. Chang. Econ. Dyn. 2019, 49, 170–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  297. Mohammed, Y.S.; Mokhtar, A.S.; Bashir, N.; Saidur, R. An overview of agricultural biomass for decentralized rural energy in Ghana. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 20, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  298. Gwak, D. The Meaning and Predict of Smart Learning. Smart Learning Korea Proceeding; Korean e-Learning Industry Association: Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2010.
  299. Zhu, Z.-T.; Yu, M.-H.; Riezebos, P. A research framework of smart education. Smart Learn. Environ. 2016, 3, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  300. Jia, W.; Li, X.; Huang, W.; Wang, H.; Zheng, Y.; Wang, H.; Mao, Z.; Tang, T. Smart Education Under 5G+. In Proceedings of the 2021 11th International Conference on Information Technology in Medicine and Education (ITME), Wuyishan, China, 19–21 November 2021; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  301. Palanivel, K. Emerging technologies to smart education. Int. J. Comput. Trends Technol. 2020, 68, 5–16. [Google Scholar]
  302. Memos, V.A.; Minopoulos, G.; Stergiou, C.; Psannis, K.E.; Ishibashi, Y. A revolutionary interactive smart classroom (RISC) with the use of emerging technologies. In Proceedings of the 2020 2nd International Conference on Computer Communication and the Internet (ICCCI), Nagoya, Japan, 26–29 June 2020; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  303. Wals, A.E.J.; Benavot, A. Can we meet the sustainability challenges? The role of education and lifelong learning. Eur. J. Educ. 2017, 52, 404–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  304. Kędzierska, B.; Magenheim, J.; Kędzierska, A.; Fischbach, R. The application and impact of ICT in education for sustainable development. In Proceedings of the X World Conference on Computers in Education, Torun, Poland, 2–5 July 2013. [Google Scholar]
  305. Jirgensons, M.; Kapenieks, J. Blockchain and the future of digital learning credential assessment and management. J. Teach. Educ. Sustain. 2018, 20, 145–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  306. Anthonysamy, L.; Koo, A.C.; Hew, S.H. Self-regulated learning strategies in higher education: Fostering digital literacy for sustainable lifelong learning. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2020, 25, 2393–2414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  307. Foster, J. Education as sustainability. Environ. Educ. Res. 2001, 7, 153–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  308. Simović, A. A Big Data smart library recommender system for an educational institution. Libr. Hi Tech 2018, 36, 498–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  309. Singh, H.; Miah, S.J. Smart education literature: A theoretical analysis. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2020, 25, 3299–3328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  310. Lee, J.; Zo, H.; Lee, H. Smart learning adoption in employees and HRD managers. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2014, 45, 1082–1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  311. Thomson, S. Building a Conversational Framework for e-Learning to Support the Future Implementation of Learning Technologies; Sheffield Hallam University: Sheffield, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  312. Gros, B. The design of smart educational environments. Smart Learn. Environ. 2016, 3, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  313. Bontchev, B.; Vassileva, D. Affect-based adaptation of an applied video game for educational purposes. Interact. Technol. Smart Educ. 2017, 14, 31–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  314. Wei, N.; Yang, F.; Muthu, B.; Shanthini, A. Human machine interaction-assisted smart educational system for rural children. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2022, 99, 107812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  315. Nataliya, B.; Natalya, V.; Viacheslav, F.; Irina, K.; Alexandra, S.; Nadezhda, I. The Concept of Smart-Education for Sustainable Development. In Proceedings of the International Conference on the Theory and Practice of Personality Formation in Modern Society (ICTPPFMS 2018), Yurga, Russia, 20–22 September 2018; Atlantis Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  316. Mazutti, J.; Brandli, L.L.; Salvia, A.L.; Gomes, B.M.F.; Damke, L.I.; da Rocha, V.T.; Rabello, R.D.S. Smart and learning campus as living lab to foster education for sustainable development: An experience with air quality monitoring. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2020, 21, 1311–1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  317. Al-Bahi, A.M.; Soliman, A.Y. Sustainability SMART indicators of engineering education for sustainable development. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain, 17–20 April 2018; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  318. Chi, Y.; Qin, Y.; Song, R.; Xu, H. Knowledge graph in smart education: A case study of entrepreneurship scientific publication management. Sustainability 2018, 10, 995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  319. Chou, P.-N. Skill development and knowledge acquisition cultivated by maker education: Evidence from Arduino-based educational robotics. EURASIA J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2018, 14, em1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  320. Hlalele, D. Rural education in South Africa: Concepts and practices. Mediterr. J. Soc. Sci. 2014, 5, 462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  321. Anand, R.; Saxena, S.; Saxena, S. E-learning and its Impact on Rural Areas. Int. J. Mod. Educ. Comput. Sci. 2012, 4, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  322. Snoussi, T. Learning management system in education: Opportunities and challenges. Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng. 2019, 8, 664–667. [Google Scholar]
