EXPLORING THE CORRELATION OF MUNICIPAL ICT BUDGET TO ANNUAL

CITY-VISITOR COUNTS AND STATE ANNUAL TOURISM INCOME IN THE

SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A QUANTITATIVE STUDY

by

Christophe A. St. Luce

KIMBERLY LOWREY, PhD, Faculty Mentor and Chair

JAMES WEBB, PhD, Committee Member

KATHLEEN HARGISS, PhD, Committee Member

Todd Wilson, PhD, Dean, School of Business and Technology

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Information Technology

Capella University

April 2019




ProQuest Number: 13863260




All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.






ProQuest 13863260

Published by ProQuest LLC (2019 ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.


All rights reserved.
This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.


ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
© Christophe A. St. Luce, 2019
 Abstract

Municipal managers of midsized southeastern tourist cities compete for financial gain realized by

tourists spending money during travel. Municipal managers must decide if spending on ICT is

justifiable regarding enhancing tourism. This quantitative ex post facto research study

investigated if a correlation existed between the variables of municipal ICT budget and annual

city-visitor counts. The research also investigated if a correlation existed between the variables

of municipal ICT budget and state annual tourism income. A convenience sample was utilized

for the study that consisted of 27 midsized cities throughout eight southeastern states in the

United States of America. Eleven historical years of financial data (2005–2015) were analyzed

using the Shapiro-Wilk Test of Normality, Spearman rho, and scatterplots. This research found

that there was a strong, positive relationship between the municipal ICT budget allocated by

midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and annual city-visitor counts. This research found

that there was a significant, moderate positive relationship between the municipal ICT budget

allocated by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and state annual tourism income

received. To maximize the return on investment, municipal managers must think long term and

must incorporate investments into an overall ICT strategy.

 Dedication

I dedicate this dissertation to my wife, Jeane, whose unending love and support of my

continuing education allowed me to pursue this dream. After completing my master’s courses

and graduating, she urged me to take a short break and pursue a doctoral degree. Our dream of

having a brighter future came true. My stepdaughters, Shannon and Lauren, provided me with

the laughs needed along this journey and the aspiration to be a positive role model in their lives,

to help shape their future, and to show them that anything is possible. My mother, Pearl, who

always believed in the efforts and educational endeavors of her four children, remained a

constant source of support. My sisters, Suzanne and Dawn, and my brother, Phillip, were always

only a text message or e-mail away when I needed a break. A heartfelt thank you goes out to all

of my friends and coworkers who also supported me along this wonderful and insightful doctoral

journey. We learned a lot as we shared stories of higher education trials and tribulations.

iv
 Acknowledgments

I want to express my sincere thanks to Dr. Kimberly Lowrey, my dissertation committee

chair, and advisor. She has provided a wealth of knowledge, positive insight, and constructive

criticism that has helped me to produce this quality product. I would also like to thank Drs.

Kathleen Hargiss and James Webb, my other dissertation committee members, for their inputs

and insights. I also acknowledge my cohorts at Capella University for taking the bold step in

becoming the first class enrolled in 2015 to pursue the Doctorate in Information Technology at

Capella University. My coworkers also provided much support by always asking how my

studies were proceeding.

v
 Table of Contents

Acknowledgments................................................................................................................v

Table of Contents............................................................................................................... vi

List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix

List of Figures .................................................................................................................... xi

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1

Introduction..............................................................................................................1

Background ..............................................................................................................4

Business Technical Problem ....................................................................................5

Research Purpose .....................................................................................................8

Research Questions..................................................................................................8

Rationale ..................................................................................................................9

Theoretical Framework ..........................................................................................10

Significance............................................................................................................13

Definition of Terms................................................................................................14

Assumptions and Limitations ................................................................................18

Organization for Remainder of Study....................................................................20

Summary................................................................................................................20

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................21

Introduction to the Literature Review....................................................................21

Literature Review...................................................................................................22

Summary................................................................................................................49

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY .....................................................................................50

vi
 Introduction............................................................................................................50

Design and Methodology.......................................................................................50

Population and Sampling .......................................................................................52

Setting ....................................................................................................................53

Data Collection ......................................................................................................54

Instrumentation ......................................................................................................55

Hypotheses.............................................................................................................55

Data Analysis .........................................................................................................56

Validity and Reliability..........................................................................................60

Ethical Considerations ...........................................................................................61

Summary................................................................................................................62

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS ...................................................................................................63

Introduction............................................................................................................63

Data Collection Results..........................................................................................63

Descriptive Analysis ..............................................................................................65

Analysis of Hypotheses..........................................................................................74

Summary................................................................................................................81

CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................82

Introduction............................................................................................................82

Evaluation of Research Questions .........................................................................82

Discussion of the Findings.....................................................................................84

Fulfillment of Research Purpose............................................................................85

Contribution to Business Technical Problem ........................................................86

vii
 Recommendations for Further Research................................................................87

Conclusions............................................................................................................87

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................89

STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK ..........................................................................113

STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK AND SIGNATURE.........................................114

APPENDIX A. SURVEY................................................................................................115

APPENDIX B. STUDY SAMPLE CITIES ....................................................................116

APPENDIX C. STATE TOURISM COUNTS AND INCOME RECEIVED ................117

APPENDIX D. STUDY SAMPLE STATISTICAL DATA ...........................................125

viii
 List of Tables

Table 1. Hypothesis, Statistical Test, Predictor and Criterion Variables .........................57

Table 2. Input Parameters for A Priori Power Analysis ...................................................58

Table 3. Data Collection Results .......................................................................................64

Table 4. Descriptive Statistics............................................................................................65

Table 5. Shapiro-Wilk Test of Normality ...........................................................................66

Table 6. Correlation Matrix...............................................................................................76

Table C1. State of Alabama Visitors and Tourism Income..............................................117

Table C2. State of Florida Visitors and Tourism Income................................................118

Table C3. State of Georgia Visitors and Tourism Income...............................................119

Table C4. State of Louisiana Visitors and Tourism Income ............................................120

Table C5. State of Mississippi Visitors and Tourism Income ..........................................122

Table C6. State of North Carolina Visitors and Tourism Income ...................................123

Table C7. State of Texas Visitors and Tourism Income...................................................124

Table D1. Resident Populations From the 2010 Census of 27 Sample Cities Within Eight Sample
States..................................................................................................................125

Table D2. City of Huntsville, Alabama Annual ICT Budget and Visitors .......................126

Table D3. City of Cape Coral, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors .......................127

Table D4. City of Ft. Lauderdale, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors..................128

Table D5. City of Hialeah, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors .............................128

Table D6. City of Hollywood, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors ........................129

Table D7. City of Jacksonville, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors ......................130

Table D8. City of Miami, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors................................131

Table D9. City of Orlando, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors ............................132

Table D10. City of Pembroke Pines, Florida Annual ICT Budget And Visitors .............133

ix
Table D11. City of Tampa, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors.............................134

Table D12. City of Columbus, Georgia Annual ICT Budget and Visitors.......................135

Table D13. City of New Orleans, Louisiana Annual ICT Budget and Visitors ...............136

Table D14. City of Jackson, Mississippi Annual ICT Budget and Visitors .....................137

Table D15. City of Fayetteville, North Carolina Annual ICT Budget and Visitors.........137

Table D16. City of Greensboro, North Carolina Annual ICT Budget and Visitors ........139

Table D17. City of Amarillo, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors.............................140

Table D18. City of Arlington, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors............................141

Table D19. City of Austin, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors.................................142

Table D20. City of Brownsville, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors........................142

Table D21. City of Corpus Christi, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors...................144

Table D22. City of Fort Worth, Texas Annual ICT Budget And Visitors ........................145

Table D23. City of Garland, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors .............................146

Table D24. City of Grand Prairie, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors....................146

Table D25. City of Houston, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors .............................148

Table D26. City of Laredo, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors ...............................149

Table D27. City of Plano, Texas Annual ICT Budget And Visitors.................................149

Table D28. City of San Antonio, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors .......................150

Table D29. Composite of Sample Cities Data (2005 and 2015 ICT Budgets, Visitors, Tourist
Revenue) ............................................................................................................152

Table D30. All City Data (2005 – 2015 ICT Budgets, Visitors), State Visitors And Tourism
Income ...............................................................................................................154

x
 List of Figures

Figure 1. A Priori Power Analysis ....................................................................................59

Figure 2. Histogram for ICT Budget .................................................................................67

Figure 3. Histogram for City Visitors................................................................................68

Figure 4. Histogram for State Visitors ..............................................................................69

Figure 5. Histogram for State Tourism Income.................................................................70

Figure 6. Box and Whisker Plot for ICT Budget...............................................................71

Figure 7. Box and Whisker Plot for City Visitors .............................................................72

Figure 8. Box and Whisker Plot for State Visitors............................................................73

Figure 9. Box and Whisker Plot for State Tourism Income ..............................................74

Figure 10. Scatterplot of ICT Budget and City Visitors....................................................77

Figure 11. Scatterplot of ICT Budget and State Tourism Income.....................................78

Figure 12. Scatterplot of ICT Budget and State Visitors...................................................80

xi
 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Introduction

Managers of local governments face challenges from multiple areas that include

determining how information technology (IT) spending contributes to the performance of the

organization (Pang, 2014). A municipal manager must satisfy the social and technological needs

of a dynamic population and instill economic growth (Pang, 2014). The municipal manager

must also keep municipal operations on the forefront of technological advancements while

leveraging information systems that transformed from silos into commingled and interconnected

networks through the Internet of Things (Security Industry Association, 2016).

The Internet of Things (IoT), an interconnected mesh of devices that can communicate

with each other, is a paradigm that expands into urban development and the ubiquity of service

access (Zanella, Bui, Castellani, Vangelista, & Zorzi, 2014). Smart city development depends

upon underlying information and communication technologies infrastructure to communicate

between devices as part of the IoT (Bifulco, Tregua, Amitrano, & D'Auria, 2016). Government

leaders, whether at the municipal, state, or federal level, develop initiatives and policies with the

aid of technology to resolve social issues (Lee, 2015); municipal managers must also contend

with the IoT in the future development of cities. By 2009, the number of devices connected to

the Internet outnumbered humans (Mongelas, 2016). Still in its infancy, experts within the

Security Industry Association (2016) envisioned the IoT to become the system of systems that

globally allows for seamless communication. Protecting the IoT from denial-of-service attacks,

access by legitimate users to unauthorized information, and access by illegitimate users to any

information involves implementing cryptographic algorithms (Ding, Zhou, Cheng, & Lin, 2013)

with which municipal managers are not familiar.

1
 Shichiyakh, Klyuchnikov, Balashova, Novoselov, and Novosyolova (2016) described a

smart city as an environment that integrates systems into a dynamic social space blending

government, residents, transportation, and security. Smart cities and the emerging IoT industry

are likely to burgeon into a business of additional data management and the enhancement of

initiatives such as sustainable environments to residents at home and on the move (Kamel Boulos

& Al-Shorbaji, 2014). In a smart city, the informed consent of users to share data is as much of a

concern as protecting and warehousing the data by the municipality that develops an IoT

infrastructure due to the generation of personal information such as health statistics (Dutton,

2014).

Smart cities link information and communication technologies (ICT) to public services

such as transportation routes, schedules, and traffic delays into web and smartphone-enabled

services that are accessible by the public (Asensio et al., 2015). Municipal managers can use an

ICT infrastructure connected to the IoT to make the best decisions for promoting tourism,

distributing assets, monitoring security, and automating responses to incidents (Mongelas, 2016).

For example, Europe has a long history of advanced technological innovation for tourism with

ICT for urban development and providing travel schedules for visitors (Blanck, Ribeiro, &

Anzanello, 2019). Another example of ICT implementation for tourism is in San Francisco,

California, where the travel patterns of taxi cabs are available in real time to applications

available on smartphones allowing tourists to see where available taxicabs are within the

immediate location (Lanza et al., 2015). Smart city urban planners design communities to

embrace and accommodate development imbued with technology (Zygiaris, 2013).

The availability of ICT connects a city to the global market, which increases a city’s

economic growth capacity and aids in the enticement of development and travel to that city

2
(Zygiaris, 2013). For example, in Oakley, California, municipal managers developed a smart

city program in 2016 to develop a technology foundation (McCauley, 2016). With a smart city

program, municipal leaders in Oakley have positioned the city as one pioneering the adoption of

the technology by building an infrastructure that can share big sets of sensed data for residents

and visitors (City of Oakley, 2016).

Kitchin (2014) found that data collected from smart cities might provide a real-time

understanding of cities and the needs of the city’s inhabitants and tourists. The concept of big

data was created, which is the ability to store and analyze the massive amount of data collected

(Kitchin, 2014). Kim et al. (2014) expounded on the big data concept, explaining that the crux

of the importance of big data is being able to store data and analyze the data, as well as, use the

results to enhance business decisions and the ways municipal managers can truly take advantage

of the data. Sharing data between government entities remains a challenge for municipal

managers as methods to incorporate technology into business continue to be refined (Kim et al.,

2014).

Identifying and incorporating technology into business activities has been a research

topic since the 1970s (Yeh, Lee, & Pai, 2015). The incorporation of technology with tourism to

increase and attract tourists is needed, but this strategy requires comprehensive city planning to

create a smart city (G. Popescu, 2015). Pardo et al. (2011) noted, “A comprehensive view of

smart city innovation is comprised of technology, management, and policy innovations” (p. 187).

Municipal managers understand that the smart city will not solve all city issues (Meijer, Gil-

Garcia, & Bolivar, 2015). The smart city can be both a municipal development goal and a means

to purport a specific urban agenda by municipal managers (Vanolo, 2014). The smart city’s

effects on the economy, impact on living, people, governance, mobility, and environmental

3
characteristics must be considered while developing an urban agenda (Vanolo, 2014). The

acceptance and use of smart city technology, still an innovation, align with the technology

acceptance model, whereby there are perceived benefits and a low access barrier to usage

(Mallya & Sethumadhavan, 2017).

The purpose of Chapter One is to provide the foundation of the study by providing a

background, which includes a basis for research presented to the municipal manager of a city

where tourism is an economic driver. This chapter outlines the problem statement, research

purpose, research questions, rationale of the study, theoretical framework, significance of the

study, definition of terms, assumptions, limitations, delimitations, the scope of the study, and the

organization of the remainder of the dissertation. The next section includes an examination of

the background supporting the research topic.

Background

Tourism development

Tourism development can increase the quality of life for residents and sustained

community development resulting from monies spent by tourists (Woo et al., 2015). Although

the seasonality associated with tourism and the fluctuations in related employment status are

aspects that can carry little value with residents (García, Vázquez, & Macías, 2015), most

residents of cities are generally in favor of tourism exchange and of development if the benefits

of that exchange and development outweigh the costs (García et al., 2015). This type of

resident-tourist exchange is representative of social exchange theory (García et al., 2015).

From 2007 to 2016, tourism in the United States increased at the rate of 5–10% a year

(U.S. Travel Association, 2016). The impulsive and planned expenditures of tourists, much

more than local shoppers, provides a financial infusion to that destination (Choi, Law, & Heo,

4
2018). Tourism growth not only positively affects the economy but also spurs economic

development (Cárdenas-García et al., 2015). Focusing on the needs of more technologically

advanced tourists is also important to attract and increase repeated tourism of cities (G. Popescu,

2015). Tourism not only stimulates economic factors but can influence population shifts and

contribute to state budgets (Cárdenas-García et al., 2015). Increased tourism not only supports

increasing the labor force, but the influx of tourists to neighborhoods also increases the mixing of

cultures (García et al., 2015).

A gap in knowledge exists for municipal managers in the states of Alabama, Florida,

Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas as no research has been

performed regarding a correlation existing between the municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities,

annual city-visitor counts, and annual state tourism income. The next section explains the

general and specific problem of cities using technology to affect tourism.