  323. Kasim, N.N.M.; Khalid, F. Choosing the right learning management system (LMS) for the higher education institution context: A systematic review. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. 2016, 11, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  324. Cerezo, R.; Sánchez-Santillán, M.; Paule-Ruiz, M.P.; Núñez, J.C. Students’ LMS interaction patterns and their relationship with achievement: A case study in higher education. Comput. Educ. 2016, 96, 42–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  325. Forouzesh, M.; Darvish, M. Characteristics of learning management system (LMS) and its role in education of electronics. In Proceedings of the The International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education, Bucharest, Romania, 26–27 April 2012; “Carol I” National Defence University: Bucharest, Romania, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  326. Chen, C.K.; Almunawar, M.N. Cloud learning management system in higher education. In Opening Up Education for Inclusivity Across Digital Economies and Societies; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2019; pp. 29–51. [Google Scholar]
  327. Kulshrestha, T.; Kant, A.R. Benefits of learning management system (LMS) in Indian education. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Eng. Technol. (IJCSET) 2013, 4, 1153–1164. [Google Scholar]
  328. Alyami, A.; Pileggi, S.F.; Hawryszkiewycz, I. The impact of new technologies on learning: A literature review on mobile collaborative learning. In Proceedings of the Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 22–24 June 2020. [Google Scholar]
  329. Glukhov, V.; Vasetskaya, N. Improving the teaching quality with a smart-education system. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE VI Forum Strategic Partnership of Universities and Enterprises of Hi-Tech Branches (Science. Education. Innovations)(SPUE), St. Petersburg, Russia, 15–17 November 2017; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  330. Jeong, J.-S.; Kim, M.; Yoo, K.-H. A content oriented smart education system based on cloud computing. Int. J. Multimed. Ubiquitous Eng. 2013, 8, 313–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  331. Kobayashi, T.; Arai, K.; Sato, H.; Tanimoto, S.; Kanai, A. An application framework for smart education system based on mobile and cloud systems. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. 2017, 100, 2399–2410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  332. Bower, M.; Howe, C.; McCredie, N.; Robinson, A.; Grover, D. Augmented Reality in education–cases, places and potentials. Educ. Media Int. 2014, 51, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  333. Chen, P.; Liu, X.; Cheng, W.; Huang, R. A review of using Augmented Reality in Education from 2011 to 2016. In Innovations in Smart Learning; Springer: Singapore, 2017; pp. 13–18. [Google Scholar]
  334. Huang, K.-T.; Ball, C.; Francis, J.; Ratan, R.; Boumis, J.; Fordham, J. Augmented versus virtual reality in education: An exploratory study examining science knowledge retention when using augmented reality/virtual reality mobile applications. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw. 2019, 22, 105–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  335. Lee, K. Augmented reality in education and training. TechTrends 2012, 56, 13–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  336. Kesim, M.; Ozarslan, Y. Augmented reality in education: Current technologies and the potential for education. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 47, 297–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  337. Bagheri, M.; Movahed, S.H. The effect of the Internet of Things (IoT) on education business model. In Proceedings of the 2016 12th International Conference on Signal-Image Technology & Internet-Based Systems (SITIS), Naples, Italy, 28 November–1 December 2016; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  338. Njeru, A.M.; Omar, M.S.; Yi, S.; Paracha, S.; Wannous, M. Using IoT technology to improve online education through data mining. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Applied System Innovation (ICASI), Sapporo, Japan, 13–17 May 2017; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  339. Bajaj, R.; Sharma, V. Smart Education with artificial intelligence based determination of learning styles. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2018, 132, 834–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  340. Glenn, M. The Future of Higher Education: How Technology Will Shape Learning; The New Media Consortium: Austin, TX, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  341. Al-Emran, M.; Malik, S.I.; Al-Kabi, M.N. A survey of Internet of Things (IoT) in education: Opportunities and challenges. In Toward Social Internet of Things (SIoT): Enabling Technologies, Architectures and Applications: Emerging technologies for Connected and Smart Social Objects; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 197–209. [Google Scholar]
  342. Ramlowat, D.D.; Pattanayak, B.K. Exploring the internet of things (IoT) in education: A review. In Information Systems Design and Intelligent Applications: Proceedings of Fifth International Conference INDIA 2018 Volume 2; Springer: Singapore, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  343. Choi, B.Y.; Song, S.; Zaman, R. Smart Education: Opportunities and challenges induced by COVID-19 pandemic: [A survey-based study]. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Smart Cities Conference (ISC2), Piscataway, NJ, USA, 28 September–1 October 2020; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  344. Chun, S. Birth and major strategies of smart education initiative in South Korea and its challenges. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Smart Education and Smart E-Learning, Vilamoura, Portugal, 21–23 June 2017; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  345. Kaumba, M.; Mphahlele, R.S.S.; Muleya, G.; Simui, F. Disablers and enablers in the uptake of information communication technologies in rural primary schools of Mwinilunga District, Zambia. J. Educ. Technol. Online Learn. 2021, 4, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  346. Glewwe, P.; Kremer, M. Schools, teachers, and education outcomes in developing countries. Handb. Econ. Educ. 2006, 2, 945–1017. [Google Scholar]
  347. Jimenez-Castellanos, O. Relationship between educational resources and school achievement: A mixed method intra-district analysis. Urban Rev. 2010, 42, 351–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  348. Blanchett, W.J.; Klingner, J.K.; Harry, B. The intersection of race, culture, language, and disability: Implications for urban education. Urban Educ. 2009, 44, 389–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  349. Anthopoulos, L.G.; Reddick, C.G. Smart city and smart government: Synonymous or complementary? In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web, Montreal, QC, Canada, 11–15 April 2016. [Google Scholar]
  350. Schedler, K.; Guenduez, A.A.; Frischknecht, R. How smart can government be? Exploring barriers to the adoption of smart government. Inf. Polity 2019, 24, 3–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  351. Kankanhalli, A.; Charalabidis, Y.; Mellouli, S. IoT and AI for smart government: A research agenda. Gov. Inf. Q. 2019, 36, 304–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  352. Kliksberg, B. Rebuilding the state for social development: Towards ‘smart government’. Int. Rev. Adm. Sci. 2000, 66, 241–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  353. Bhatti, Z.K.; Kusek, J.Z.; Verheijen, T. Logged on: Smart Government Solutions from South Asia; World Bank Publications: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  354. Velsberg, O.; Westergren, U.H.; Jonsson, K. Exploring smartness in public sector innovation—Creating smart public services with the Internet of Things. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2020, 29, 350–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  355. Mellouli, S.; Luna-Reyes, L.F.; Zhang, J. Smart government, citizen participation and open data. Inf. Polity 2014, 19, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  356. Von Lucke, J. Smart government–the potential of intelligent networking in government and public administration. In Proceedings of the 2016 conference for e-democracy and open government (CeDEM), Krems, Austria, 18–20 May 2016; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  357. Pereira, G.V.; Parycek, P.; Falco, E.; Kleinhans, R. Smart governance in the context of smart cities: A literature review. Inf. Polity 2018, 23, 143–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  358. De Guimarães, J.C.F.; Severo, E.A.; Júnior, L.A.F.; Da Costa, W.P.L.B.; Salmoria, F.T. Governance and quality of life in smart cities: Towards sustainable development goals. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 253, 119926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  359. Giuliodori, A.; Berrone, P.; Ricart, J.E. Where smart meets sustainability: The role of Smart Governance in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in cities. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2023, 26, 27–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  360. Tomor, Z.; Meijer, A.; Michels, A.; Geertman, S. Smart governance for sustainable cities: Findings from a systematic literature review. J. Urban Technol. 2019, 26, 3–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  361. Kulkarni, P.; Akhilesh, K.B. Big data analytics as an enabler in smart governance for the future smart cities. In Smart Technologies: Scope and Applications; Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 53–65. [Google Scholar]
  362. Chun, S.A.; Shulman, S.; Sandoval, R.; Hovy, E. Government 2.0: Making connections between citizens, data and government. Inf. Polity 2010, 15, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  363. Choenni, S.; Netten, N.; Bargh, M.S.; Braak, S.V.D. Exploiting big data for smart government: Facing the challenges. In Handbook of Smart Cities; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 1–23. [Google Scholar]
  364. Gil-Garcia, J.R.; Helbig, N.; Ojo, A. Being smart: Emerging technologies and innovation in the public sector. Gov. Inf. Q. 2014, 31, I1–I8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  365. Jiménez, C.E.; Falcone, F.; Solanas, A.; Puyosa, H.; Zoughbi, S.; González, F. Smart government: Opportunities and challenges in smart cities development. In Civil and Environmental Engineering: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2016; pp. 1454–1472. [Google Scholar]
  366. Savoldelli, A.; Codagnone, C.; Misuraca, G. Understanding the e-government paradox: Learning from literature and practice on barriers to adoption. Gov. Inf. Q. 2014, 31, S63–S71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  367. Guenduez, A.A.; Singler, S.; Tomczak, T.; Schedler, K.; Oberli, M. Smart government success factors. Yearb. Swiss Adm. Sci. 2018, 9, 96–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  368. Chatfield, A.T.; Reddick, C.G. A framework for Internet of Things-enabled smart government: A case of IoT cybersecurity policies and use cases in U.S. federal government. Gov. Inf. Q. 2018, 36, 346–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  369. Wirtz, B.W.; Weyerer, J.C.; Schichtel, F.T. An integrative public IoT framework for smart government. Gov. Inf. Q. 2018, 36, 333–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  370. Chohan, S.R.; Hu, G. Success factors influencing citizens’ adoption of IoT service orchestration for public value creation in smart government. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 208427–208448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  371. Lemke, F.; Taveter, K.; Erlenheim, R.; Pappel, I.; Draheim, D.; Janssen, M. Stage models for moving from e-government to smart government. In Electronic Governance and Open Society: Challenges in Eurasia: 6th International Conference, EGOSE 2019, St. Petersburg, Russia, 13–14 November 2019, Proceedings 6; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  372. Gil-Garcia, J.R.; Pardo, T.A.; Aldama-Nalda, A. Smart cities and smart governments: Using information technologies to address urban challenges. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, Quebec City, QC, Canada, 17–20 June 2013. [Google Scholar]
  373. Park, C.; Cha, J. A trend on smart village and implementation of smart village platform. Int. J. Adv. Smart Converg. 2019, 8, 177–183. [Google Scholar]
  374. Strover, S. Rural internet connectivity. Telecommun. Policy 2001, 25, 331–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  375. Keskġn, H.; Ġentürk, C.; Sungur, O.; Kġrġġ, H.M. The importance of SMEs in developing economies. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Sustainable Development, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 8–9 June 2010. [Google Scholar]
  376. Vervest, P.; Preiss, K.; Van Heck, E.; Pau, L.-F. The emergence of smart business networks. J. Inf. Technol. 2004, 19, 228–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  377. Armeanu, D.; Istudor, N.; Lache, L. The role of SMEs in assessing the contribution of entrepreneurship to GDP in the Romanian business environment. Amfiteatru Econ. J. 2015, 17, 195–211. [Google Scholar]
  378. Aris, N.M. SMEs: Building Blocks for Economic Growth; Department of National Statistics, Malaysia: Putrajaya, Malaysia, 2007.