Business Technical Problem

City tourism is defined as tourism to a city center and not specifically to a beach

destination, where the tourist and resident bear little distinction (Bock, 2015). City tourism has

increased for a variety of reasons such as cultural attractions and lower costs of travel. Since

2010, city trips have increased and surpassed beach trips to encompass 21% of the tourism

market (Bock, 2015). A previous study has found that tourism increases when the social aspect

of tourism is shared with an Internet audience (Bock, 2015). Ali and Frew (2014) expanded on

seminal research by Buhalis and Law (2008) on ICT being a bridge to positively affecting

tourism growth. Navío-Marco et al. (2018) updated the seminal research performed by Buhalis

and Law (2008) and found that in the ten years since the research, little has changed regarding a
5
lack of control of resources, inconsistent sustainable development, and that technology is still not

fully understood for its application in tourism. The city’s ease of using technology and its effect

on tourism income and tourism counts has not been explored. Tourist cities promote a virtual

representation that competes with other cities through ICTs (La Rocca, 2014). Tourists use

technology, such as ICTs, to share information about local restaurants, meetups, and hangouts as

easily as the residents of city’s population can perform the same set of tasks (La Rocca, 2014).

Smart city initiatives are new to municipal projects (Rochet & Pinzón Correa, 2016), and

this organizational change, while difficult, is conditional to the amount, speed, and ability for

municipal employees to adapt to the changes being implemented (K. Hultman & Hultman,

2015). Smart cities can take advantage of tourism information collected to direct the resources

of funding and staffing for future development, track the parts of cities that tourists frequently

travel, and aid administrators in designing traffic flow patterns (Bock, 2015). By not embracing

the movement of city tourism and implementing ICTs, municipal managers are not able to adapt

to changing development initiatives adequately or serve the needs of tourists more effectively

through urban development (Bock, 2015). In the new digital economy, municipal managers can

use the implementation and development of ICT to distinguish a particular tourist city from other

cities and promote distinctive activities (Nwankpa & Datta, 2017).

Technology advancements through ICT promote municipal employee skill development,

urban sustainability, and increase the opportunity for financial gain (Nwankpa & Datta, 2017),

which allows a city to broaden its stream of revenue. ICT initiatives aid the sustainable tourism

movement through such functions as curbing pollution and enhancing the experience for

travelers when arriving at a destination (Ali & Frew, 2014). Urban planners utilize ICT as part

6
of smart city governance to manage sustainability and green initiatives through traffic

management systems as more tourists arrive (Bifulco et al., 2016).

The general problem was that by not robustly embracing the movement of city tourism

and implementing ICTs, a city might not be able to serve the needs of its tourists (Bock, 2015).

Smart tourism technology has developed into any form of ICT that a tourist can use to interact

with or search for tourism content (Yoo et al., 2017). Through close interaction, the municipal

destination can portray itself to new tourists through the eyes of previous tourists’ experiences

(Neuhofer, Buhalis, & Ladkin, 2014). The implementation of ICT through system integration

and customization is critical to the development of a municipal destination’s tourism (Buhalis &

Law, 2008) which coordinates activities and compete amongst themselves through technology

innovations to acquire visitors (Navío-Marco, Ruiz-Gómez, & Sevilla-Sevilla, 2018). Seminal

research by Buhalis & Law (2008) was revisited ten years later by Navío-Marco et al., (2018)

where the same issues were identified. The specific problem was that midsized cities in the

southeastern United States are reducing the ability to grow tourism when the municipal budget

investment in ICT is not made (Navío-Marco et al., 2018).

Strategies to promote tourism growth and ICT development are increasingly more

common for municipal managers (Martins, 2014). Tourism is a multibillion-dollar industry, and

the close relationship of tourism to the intricacies of municipal management is essential for the

success of tourism growth for municipal managers (Martins, 2014). The integration of ICT by

municipal management into tourism development provides an increased experience value for

tourists (Neuhofer et al., 2014). The next section includes an examination of the research’s

purpose.

7
 Research Purpose

The purpose of this quantitative ex post facto correlation research study was to explore if

there was any correlation between the municipal budget allocated for Information and

Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and annual city-

visitor counts. The purpose of this ex post factor correlation research study was also to explore if

there was any correlation between the municipal budget allocated for Information and

Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and state annual

tourism income. Data were collected by reviewing municipal ICT budgets, annual city-visitor

counts, and annual tourism income from 27 midsized southeastern cities. Annual state tourism

income and annual state-visitor counts were also collected from the state tourism boards of the

sample cities. Historical data spanning 11 fiscal years (October through September) was

collected for this study. The study protocol involved gathering and researching data requested

via municipal websites. The next section includes a listing of the research questions.

Research Questions

This quantitative ex post facto study involved examining municipal ICT budgets, annual

city-visitor counts, and state annual tourism income from the sample. This examination would

be utilized to ascertain any correlation between the variables. Strategic plans typically include

strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis to gauge and interpret whether the

organization compares to similar-sized organizations within a shared market space (Davies,

Elwyn, & Thomas, 2014). This strategic analysis may help municipal managers in the decision-

making process of what goals and objectives should be the organization’s focus such as

economic and technological development initiatives. Observations (cases) included in the

sample set came from an 11 fiscal year history of the responding municipalities.

8
 Part of the funding sources received by municipalities is received from state sources,

county sources, tourist dollars, and levied taxes. Cities with few land developments and business

opportunities are highly reliant upon income generated from properties within municipal

boundaries and utility service funds for continued operations (Kamal, Bigdeli, Themistocleous,

& Morabito, 2015). With limited options for generating revenue, the decision-making process

for municipal managers to consider utilizing ICT services in a midsized city is highly scrutinized

and often met with resistance (Kamal et al., 2015). The following research questions were

developed for this study.

Research Question 1: What is the correlation, if any, between the municipal budget

allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and annual city-visitor counts?

Research Question 2: What is the correlation, if any, between the municipal budget

allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and state annual tourism income received? The next section includes an

examination of the rationale for the study.

Rationale

The rationale for conducting this study was to examine whether a correlation existed

between specific variables for municipal managers in the states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia,

Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. Does a correlation exist between

the municipal budget allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized

southeastern tourist municipalities and annual city-tourist counts? Does a correlation exist

between the municipal budget allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by

midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and state annual tourism income received? No

9
research existed regarding these research questions for municipal managers in the southeastern

United States.

The administrative staff of a municipal government performs several functions. A

municipal government maintains order, provides social services, levies taxes, and serves the

public good by providing services to residents when private industry is unable to (Hughes, 2017).

Aspects of municipalities run like a business where goods and services are provided in exchange

for payment (Michaels & Jon, 2015). For example, municipal residents and business owners

have access to water and sewer functions in exchange for payment (Michaels & Jon, 2015). An

active tourism base can add to the array of funds and taxes collected from the population of

residents and business owners to enhance funding most municipal operations (A. Popescu,

2014). The tourism industry and its financial contributions directly relate to local and global

economic development through job creation and the stimulation of the housing market (Zhang,

2015). The next section includes an examination of the theoretical framework surrounding the

study.

Theoretical Framework

Economic development initiatives play a role in developing a smart city to take

advantage of IT in driving the success of a geographic area (Weber, 2017). Municipal managers

must plan, develop, and instantiate performance indicators and milestones for a smart city to

promote economic standing (Weber, 2017). The adaptability of resources must be agile enough

to remain lean and still serve niche technology markets for the end user (Furukawa & Minami,

2013). Taking advantage of technological innovations and change involves increasing human

capital, training, and often the budget (Arnaboldi, Lapsley, & Steccolini, 2015). System design

and user belief are also two factors that play the role of accepting technology changes

10
(HornbÆK & Hertzum, 2017). In the technology acceptance model, the constructs of

technology’s perceived usefulness and its perceived ease of use are used to gauge innovation

adoption (HornbÆK & Hertzum, 2017). When attitudes portrayed by management and the

social environment are positive, users are more accepting of technology adoption (Hwang et al.,

2016) and its benefits in implementation and operation.

Municipal managers must shift operations from being policy-centric to being innovation-

centric to be competitive with private industry in offering technology alternatives for the public

being served (Walravens, 2015). Municipal management theory on governance for smart cities

suggests an integrated approach be taken regarding municipal investments, social implications,

administrative features, and political ramifications of technology being planned for and

implemented (Dameri & Benevolo, 2016).

Municipal managers must also focus on future implementations and implications of

technology as methods to improve the quality of life for residents (Meijer & Bolívar, 2016).