  379. Neuhofer, B.; Buhalis, D.; Ladkin, A. Smart technologies for personalized experiences: A case study in the hospitality domain. Electron. Mark. 2015, 25, 243–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  380. Liu, W.; Shanthikumar, J.G.; Lee, P.T.-W.; Li, X.; Zhou, L. Special issue editorial: Smart supply chains and intelligent logistics services. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2021, 147, 102256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  381. Sen, D.; Ozturk, M.; Vayvay, O. An overview of big data for growth in SMEs. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016, 235, 159–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  382. Vilarinho, S.; Lopes, I.; Sousa, S. Developing dashboards for SMEs to improve performance of productive equipment and processes. J. Ind. Inf. Integr. 2018, 12, 13–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  383. Yigitbasioglu, O.M.; Velcu, O. A review of dashboards in performance management: Implications for design and research. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 2012, 13, 41–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  384. Tsai, W.-H.; Chou, W.-C. Selecting management systems for sustainable development in SMEs: A novel hybrid model based on DEMATEL, ANP, and ZOGP. Expert Syst. Appl. 2009, 36, 1444–1458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  385. Mohammadian, H.D.; Mohammadian, F.D.; Assante, D. IoT-education policies on national and international level regarding best practices in German SMEs. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Porto, Portugal, 27–30 April 2020; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  386. Kongolo, M. Job creation versus job shedding and the role of SMEs in economic development. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 2010, 4, 2288. [Google Scholar]
  387. Matinaro, V.; Liu, Y.; Poesche, J. Extracting key factors for sustainable development of enterprises: Case study of SMEs in Taiwan. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 209, 1152–1169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  388. De Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L.; Ndubisi, N.O.; Seles, B.M.R.P. Sustainable development in Asian manufacturing SMEs: Progress and directions. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2019, 225, 107567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  389. AlMulhim, A.F. Smart supply chain and firm performance: The role of digital technologies. Bus. Process. Manag. J. 2021, 27, 1353–1372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  390. Zairis, A.G. The effective use of digital technology by SMEs. In Research Anthology on Small Business Strategies for Success and Survival; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2021; pp. 548–559. [Google Scholar]
  391. Choubisa, K. Cloud computing & rural development. Int. J. Informat. Technol. Knowl. Manag. 2012, 6, 98–100. [Google Scholar]
  392. Jones, N.B.; Graham, C.M. Can the IoT help small businesses? Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 2018, 38, 3–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  393. Moeuf, A.; Pellerin, R.; Lamouri, S.; Tamayo, S.; Barbaray, R. The industrial management of SMEs in the era of Industry 4.0. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2018, 56, 1118–1136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  394. Mohammadian, H.D. IoT-Education technologies as solutions towards SMEs’ educational challenges and I4. 0 readiness. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Porto, Portugal, 27–30 April 2020; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  395. Nganga, S.I.; Mwachofi, M.M. Technology adoption and the banking agency in rural Kenya. J. Sociol. Res. 2013, 4, 249–266. [Google Scholar]
  396. Ahmad Zaidi, M.F. The IoT readiness of SMEs in Malaysia: Are they worthwhile for investigation? In Proceedings of the International Conference on International Business, Marketing and Humanities (ICIBMAH 2017), Alor Setar, Malaysia, 26–27 August 2017. [Google Scholar]
  397. Groot, A.; Bolt, J.; Jat, H.; Jat, M.; Kumar, M.; Agarwal, T.; Blok, V. Business models of SMEs as a mechanism for scaling climate smart technologies: The case of Punjab, India. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 210, 1109–1119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  398. Prause, M. Challenges of industry 4.0 technology adoption for SMEs: The case of Japan. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  399. Suciu, A.D.; Tudor, A.I.M.; Chițu, I.B.; Dovleac, L.; Brătucu, G. IoT technologies as instruments for SMEs’ innovation and sustainable growth. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  400. Pappas, N.; Caputo, A.; Pellegrini, M.M.; Marzi, G.; Michopoulou, E. The complexity of decision-making processes and IoT adoption in accommodation SMEs. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 131, 573–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  401. Hwang, B.-G.; Ngo, J.; Teo, J.Z.K. Challenges and strategies for the adoption of smart technologies in the construction industry: The case of Singapore. J. Manag. Eng. 2022, 38, 05021014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  402. Ghobakhloo, M.; Iranmanesh, M.; Vilkas, M.; Grybauskas, A.; Amran, A. Drivers and barriers of Industry 4.0 technology adoption among manufacturing SMEs: A systematic review and transformation roadmap. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2022, 33, 1029–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  403. Lee, N.; Rodríguez-Pose, A. Original innovation, learnt innovation and cities: Evidence from UK SMEs. Urban Stud. 2013, 50, 1742–1759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  404. Manzoor, F.; Wei, L.; Sahito, N. The role of SMEs in rural development: Access of SMEs to finance as a mediator. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0247598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  405. Uvarova, I.; Vitola, A. Innovation challenges and opportunities in European Rural SMEs. Public Policy Adm. 2019, 18, 152–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  406. Phuyal, S.; Bista, D.; Bista, R. Challenges, opportunities and future directions of smart manufacturing: A state of art review. Sustain. Futur. 2020, 2, 100023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  407. Lu, Y.; Ju, F. Smart manufacturing systems based on cyber-physical manufacturing services (CPMS). IFAC-PapersOnLine 2017, 50, 15883–15889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  408. Davis, J.; Edgar, T.; Graybill, R.; Korambath, P.; Schott, B.; Swink, D.; Wang, J.; Wetzel, J. Smart manufacturing. Annu. Rev. Chem. Biomol. Eng. 2015, 6, 141–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  409. Tao, F.; Qi, Q.; Liu, A.; Kusiak, A. Data-driven smart manufacturing. J. Manuf. Syst. 2018, 48, 157–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  410. Nagorny, K.; Lima-Monteiro, P.; Barata, J.; Colombo, A.W. Big data analysis in smart manufacturing: A review. Int. J. Commun. Netw. Syst. Sci. 2017, 10, 31–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  411. Kang, H.S.; Lee, J.Y.; Choi, S.; Kim, H.; Park, J.H.; Son, J.Y.; Kim, B.H.; Noh, S.D. Smart manufacturing: Past research, present findings, and future directions. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf.-Green Technol. 2016, 3, 111–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  412. Qu, Y.J.; Ming, X.G.; Liu, Z.W.; Zhang, X.Y.; Hou, Z.T. Smart manufacturing systems: State of the art and future trends. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2019, 103, 3751–3768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  413. Patel, P.; Ali, M.I.; Sheth, A. From raw data to smart manufacturing: AI and semantic web of things for industry 4.0. IEEE Intell. Syst. 2018, 33, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  414. Yang, H.; Kumara, S.; Bukkapatnam, S.T.; Tsung, F. The internet of things for smart manufacturing: A review. IISE Trans. 2019, 51, 1190–1216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  415. Cioffi, R.; Travaglioni, M.; Piscitelli, G.; Petrillo, A.; Parmentola, A. Smart manufacturing systems and applied industrial technologies for a sustainable industry: A systematic literature review. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 2897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  416. Abubakr, M.; Abbas, A.T.; Tomaz, I.; Soliman, M.S.; Luqman, M.; Hegab, H. Sustainable and smart manufacturing: An integrated approach. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  417. Del Giudice, M.; Scuotto, V.; Papa, A.; Tarba, S.Y.; Bresciani, S.; Warkentin, M. A self-tuning model for smart manufacturing SMEs: Effects on digital innovation. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2021, 38, 68–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  418. Warke, V.; Kumar, S.; Bongale, A.; Kotecha, K. Sustainable development of smart manufacturing driven by the digital twin framework: A statistical analysis. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  419. Davis, J.; Edgar, T.; Porter, J.; Bernaden, J.; Sarli, M. Smart manufacturing, manufacturing intelligence and demand-dynamic performance. Comput. Chem. Eng. 2012, 47, 145–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  420. Shestakofsky, B. Working algorithms: Software automation and the future of work. Work. Occup. 2017, 44, 376–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  421. Nazareno, L.; Schiff, D.S. The impact of automation and artificial intelligence on worker well-being. Technol. Soc. 2021, 67, 101679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  422. Leduc, S.; Liu, Z. Robots or Workers? A Macro Analysis of Automation and Labor Markets; Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2019.