Training for technology and innovation shifts is a function that municipal managers must plan

for as the post-industrial economy is replaced with a highly technological one (Angelidou, 2015).

The knowledge-driven economy assists connected businesses and individuals in a smart city

environment through technology integration (Angelidou, 2015). Economic and technology shifts

have given municipal managers smart city options and theories to consider as methodologies to

curb spending and offer customized solutions to attract and cultivate tourists (Angelidou, 2015).

A relationship exists between tourists, residents, and social practices related to tourism

research (Lamers et al., 2017). When travel activities are observed through a tourism

framework, tourists can experience and gain meaningful skills and technology or other tangible

11
assets by traveling (Lamers et al., 2017). The tourism relationship is further developed when an

identity is formed by the tourist with the city being visited (Lamers et al., 2017).

In the technology acceptance model, individuals will not accept or use technology if the

intended user deems the technology to be difficult, intimidating, or not beneficial (HornbÆK &

Hertzum, 2017). The basis of the technology acceptance model is aspects of historical models

that also pertain to perceived ease of use and benefits: the self-efficacy theory and cost-benefit

paradigm (HornbÆK & Hertzum, 2017). The technology acceptance model involves using a

Likert-type scale to capture measurements. Information system researchers derived the

technology acceptance model from the theory of reasoned action, which incorporates beliefs as a

factor regarding whether a user implements a technology-based behavior (HornbÆK & Hertzum,

2017).

E. M. Rogers developed the diffusion of innovations theory as a social science theory

relating to the bell curve of the adoption of ideas (Ganglmair-Wooliscroft & Wooliscroft, 2016).

Individuals can use the diffusion of innovations theory to quantify the percentage of a population

that chooses to adopt an idea during the development stage (LaMorte, 2016). A very small

percentage (2.5%) of organizations or individuals will choose to adopt an idea as innovators

(Ganglmair-Wooliscroft & Wooliscroft, 2016), a precursor to the early adopter stage.

Smart city theories by Nam and Pardo (2011) and Chourabi et al. (2012) explore

technology, governance, and training in the application and development of smart city networks

for municipal operations. Through a commingling of technology and proper governance, the

smart city framework is utilized to derive municipal sustainability (Nam & Pardo, 2011). Nam

and Pardo (2011) stated that “smartness in the urban metropolitan context not only indicates

utilizing cutting-edge information and communication technologies (ICT) but also importantly

12
management and policy tools” (p. 185). Nam and Pardo (2011) proclaimed that municipal

managers typically exhibit patterns of being risk-averse, hence the 85% failure rate of technology

projects in municipalities.

The smart city theoretical framework described by Chourabi et al. (2012) has “eight

clusters of factors: (1) management and organization, (2) technology, (3) governance, (4) policy,

(5) people and communities, (6) the economy, (7) built infrastructure, and (8) the natural

environment” (p. 2291). The theoretical framework in this study utilized the smart city

theoretical framework. For this study, the smart city theoretical framework focused on the

economy, technology, infrastructure, and smart city initiatives for municipal managers in the

states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and

Texas in the implementation of ICT for tourism. The next section includes an examination of the

significance of the study.

Significance

The idea of having a smart city or being the manager of a smart city may be alluring to

municipal managers (Lara, Moreira Da Costa, Furlani, & Yigitcanlar, 2016) because a smart city

could mean more tourism revenue by adding to a city’s annual revenue (Prandi, Mirri, Ferretti, &

Salomoni, 2017). Cities must be dynamic, and city leaders must not apply development

initiatives with a copy–paste–edit mentality (Meijer et al., 2015). Municipal managers must

accept that the technology initiatives that work for one city will not work for all cities (G.

Popescu, 2015). Smart city development is often haphazard and hasty, where the process of

applying its methodologies to practice lacks direction and planning due to unproven technology

implementation track records (G. Popescu, 2015). By exploring the correlation between the sets

of research variables (municipal ICT budget and the correlation to annual city-visitor counts, as
13
well as municipal ICT budget and the correlation to state annual tourism income), the research

will provide insights for municipal managers in the states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia,

Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas regarding the efforts to promote

tourism for the cities they manage. Municipal managers may justify the expense of these ICT

innovation implementations as a cost for added tourism marketing options. The next section

includes an examination of the definition of the terms utilized.

Definition of Terms

Annual city-visitor counts: Annual city-visitor counts is defined as the number of

individual tourists to enter a city boundary during a calendar or fiscal year (Neher, Duffield, &

Patterson, 2013).

Chief Information Officer: Chief Information Officer is defined as the C-level person

responsible for the technology initiatives (either all or public facing) of an organization (Banker,

Hu, Pavlou, & Luftman, 2011).

Community Redevelopment Agency: Community Redevelopment Agency is defined as a

function created by a municipality or county to focus redevelopment on areas of slum and blight.

The members of the agency may also focus on business relations and tourism enhancements

(Quinones & Benjamin, 1994).

Digital Video Recorder: Digital Video Recorder is defined as an appliance that records

audio and video from one or more video sources and stores the video for playback and searching

(Wilbur, 2008).

Electronic Data Interchange (EDI): Electronic Data Interchange is defined as a

telecommunications interchange between businesses using a standardized format. Although

14
businesses that participated in EDI initially needed to be within the same sector; that is no longer

the case (Engel et al., 2016).

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP): Enterprise Resource Planning is defined as a

software solution package that enables organizational leaders to integrate and manage several

functions into a common system and allows the sharing of data in real time (Bhumgara &

Sayyed, 2017).

Geographic Information System: Geographic Information System is defined as a

computerized system of hardware and software that individuals can use to visualize, analyze, and

interpret data in a geospatial manner (Tsagaris, Seck, Keeler, & Rowe, 2016).

Global Positioning System: Global Positioning System is defined as a multi-satellite-

based system for navigation through transmitters and receivers that depict speed, direction, and

elevation (Maddison & Ni Mhurchu, 2009).

Hedonic-motivation systems: Hedonic-motivation systems is defined as organizational

social media systems used primarily to satisfy intrinsic motivations (Lowry, Gaskin, Twyman,

Hammer, & Roberts, 2013).

Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs): Information and Communication

Technologies is defined as a generic term for telecommunication devices and media used to

integrate voice, data, satellite, and video conferencing systems accessible on a common or

bridged network (Hoque & Alam, 2010).

Internet of Things (IoT): Internet of Things is defined as an interconnected network of

Internet Protocol (IP) enabled devices that communicate with one another and other networked

devices (Pei, Wang, Wang, & Li, 2013).

15
 Municipal Budget: Municipal Budget is defined as the operating budget for a

municipality. The operating budget for a municipality includes all revenues and expenses that

are incurred during a fiscal year (City of Hollywood Budget Division, 2017).

Municipal Initial Investment: Municipal Initial Investment is defined as the monies spent

on municipal capital expenditures (startup costs), not including continual operating expenditures

(recurring costs) (Athanasiou, Tsalkidis, Kalogirou, & Voudrias, 2015).

Machine to Machine (M2M): Machine to Machine is a broad term used to define the

telecommunications exchange of networked devices and performing actions without human

intervention (Chen, Wan, & Li, 2012).

Municipal manager or City Manager: Municipal manager or City Manager is defined as

the chief executive officer of a municipality. This appointed entity reports directly to the city

council or city commission and is responsible for the day-to-day management of all city

functions (Nelson & Svara, 2012). This position may also include the title of chief

administrative officer.

Network Video Recorder: Network Video Recorder is defined as an appliance that stores

preprocessed audio and video from one or more digital camera streams for playback and

searching through a network-video-recorder-compatible software program (Ma, Chen, Li, &

Yang, 2018).

Near-field communication: Near-field communication is defined as communication over

very short distances through wireless technology by contact or near-contact of devices (Chang,

Wang, & Hung, 2013).

16
 Power over Ethernet: Power over Ethernet is defined as a process of supplying the

electrical power needed by networking equipment through the same cables used to transmit and

send networking data (Knisley, 2016).

Smart City Infrastructure: Smart City Infrastructure is defined as the underlying,

scalable, interconnected telecommunications network that dynamically sizes itself to meet the

demand of data that flows through the network (Celino & Kotoulas, 2013).