  423. Chege, S.M.; Wang, D. Information technology innovation and its impact on job creation by SMEs in developing countries: An analysis of the literature review. Technol. Anal. Strat. Manag. 2019, 32, 256–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  424. Wuest, T.; Romero, D.; Khan, M.A.; Mittal, S. The triple bottom line of smart manufacturing technologies: An economic, environmental, and social perspective. In Handbook of Smart Technologies: An Economic and Social Perspective; Routledge: London, UK, 2022; pp. 310–330. Available online: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780429351921-20 (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  425. Mittal, S.; Khan, M.A.; Romero, D.; Wuest, T. Smart manufacturing: Characteristics, technologies and enabling factors. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 2019, 233, 1342–1361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  426. Arndt, C.; Davies, R.; Thurlow, J. Urbanization, Structural Transformation, and Rural-Urban Linkages in South Africa. South African Urbanisation Review, Cities Support Programme (CSP) of the National Treasury. 2018. Available online: https://sa-tied.wider.unu.edu/article/urbanization-structural-transformation-and-rural-urban-linkages-in-south-africa (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  427. Hao, P.; Tang, S. Floating or settling down: The effect of rural landholdings on the settlement intention of rural migrants in urban China. Environ. Plan. A Econ. Space 2015, 47, 1979–1999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  428. Porru, S.; Missoa, F.E.; Pani, F.E.; Repetto, C. Smart mobility and public transport: Opportunities and challenges in rural and urban areas. J. Traffic Transp. Eng. (Engl. Ed.) 2020, 7, 88–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  429. Leelaarporn, P.; Wachiraphan, P.; Kaewlee, T.; Udsa, T.; Chaisaen, R.; Choksatchawathi, T.; Laosirirat, R.; Lakhan, P.; Natnithikarat, P.; Thanontip, K.; et al. Sensor-driven achieving of smart living: A review. IEEE Sens. J. 2021, 21, 10369–10391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  430. Han, M.J.N.; Kim, M.J. A critical review of the smart city in relation to citizen adoption towards sustainable smart living. Habitat Int. 2021, 108, 102312. [Google Scholar]
  431. Weck, M.; Humala, I.; Tamminen, P.; Ferreira, F.A.F. Supporting sustainable development using multiple criteria decision aid: Towards an age-friendly smart living environment. In Multiple Criteria Decision Making for Sustainable Development: Pursuing Economic Growth, Environmental Protection and Social Cohesion; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 151–173. [Google Scholar]
  432. Varghese, C.; Pathak, D.; Varde, A.S. SeVa: A food donation app for smart living. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 11th Annual Computing and Communication Workshop and Conference (CCWC), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 January 2021; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  433. Chan, M.; Estève, D.; Escriba, C.; Campo, E. A review of smart homes—Present state and future challenges. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 2008, 91, 55–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  434. King, N. Smart Home—A Definition; Intertek Research and Testing Center: Banksmeadow, Australia, 2003; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  435. Paetz, A.-G.; Dütschke, E.; Fichtner, W. Smart homes as a means to sustainable energy consumption: A study of consumer perceptions. J. Consum. Policy 2011, 35, 23–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  436. Robles, R.J.; Kim, T.-H. Applications, systems and methods in smart home technology: A. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Technol. 2010, 15, 37–48. [Google Scholar]
  437. Malche, T.; Maheshwary, P. Internet of Things (IoT) for building smart home system. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on I-SMAC (IoT in Social, Mobile, Analytics and Cloud)(I-SMAC), Palladam, India, 10–11 February 2017; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  438. Fatimah, Y.A.; Govindan, K.; Murniningsih, R.; Setiawan, A. Industry 4.0 based sustainable circular economy approach for smart waste management system to achieve sustainable development goals: A case study of Indonesia. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 269, 122263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  439. Ghorpade-Aher, J.; Wadkar, A.; Kamble, J.; Bagade, U.; Pagare, V. Smart dustbin: An efficient garbage management approach for a healthy society. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Information, Communication, Engineering and Technology (ICICET), Pune, India, 29–31 August 2018; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  440. Folianto, F.; Low, Y.S.; Yeow, W.L. Smartbin: Smart waste management system. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Tenth International Conference on Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information Processing (ISSNIP), Singapore, 7–9 April 2015; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  441. Kariapper, R.; Pirapuraj, P.; Razeeth, M.S.; Nafrees, A.; Rameez, K. Smart garbage collection using GPS & Shortest path algorithm. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Pune Section International Conference (PuneCon), Pune, India, 18–20 December 2019; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  442. Xu, R.; Nikouei, S.Y.; Nagothu, D.; Fitwi, A.; Chen, Y. Blendsps: A blockchain-enabled decentralized smart public safety system. Smart Cities 2020, 3, 928–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  443. Bistry, H.; Zhang, J. A cloud computing approach to complex robot vision tasks using smart camera systems. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Taipei, Taiwan, 18–22 October 2010; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  444. Minnikhanov, R.; Dagaeva, M.; Anikin, I.; Bolshakov, T.; Makhmutova, A.; Mingulov, K. Detection of Traffic Anomalies for a Safety System of Smart City. 2020. Available online: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2667/paper74.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2023).