State annual tourism income: State annual tourism income is defined as the dollar amount

reported by a state tourism board of income received by visitors within a calendar or fiscal year

(Alam & Paramati, 2016).

Social Exchange Theory: Social Exchange Theory is defined as the belief that humans

use cost-benefit analysis when creating relationships (Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005).

Social Internet of things: Social Internet of Things is defined as the involvement of

individuals in the IoT movement by allowing access to sensed data through an object’s social

network (Truong, Lee, Askwith, & Lee, 2017).

Tourism Growth: Tourism Growth is defined as the increase in a region’s tourism

economy or an increase in tourism scale for a region (Zha, Jianping, & Zhiyong, 2017).

Wireless sensor network: Wireless sensor network is defined as a multinode network

usually of hundreds or thousands of nodes designed to monitor environmental conditions (Chi-Fu

& Yu-Chee, 2005).

The next section includes an examination of the assumptions, limitations, and

delimitations of the study.

17
 Assumptions and Limitations

Assumptions

Assumptions made for this study included that the municipal ICT budget and project

implementations were accurate for each municipality surveyed. Another assumption was that

each member of the sample provided accurate annual visitor counts and annual tourism income.

The assumption was made that the size of the sample was sufficient to detect a hypothesized

correlation as a generalization across tasks is suitable for the measurements in a quantitative

study (Moss, 1994). The researcher restricted the sample to eight midsized southeastern states,

and the results of the study are relevant to managers of midsized municipalities.

Limitations

The limitation of this study included the determination that the feasibility did not exist to

include cities with similar resident population densities throughout all 50 states in the United

States of America and popular tourist destinations abroad as municipal budgets and priorities

differ within national and international regions. The research results also contained some

limitations. Of the 49 queried population cities, the sample produced a total of 27 responsive

cities. The remaining 22 cities in the population either did not respond to the data request, or

cited McBurney v. Young, 569 U.S. (2013) as their reason for not sending data. The ability for

municipality leaders to cite McBurney v. Young, 569 U.S. (2013) may restrict future researchers

from requesting updated sets of the data used for this research.

Downward financial times, such as the Great Recession, which was the longest since

World War II and lasted from December 2007 through parts of 2009 (Rich, 2013), may also

continue to affect municipalities in a manner that is more detrimental than private organizations.

Economic development halted. Hardened financial times restrict the municipal manager
18
(Paroutis, Bennett, & Heracleous, 2014) from sustaining development and implementing

strategic plans.

The data requested and collected came from publicly available secondary sources.

Furthermore, this study was the first doctoral-level research project initiated by the researcher. A

researcher with additional experience may have other techniques for retrieving updated sets of

the data used for this research. The research was quantitative and involved looking at municipal

ICT budgets, strategic plans, visioning plans, and annual city-visitor counts from municipalities,

as well as state annual tourism income as reported from state tourism boards. As the study was

not qualitative, the researcher did not consider the desires or thoughts of municipal managers

toward smart city infrastructure implementation.

Delimitations

The scope of the study was to contribute new knowledge and advance the technological

knowledge base by exploring a business area of need for municipal managers and urban

planners, which involved examining the means to serve the needs of tourists and residents

through technology. The delimitations of the study included a study population of 49 midsized

cities in eight southern states. The study’s sample was reduced to the 27 responding cities from

the 49 that were queried. A quantitative ex post facto study method was suitable, as the study

consisted entirely of researching secondary data. The study should not serve as a definitive or

sole guide for municipal managers to follow regarding whether to make an investment in ICT for

tourism. The next section includes an examination of the organizations of the remainder of the

study.

19
 Organization for Remainder of Study

The remainder of the study includes four chapters. Chapter Two will include a historical

representation of technological, managerial, city organization, projects, travel, technology, and

innovation aspects that contributed to the basis for the study. Chapter Three will include a

description of the research methodology used and any ethical considerations that arose from the

data acquisition and interpretation. Chapter Four will include the data analysis and the results of

the study. Chapter Five will conclude the dissertation with a summary, research findings, and

potential areas for future research on this topic.

Summary

Chapter One included the research study’s population, sample, the significance of the

study, design, theoretical framework, assumptions, and its purpose. The chapter included a

discussion of why the researcher chose the sample and the importance of the sample to municipal

budgeting and a municipal manager’s ability to fund ICT development. The chapter also

included concerns among municipal managers over privacy and managing data generated by

ICTs, while the research serves the needs of both residents and tourists. Chapter Two will cover

the literature review of articles relating to the research and gap in knowledge.

20
 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction to the Literature Review

This literature review is an outline of previous research on the challenges of technology,

its historical advantages, and public-sector governance concerning the handling of innovation in

the public sector and the history of cities. A peer-review process is a form of quality control in

reviewing sources that provide the foundation for research (Pinzur, 2018). This review served to

identify seminal works and the key aspects of public sector management, technology

management, big data, innovation, city tourism, and the management of IT projects. The

research was performed to fill the knowledge gap of urban digitalism expansion efforts that

either positively or negatively affect tourism via peer-reviewed and technology industry sources.

The review also provides a foundation on which to build additional research.

The literature review involved evaluating more than 150 peer-reviewed journals,

government publications, and IT industry articles to determine a gap in the knowledge and using

the sources to formulate the research questions and hypotheses for this quantitative ex post facto

correlation study. The articles included industry and government analyses on the future of smart

city development and what role the government should have in shaping smart city usage. A

historical analysis of technology implementation for municipalities, city tourism, and

municipalities dealing with risk aversion and lack of financial and human resources to implement

technology projects comprised a portion of the makeup of the literature review. Project

implementation of dynamic, new (such as smart city technology), or uncertain technology is

plagued with risk (Liu & Wang, 2014).

21
 Literature Review

Comprehension of the factors that comprise business dilemmas for municipal managers

of urban development and technology initiatives begins with a literary analysis of technology

project management, e-government initiatives, and innovation challenges. Although business

owners and hoteliers once considered the availability of public Internet access as a luxury

amenity, the availability of public Internet access is one of the first amenities searched for at

many establishments by tourists (Lavassani, Movahedi, & Parry, 2014). Lavassani, et al. (2014)

commented on the ubiquity of Internet access as a tool required for business units to function in

daily operations such as sales, the management of data, and purchasing. The

telecommunications giants, AT&T and Comcast, increased service ubiquity by providing access

to the publicly shared portions of home and business routers used by customers of those entities,

broadening the availability of high-speed Internet through thousands of hotspots for residents and

tourists while traveling (Comcast, 2016).

In 2014, there were 171 million smartphones in the United States, with ownership

estimates reaching 236.8 million smartphones in 2019 (Statistica, 2016). In 2014, the population

of the United States was 318.9 million, which meant that almost half of the population in the

United States had a smartphone in 2014 (Statistica, 2016). With the number of smartphone

owners only expected to increase, the connected and smart city, especially as a function of

tourism generation, will become an expectation and not simply a feature of convenience, as ICT

leads the smart city development (Chourabi et al., 2012). The next section includes an

examination of public sector management.

22
Public Sector Management

The typical bureaucratic style of municipal management appeared in the following

excerpt from Friedrich in 1940: “Public policy . . . is a continuous process, the formation of

which is inseparable from its execution. . . . Public policy is being formed as it is being executed,

and it is likewise being executed as it is being formed” (as cited in Smith & Taebel, 1985, p.

165). Municipal managers have sought the input of technology implementers to increase

efficiency, reduce bureaucracy, and assist in the decision-making process, as they have an

arsenal of technology that was not available in the 20th century to assist in the resolution of

urban matters (Pang, Lee, & DeLone, 2014). The introduction of innovation through strategic

implementation into the public-sector management bureaucracy has forced municipal managers

to seek the counsel of consultants (Seyed Kalali & Heidari, 2016). Consultants may also assist

with retraining staff to make them better able to support the implementation of new technology

and business initiatives (Aftandilyants, 2015). As the municipal staff is the most crucial resource

of any agency, management consultants may also aid in increasing the employees’ performance

(West & Blackman, 2015). Public sector agencies without sufficient resources face difficulties

including developing initiatives and strong institutions that can meet industry, state, or federal

standards (Aftandilyants, 2015) and may cobble together insufficient networks with inoperable

technology (Kaneshige, 2016). In some instances of oversight, Federal direction is required.

The uniquely complex nature of a public-sector agency compared to a private-sector

agency entails social responsibility, political influence, and expectations of change by the society

the public-sector agency represents (Arnaboldi et al., 2015). For example, in August 2017, the

United States federal government recognized the need to ensure additional safeguards were in

place for public-sector agencies whose leaders desired to use IoT technology by introducing a

23
Senate bill titled the Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity Improvement Act of 2017, to

improve the security of IoT devices (Bjorlin, 2017). The ability of the United States federal

government to enforce additional IoT security safeguards remains unknown but is likely to be

difficult as guidelines remain limited (Vijayan, 2017).

Municipal managers managing risk in the public sector have adopted the principles and

guidelines utilized in the private sector to determine what budget cuts need to be made during the

fiscal year budgeting process (Palermo, 2014). The financial accountability of municipal

managers to governing bodies, residents, and business owners makes the municipal manager

more adverse to risk and less likely to engage in non-standard technology practices (Palermo,

2014). Lingering stagflation and lower property values have left municipal managers scrambling

to find alternative ways to finance operational costs—compounding the need to be risk averse

(Flannigan, 2017) in the financing of technology, the development of ventures, and the

satisfaction of performance to the public.

Among monthly or annual performance indicator measures, public-sector agencies

include factors such as employee training and development, recruitment, and the average time

required to close resolutions or public service calls (Speklé & Verbeeten, 2014). Joint ventures

between public sector agencies can involve sharing resources, building trust, and developing

control packages to share for increased efficiency (Holum & Marthe Liss, 2016). Formal

bureaucratic measures are still necessary to share resources in the form of adopting interlocal

agreements and memoranda of understanding between associated public-sector agencies. Policy

stipulation and a direct reliance on human resources further complicate the proper application

and meeting of performance indicators (Arnaboldi et al., 2015) and sharing data with staff.

24
 The need to employ staff who, because of the implementation of innovation, must

interact with the public at large and not solely with coworkers has exacerbated the need to fill the

knowledge gap by hiring and sustaining qualified municipal technology employees (Jacobson &

Sowa, 2016). Outsourcing government services through performance-based contracts may

include public-private partnerships when internal staff cannot meet the standards to provide those

services for the public (Nyland & Pettersen, 2015). The push for technology advancements for

municipal managers is largely coming from bureaucratic leaders (Rathore et al., 2018), which

can further perpetuate the need for outsourced technology services. The highest-ranked

performance tool, the municipal budget, typically constrains municipal managers in

implementing newer services by tying resources (financial and human) to political influence and

governance (Arnaboldi et al., 2015).

Governance, or how a municipal entity interacts with its stakeholders and the public to

make achievements, can be complex due to urban processes resulting from policy or project

implementations (Kim & Kim, 2017). Governance and policy changes, especially changes that

affect urban spaces, require interaction between those managing governance, those creating

policy, and those most affected by the policy (Nasiri, 2017). The most vocal of the ones affected

by change tend to get the most attention at public hearings to ensure the satisfaction of expressed

needs and wants. Change is never an easy task to accomplish, and people typically fear what is

new to them (Nasiri, 2017). The next section includes an examination of citizen assistance

delivery.

Citizen Assistance Delivery

The economic boom of the 1950s and 1960s led to a focus on city planning during the

1970s (Hall, 2014). Systems theory and computer-aided design assisted developers in the 1960s

25
with the creation of citywide master plans and development procedures that would govern how

to develop areas of a city based on the desired makeup of the city by elected leaders (Hall, 2014).

Development that could spur the growth of areas became the focus over a means to control urban

growth (Hall, 2014). The economic recession and hardships that occurred during the 1970s had

lasting effects into the 1980s, where city centers then became the focus of redevelopment by

urban planners in delivering service (Hall, 2014).

At the start of the 1990s, redevelopment increased due to changes in the economy and the

integration of ICT that shifted the urban landscape of nations (Meller & Hein, 2016). In the

early 2000s, municipal managers began undertaking the gentrification of cities as urban sprawl

spread and brownfields sat unused (Stabrowski, 2015). Hoyng (2016) noted that extremely fast

redevelopment of a city, to implement smart city technology, can create a breakdown in politics

and cause people to actively object to the urban redevelopment.

In 2014, 54% of the world’s population was in urban areas, which are areas classified as

cities and towns, and that number is likely to grow by more than 1% every year through 2030

(World Health Organization, 2016). The migration and congregation of increasing numbers of

people to cities and city centers may self-promote the city as an area of attraction and

development (M. Porter, 2016). Stemming urbanization may not only be impossible, but

undesirable, to municipal managers; creating an urban policy framework assists municipal

managers in resource sharing and process development in the event of urban crises, such as

disasters, which can displace residents, close businesses, and disrupt services (Schindler, Mitlin,

& Marvin, 2018). The next section includes an examination of municipal tourism.

Municipal Tourism

26
 The Internet has changed the behavior of tourists and the ability to consume and generate

shared and sensed data. The freedom of travel choice has burgeoned, and the expectation is that

responses to queries of destination information will be much shorter as technology advances

(Navío-Marco et al., 2018). Information technology development has a profound effect on

tourism as a partner in marketing, distribution, and organizing a business for travel-related

services (Law, Buhalis, & Cobanoglu, 2014).

Part of the duty of municipal managers includes the responsibility to decide what

strategies will be implemented to promote economic success through business and tourism

development (Martins, 2014). The municipal manager is also faced with developing,

implementing, and continually promoting sustainable tourism by way of social, economic, and

environmental factors that are dependent upon travel frequency, population shifts, and natural

resource availability (Torres-Delgado & Palomeque, 2014). While municipal managers may

benefit from an increase to revenue for municipal budgets due to tourism expansion, drawbacks

such as increased traffic, requirements for added staff, and additional wear and tear on the public

infrastructure must also be considered (Kapmeier, Florian, & Paulo, 2018) when developing

municipal tourism strategies. Municipal tourism strategies must also align with tourism policies

from the state level. State level tourism policies may contradict tourism strategies that municipal

managers may want to implement (Rodríguez, Williams, & Hall, 2014).

Tourist cities have little control over the experiences and outcomes realized by visitors,

and part of this failure is due to a lack of tourism options to generate additional revenue

(Choudhury & Goswami, 2013). The development and implementation of ICT for and within

the tourism industry have become a critical step for the industry to conduct business and

transform citizen services provided (Ali & Frew, 2014). The revenue generated by tourism is a

27
staggering amount. When referring to travel in the United States of America, Delener (2010)

noted, “Tourism provides $110 billion in tax revenue for federal, state, and local governments”

(p. 1126). An overseas visitor can spend more than $1,600 on a six-night trip within the United

States (Delener, 2010). The technology for the tourism industry still lacks in end-to-end

development while the Internet has become the primary resource for travel planning, and social

media outlets have become the primary resources for documenting travel experiences (Tfaily,

2018). Little municipal ICT exists to connect the points of travel planning and documenting the

travel experience. The next section includes an examination of the smart city infrastructure.

Smart City Infrastructure

The modernization of infrastructure, including the public goods infrastructure maintained

by a municipal, county, or state government, is necessary for an entity to remain competitive

(Glavas, Mathews, & Bianchi, 2017). The foray into an IoT infrastructure development project

will require the implementation of new skills for staff charged with its maintenance (Microsoft,

2016) and security. Existing technology staff will need training, or new staff will be necessary to

manage and maintain the new infrastructure (Muller, 2015) while consultants assist

organizational leaders in achieving innovations and understanding smart city technology assets

that can better serve the public’s dynamic needs (Oesterle, Buchwald, & Urbach, 2016).

Safeguarding these smart city technological assets from attacks becomes the responsibility of

newly trained staff. Public sector IT assets become specific targets of attack through malware

directed toward government computers, and the malware’s function is to intercept downloads

and replace the downloaded data on IoT networks with compromised applications (Kan, 2016).