  445. Hampapur, A.; Brown, L.; Connell, J.; Pankanti, S.; Senior, A.; Tian, Y. Smart surveillance: Applications, technologies and implications. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Information, Communications and Signal Processing, 2003 and the Fourth Pacific Rim Conference on Multimedia. Proceedings of the 2003 Joint, Singapore, 15–18 December 2003; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  446. Kılkış, Ş.; Krajačić, G.; Duić, N.; Rosen, M.A.; Al-Nimr, M.A. Accelerating mitigation of climate change with sustainable development of energy, water and environment systems. Energy Convers. Manag. 2021, 245, 114606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  447. Ullo, S.L.; Sinha, G.R. Advances in smart environment monitoring systems using IoT and sensors. Sensors 2020, 20, 3113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  448. Morton, J.F. The impact of climate change on smallholder and subsistence agriculture. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 19680–19685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  449. Raleigh, C.; Urdal, H. Climate change, environmental degradation and armed conflict. Pol. Geogr. 2007, 26, 674–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  450. Govada, S.S.; Rodgers, T.; Cheng, L.; Chung, H. Smart environment for smart and sustainable Hong Kong. In Smart Environment for Smart Cities; Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 57–90. [Google Scholar]
  451. Mishbah, M.; Purwandari, B.; Sensuse, D.I. Systematic review and meta-analysis of proposed smart village conceptual model: Objectives, strategies, dimensions, and foundations. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Information Technology Systems and Innovation (ICITSI), Bandung, Indonesia, 22–26 October 2018; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  452. Cvar, N.; Trilar, J.; Kos, A.; Volk, M.; Stojmenova Duh, E. The use of IoT technology in smart cities and smart villages: Similarities, differences, and future prospects. Sensors 2020, 20, 3897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  453. Gu, H.; Diao, Y.; Liu, W.; Zhang, X. The design of smart home platform based on cloud computing. In Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Electronic & Mechanical Engineering and Information Technology, Harbin, China, 12–14 August 2011; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  454. Gustavsson, E.; Elander, I. Cocky and climate smart? Climate change mitigation and place-branding in three Swedish towns. Local Environ. 2012, 17, 769–782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  455. Balta-Ozkan, N.; Davidson, R.; Bicket, M.; Whitmarsh, L. Social barriers to the adoption of smart homes. Energy Policy 2013, 63, 363–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  456. Balta-Ozkan, N.; Davidson, R.; Bicket, M.; Whitmarsh, L. The development of smart homes market in the UK. Energy 2013, 60, 361–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  457. Ehrenhard, M.; Kijl, B.; Nieuwenhuis, L. Market adoption barriers of multi-stakeholder technology: Smart homes for the aging population. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 89, 306–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  458. Elmaghraby, A.S.; Losavio, M.M. Cyber security challenges in Smart Cities: Safety, security and privacy. J. Adv. Res. 2014, 5, 491–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  459. Ranade, P.; Londhe, S.; Mishra, A. Smart villages through information technology–need of emerging India. Int. J. Inf. Technol. 2015, 3, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  460. Wilson, C.; Hargreaves, T.; Hauxwell-Baldwin, R. Smart homes and their users: A systematic analysis and key challenges. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 2015, 19, 463–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  461. Kaur, K. The idea of Smart villages based on Internet of Things (IoT). Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol. (IRJET) 2016, 3, 165–168. [Google Scholar]
  462. Kim, S.; Nussbaum, M.A.; Gabbard, J.L. Augmented reality “smart glasses” in the workplace: Industry perspectives and challenges for worker safety and health. IIE Trans. Occup. Ergon. Hum. Factors 2016, 4, 253–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  463. Lobaccaro, G.; Carlucci, S.; Löfström, E. A review of systems and technologies for smart homes and smart grids. Energies 2016, 9, 348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  464. Wilson, C.; Hargreaves, T.; Hauxwell-Baldwin, R. Benefits and risks of smart home technologies. Energy Policy 2017, 103, 72–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  465. Partey, S.T.; Zougmoré, R.B.; Ouédraogo, M.; Campbell, B.M. Developing climate-smart agriculture to face climate variability in West Africa: Challenges and lessons learnt. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 187, 285–295. [Google Scholar]
  466. Rutqvist, D.; Kleyko, D.; Blomstedt, F. An automated machine learning approach for smart waste management systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2019, 16, 384–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  467. Chan, M.; Campo, E.; Estève, D.; Fourniols, J.Y. Smart homes—Current features and future perspectives. Maturitas 2009, 64, 90–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  468. Shuhaiber, A.; Mashal, I. Understanding users’ acceptance of smart homes. Technol. Soc. 2019, 58, 101110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  469. Randell-Moon, H.E.K.; Hynes, D. ‘Too smart’: Infrastructuring the Internet through regional and rural smart policy in Australia. Policy Internet 2022, 14, 151–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  470. Zhang, A.; Venkatesh, V.; Liu, Y.; Wan, M.; Qu, T.; Huisingh, D. Barriers to smart waste management for a circular economy in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 240, 118198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  471. Komorowski, Ł.; Stanny, M. Smart villages: Where can they happen? Land 2020, 9, 151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  472. Aziiza, A.; Susanto, T.D. The smart village model for rural area (case study: Banyuwangi Regency). In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  473. Shah, A.A.I.; Fauzi, S.S.M.; Gining, R.A.J.M.; Razak, T.R.; Jamaluddin, M.N.F.; Maskat, R. A review of IoT-based smart waste level monitoring system for smart cities. Indones. J. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 2021, 21, 450–456. [Google Scholar]
  474. Jacobsson, A.; Davidsson, P. Towards a model of privacy and security for smart homes. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 2nd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), Milan, Italy, 14–16 December 2015; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  475. Shami, M.R.; Rad, V.B.; Moinifar, M. The structural model of indicators for evaluating the quality of urban smart living. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 176, 121427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  476. Srivatsa, P. Rural urban migration: Disturbing the equilibrium between smart cities and smart villages. FIIB Bus. Rev. 2015, 4, 3–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  477. Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Chen, Y.; Long, H. The process and driving forces of rural hollowing in China under rapid urbanization. J. Geogr. Sci. 2010, 20, 876–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  478. Pileggi, S.F. Walking Together Indicator (WTI): Understanding and Measuring World Inequality. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Overview of the selected papers classified by application domain.