The IoT is a global technology concept used to improve efficiencies throughout all

sectors and is likely to exceed $947 billion in worth by 2019 and is dependent upon the creation

28
of a sound infrastructure (5G Americas, 2016). As the need for IoT components such as

processing chips to drive technology development for the IoT and near-field communication

increases as a result of more connected homes, vehicles, and other wearables, chipmakers will

continue to see demand increase for semiconductor products (Theron, 2014). In an IoT

environment, smart governance includes social service and policy development by way of ICTs

(Meijer et al., 2015). As a boon for the tourism industry, the IoT market may add overall value

of up to $11 trillion (Coalition for Cybersecurity Policy & Law, 2016), which is an idea echoed

by Motorola Solutions Inc. (2016), whose leaders have noted that both private and public-sector

entities will benefit from the economic and technological benefits of a smart city when integrated

into urban plans. The difficulties of public sector municipal planners adopting change and

adapting to IoT initiatives will be a more difficult hurdle to overcome than any limitations of

technology, which are easily surpassed (Motorola Solutions Inc., 2016).

Municipal planners can utilize devices to interconnect difficult to reach areas to the IoT

when planning a smart city infrastructure. The development of a sound smart city infrastructure

will lay the foundation for intricate IoT devices communicating in a smart city with smart homes

and municipal management for more efficient municipal operations and enhanced public safety

for tourists (Lynggaard & Skouby, 2016). Tourists will benefit from smart city infrastructure

that is planned with the tourists’ vantage point taken into consideration. Technology projects

implemented as part of a smart city infrastructure can inform tourists of available parking spaces,

traffic conditions, and other environmental factors that could influence where they may visit

(Lanza et al., 2016).

Municipal investment in ICT and smart city infrastructure creates jobs and improves

public safety (Kathuria, 2016). The telecommunications sector continues to develop its

29
technology to achieve higher bandwidth in real-time with greater efficiency in order to satisfy the

growing need for broadband consumption as the smart city landscape develops (Kathuria, 2016).

The increased push of e-Government (government technology usage) by municipal managers

drives city-visitors to utilize online municipal databases and applications, increasing the need for

bandwidth and ICT infrastructure (Das, Singh, & Joseph, 2017). The next section includes an

examination of municipal technology projects and initiatives.

Municipal Technology Projects and Initiatives

Leaders of state and local non-federal agencies spend approximately $35 billion annually

on IT, and that amount has consistently increased each year (Brown & Brudney, 1998). Public

administrators look to IT managers for business process re-engineering and assistance in making

processes more efficient using technology implementation (Shearmur & Poirier, 2017). The

adoption of formal technological processes in an orderly manner can create more efficient means

to process information and make informed decisions (Zammuto, Griffith, Majchrzak, Dougherty,

& Faraj, 2007). Ensmenger (2012) noted that “More than three-quarters of all software

development projects fail to be completed” (p. 764) while municipal managers, faced with

financial restraint, must frequently attempt to do more with less, and are expected to keep cities

competitive and forward thinking with complex technological infrastructure upgrades

(Ensmenger, 2012). Public sector administrators cancel one-third of all IT projects, where

cancellation occurs due to the project being over budgeted or delayed (Moon, Jooho, & Chul-

Young, 2014). Organizational issues, including the management of staff by municipal managers,

also contributes to technology project failures (Moon et al., 2014).

Municipal managers have yet to combine technology for smart cities with urban area

development projects in a technology-driven manner to capture and realize the value of data that

30
is generated from smart city developments (Piovano, Garrido, Silva, & Galloso, 2014). Smart

city and urban development projects are susceptible to escalation and failure as a result of being

highly publicized and politicized (Nuijten, Keil, & Commandeur, 2016). Various aspects that

contribute to the failure rates of IT projects may include poor planning, a lack of support, and an

unjustified need. Projects may fail due to unproven technology (Partala & Saari, 2015).

Managing the projects’ success involves managing facets that include scope, budget,

expectations, complexity, and vendor competence (Partala & Saari, 2015).

The increased complexity of technology projects relates to the requirements of systems

thinking, that enables data integration between disparate systems and the need to satisfy an ever-

changing security requirement list to thwart threats against those systems (Bueno & Gallego,

2017). At the enterprise level, organizational leaders must embrace a holistic view of regulatory,

technical, and engineering compliance with the need to relate to the citizen or customer in the

delivery of services in the development process of systems and projects (Bueno & Gallego,

2017). Technology project risks that can contribute to the failure of implementation also include

the technological uncertainties of the unknown factors of new technology, the relationships that

must form between agencies and contractors, and the unforeseen situations that inherently arise

as the project proceeds (Mishra, Das, & Murray, 2015). Maylor, Turner, and Murray-Webster

(2013) noted that sociopolitical implications and the uncertainty of the unknown could

compound the layers of a municipal smart city project and raise the complexity level of

advancements higher than expected.

Many municipal managers embrace technological advancements but struggle to decide

which techniques to use to implement innovations (Cohen, Susan, & Mary, 2018) such as ICT

projects. In the National Technology Leadership Summit of 2011, one of the recommendations

31
for nonprofit leaders was to create a system that promotes collaborative exchange and

advancements beyond research sites (Sick, Preschitschek, Leker, & Bröring, 2018). Providing

technological advancements such as real-time traffic conditions, emergency alerts, and the

submission and interaction of interactive forms for public communication requires significant

resources and investment (Komninos et al., 2013) of municipal managers to implement those

advancements with minimal risk.

Uncertainty in technology projects breeds higher levels of risk; leaders develop risk

assessments to accommodate the unknown scenarios that can plague project implementation or

acceptance (Doty, 2015). No technology projects and initiatives are ever 100% successful in

initial attempts; this may be due to a lack of collaboration, resources, or desire to complete the

project. Leaders of organizations and municipalities face the problem of finding funding to

undertake smart city projects due to the associated risk (Kaneshige, 2016). Levels of trust and

the cohesiveness of a team engaged in a project are contributing factors to the success or failure

of a technology project and the success of the municipal manager (Henry, 2015).

Researchers for the Standish Group found that public sector IT projects experienced an

18% success rate in 2001, whereas overall IT projects for that year had a 26% success rate

(Goldfinch, 2007). The implementation of organizational new management cannot always make

IT projects succeed. Managing expectations of projects goes a long way toward achieving

success (Alfaro Navarro, López Ruiz, & Nevado Peña, 2017). While public sector IT projects

undergo further scrutiny because those projects include the expenditure of public funds and

municipal management is accountable for those expenditures, failure to learn from previous

mistakes, staff turnover, and a lack of incentive to innovate also contribute to a low success rate

(Alfaro Navarro et al., 2017).

32
 The municipal manager also faces the failure of smart city project implementation due to

frustration and a lack of trust between municipal departments and other stakeholder

municipalities (Gastaud, 2017). The municipal manager is focused on increasing citizen

engagement and providing services to the public. At times, the private industry provides

financial assistance for these engagements, but long-term commitment and a lack of a return on

the investment remains a concern for private industry and contributes to projects being

incomplete (Gastaud, 2017). In 2006, municipal managers for the City of Corpus Christi, Texas,

unveiled a citywide mesh network for broadband and future uses. Two years later, the network,

which was provided by a private company, was bought by municipal managers of the City of

Corpus Christi and later shut down due to a lack of citizen engagement and usage (Tapia &

Ortiz, 2010). Incubators of technology, often found at the university level, can direct results of

technology initiatives to firms and other agencies, thus lessening the chance of project failure by

way of a knowledge transfer (Cunningham, Menter, & Young, 2017). Technology initiatives

solely focused on technical knowledge and specifications overlook the importance of tacit

knowledge (Cunningham et al., 2017) in shortcutting failed attempts at innovating municipal

operations.

In the United States of America, ICT has become a general-purpose technology (Liao,

Wang, Li, & Weyman-Jones, 2016). As a general-purpose technology, ICT is now considered a

necessary technology for fundamental economic growth to occur (Liao et al., 2016). For both

the public and private sector, the role of ICT development in project initiatives has been

broadened to foster technology innovation and organizational performance (Yunis, Tarhini, &

Kassar, 2018). Jin and Cho (2015) also support that a strong relationship exists between ICT

33
investment and economic growth. The next section includes an examination of change and

innovation in municipal technology operations.

Change and Innovation in Municipal Technology Operations

A Chief Information Officer (CIO) should add substantive technological insight on

solutions and implement efficiency in the municipal organization (Lorences & Ávila, 2013).

Over 2,000 cities now claim to be smart cities while no standard exists to definitively declare the

municipal technology operations as being “smart” (Zygiaris, 2013). Being able to change the

declaration of a city through private-sector technology adoption is how a city becomes

innovative (Shearmur & Poirier, 2017). Organizations whose leaders struggle with

implementing change initiatives face three flaws: failing to document and clarify change

initiatives, being unable to measure the effectiveness of change, and failing to acknowledge the

complexity of management behind the implementation of the change (Elias & Davis, 2018).

Innovation can be the introduction of a new idea or a process to an existing model to

make the model more efficient (Baskaran & Mehta, 2016). Smith and Taebel (1985) divided

administrative innovation, which refers to innovation undertaken by a municipal bureaucracy,

into the two distinct areas of management and technology, where policy implementation

determines management innovation, and process or product implementation determines

technology innovation. Adopting collective decisions for innovation and being accountable for

the problems of the citizenry have dominated the complexity of the public sector for some time

(Hughes, 2017).

Leaders in the public sector face challenges that differ from the private sector, but they

must also be able to apply innovation through IT to serve residents and tourists more effectively

(Haug, 2018). Municipal managers must also be able to provide innovative solutions just as

34
private sector executives do, but with financial limitations (Pang et al., 2014). Innovation for

municipal managers is also dependent upon the ability of staff to receive a knowledge transfer

for new technologies such as smart city infrastructure operation and maintenance (Shearmur &

Poirier, 2017).

Smart city projects are new, and with a public that is generally hesitant to change and

innovate by the implementation of new projects, the research and implementation of innovative

projects fall by the wayside as more projects envisioned to benefit the public gain a higher

priority by municipal managers (Pang et al., 2014). Complacency and the unwillingness to

attempt change can stifle creativity and the proposal of innovative ways of doing business such

as redeveloping infrastructure to accommodate smart city technology for tourism (Buntz, 2016b).

Leaders in every organization must be willing to change to realign the business strategy and to

adapt technology to remain relevant and competitive with innovation (Furukawa, Hirobayashi, &

Misawa, 2014).

Citizen surveys often serve as a tool to evaluate the performance of a public-sector entity,

and this performance evaluation may have a financial factor associated with the results

1LFKROVRQဨ&URWW\1LFKROVRQဨ&URWW\ )HUQDQGH]. The innovation of smart city

technology and ICTs may also spur business development or attract business to blighted areas of

a city as a result of a survey 1LFKROVRQဨ&URWW\HWDO. Leaders of the City of Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania, used census and open data initiatives to provide geographic maps of underserved

areas with food markets, as a way of steering financial and developmental initiatives in the

construction of food markets for underserved communities as a matter of instituting change (Gil-

Garcia, Helbig, & Ojo, 2014).

35
 Leaders of public sector organizations should be able to initiate and sustain change as

well as have the capacity to identify the need to initiate that change (Kickert & Walter, 2014). In

an institution where smart city initiatives and the proliferation of urban digitalism are to take

place, change must occur throughout the organization to accept a new way of operation for the

institution Buntz (2016a). Continual communication between stakeholders and participants

initiating change is necessary, whereas failing to have buy-in and commitment to the change,

such as smart city development, will be detrimental to the project (Kickert & Walter, 2014).

Buntz (2016a) stated that difficulty exists in implementing innovative change based on IoT

initiatives for the public sector when only 30% of technology suppliers have developed IoT

strategies. Support from levels of upper management will keep the change momentum going and

commitment strong (Kickert & Walter, 2014). As leaders of public sector organizations work to

adapt to change, which is necessary to survive and innovate, the constant flux of change can lead

to fear among the individuals responsible for implementing and supporting the effects of change

(Ben-Elia, Alexander, Hubers, & Ettema, 2014).

The Innovative Cities for the Next Generation (ICING) Project’s focus is to take

advantage of increased ICTs to engage residents more through change (Gil-Garcia, Pardo, &

Nam, 2015). The use of ICTs would also lower the per-transaction rate charged for services

encountered by residents and treat that result as a project incentive (Gil-Garcia et al., 2015). The

ICING Project also includes a two-way instant messenger as a mobile module that allows city-to-

citizen and citizen-to-citizen communication (Gil-Garcia et al., 2015). These messaging tools

are all freely available with public participation systems such as Twitter, Facebook, and

PublicStuff. PublicStuff enables residents of a municipality to communicate directly with

36
municipal managers to promote civic engagement, increase urban efficiency in the reporting, and

promote the speedy resolution of service requests (Woo et al., 2015).

Public sector innovation does change the level of distribution of goods and services

(Meijer, 2015). Although challenges exist, the innovation sprung from the IoT will span a

breadth of uses, including manipulating vehicles through traffic (5G Americas, 2016).

Innovation is a form of change management in which innovators can use technology projects to

be the catalyst for change within an organization or for the public served by that organization

(Euchner, 2013). The next section includes an examination of the development, investment, and

management of smart cities.

Development, Investment, and Management of Smart Cities

Technological advancements have enabled the near instantaneous delivery of data from

endpoint to endpoint, whether the endpoints are city blocks, miles, or continents apart (Kitchin,

2014). The creative mix of technologies used to develop a smart city has disrupted the

administrative procedures for public sector agencies (Gil-Garcia et al., 2014). During the 1990s,

the advent of the Internet, as technology advancement, helped to replace paper-based

communication with electronic communication methods and sped the transmission of

communication data (Gil-Garcia et al., 2014).

The concept of the smart city has advanced from its infancy in the early 2000s as solely

the implementation of ICT to a provider of quality of life services to residents and investing in

human capital development (Keta, 2015). Smart city development includes the management

capabilities for autonomous vehicles to move in lockstep with one another throughout a city by

way of embedded sensors (Shichiyakh et al., 2016). The globalization of cities as interconnected

communities allows individuals to create relationships within societies and with the

37
administrators charged with the sustainable development of those cities (Keta, 2015). As the

production costs of building sensors for the management of smart cities lessen with the continued

refinement in product development, more business leaders will adopt the infrastructure to

support ICT (International Institute for Analytics, 2015).

The term smart city has yet to become part of the mainstream of municipal development

and growth planning. The term smart city is also more akin to the branding of a district within a

city retrofitted with ICT or likened to the educational status of a city’s inhabitants (Albino,

Berardi, & Dangelico, 2015). The management of a city’s development, while fraught with

complexity challenges, can provide community benefits using information systems (Bawami &

Swamsi, 2015). Some of those complexity challenges include managing security, privacy, big

data, costs, advancements, and scalability while developing an architecture that is sharable across

multiple connected internal and external municipal agencies (Bawany & Shamsi, 2015).

For municipal managers, smart city development includes many aspects of infrastructure

enhancements, such as sensors, to monitor the structural integrity of buildings and the movement

of items using radio frequency identification (Shearmur & Poirier, 2017). A city whose leaders

use ICTs to improve the quality of life of its residents has a smaller effect on the surrounding

environment and further benefits urban planning by reducing substandard housing (Shichiyakh et

al., 2016). Implications of smart city development scale to the county, state, federal, and

international levels where international conferences and consortiums devote attention to smart

city research (Chen, Mao, & Liu, 2014). Municipal managers can enlist the services of

technology consortiums and companies, like IBM, to help them in infrastructure development,

citizen engagement, and developing a strategy for ensuring investments during recessionary

times (Paroutis, Bennett, & Heracleous, 2014). IBM is a firm whose leaders implement smart

38
city technologies with global ICT firms as they relate to workforce enhancement and research

and development investments (Paroutis, Bennett, & Heracleous, 2014). Recessionary times

force municipal managers to adapt municipal organizations to focus on additional cost-saving

measures and reposition the municipal organization for economic recovery using smart city

technology (Paroutis et al., 2014).

The capital investment required by municipal managers to develop and continue the

management of ICT can be extremely cost prohibitive for those either unwilling or unable to

allocate funds from municipal budgets implementation (Alfaro Navarro, López Ruiz, & Nevado

Peña, 2017). Investments in ICT for the municipal manager are not limited to financial factors

but do also include the necessary investments in human capital to continually manage the ICT

infrastructure after implementation (