Figure 1. Overview of the selected papers classified by application domain.
Sustainability 15 07908 g001
Figure 2. Summary of major barriers and limitations.
Figure 2. Summary of major barriers and limitations.
Sustainability 15 07908 g002
Table 1. Country classification.
Table 1. Country classification.
More Developed CountriesLess Developed CountriesLeast Developed Countries
Europe, Northern America, Australia/New Zealand, and Japan [45].Countries from Africa and Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, plus Melanesia, Micronesia, and Polynesia [45].Includes 46 countries located in sub-Saharan Africa (32), Northern Africa and Western Asia (2), Central and Southern Asia (4), Eastern and South-Eastern Asia (4), Latin America and the Caribbean (1), and Oceania (3) [45].
Table 2. Overview of rural areas’ characteristics.
Table 2. Overview of rural areas’ characteristics.
IndicatorMore Developed CountriesLess Developed Countries Least Developed Countries
Geography and Demography
  • High population density (over 78% of the land occupied by human settlements) [43].
  • High rate of people moving to urban cities, especially old people who look for better healthcare services [46,47].
  • Decreasing population in rural regions, due mostly to limited job opportunities that are usually confined by agriculture [48].
  • Lower population density (50–78% of the land occupied by human settlements) [43].
  • The migration rate is high due to limited resources [49].
  • Limited population density (less than 50% of the land occupied by human settlements) [43].
  • Rural regions are the most inhabited [50]
Economy
  • Economy tends to be less diverse and includes specific business, such as agriculture and fishing, services and tourism [51].
  • Economic growth is limited due to labor shortages [24,52].
  • Rural regions usually receive less attention to enhance people’s income [53].
  • Economy is usually not subject to regulation or taxation, which makes it difficult to develop formal economic sectors [54].
  • Agriculture and handicrafts as the primary source of income [55,56].
  • Self-sufficient resources [57].
  • Economic activities usually limited due to less developed infrastructure and transportation networks [58].
  • Low financial incentivization makes it difficult to develop startups [59].
  • A mix of traditional livelihoods, such as agriculture, tourism, and handicrafts [60].
  • The lack of facilities and technology is a challenge for rural economic growth [61].
  • Infrastructure and services are very limited, which discourages business and investment [62].
Social and Cultural
  • Gender roles play an important role in assigning jobs.
  • People move to urban cities looking for better living standards [63].
  • Cultural and ethnic diversity [64].
  • Limited access to education, healthcare, and internet services [65].
  • Local rural communities have different traditions and values [66].
  • Limited income, access to education, healthcare, and modern technology [67].
  • Gender roles still less developed [68,69].
  • Strong social ties based on family [70].
  • Limited income [10,71].
  • Limited access to education and healthcare, raising poverty level [72,73].
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Alabdali, S.A.; Pileggi, S.F.; Cetindamar, D. Influential Factors, Enablers, and Barriers to Adopting Smart Technology in Rural Regions: A Literature Review. Sustainability 2023, 15, 7908. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107908

AMA Style

Alabdali SA, Pileggi SF, Cetindamar D. Influential Factors, Enablers, and Barriers to Adopting Smart Technology in Rural Regions: A Literature Review. Sustainability. 2023; 15(10):7908. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107908

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alabdali, Salem Ahmed, Salvatore Flavio Pileggi, and Dilek Cetindamar. 2023. "Influential Factors, Enablers, and Barriers to Adopting Smart Technology in Rural Regions: A Literature Review" Sustainability 15, no. 10: 7908. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107908

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop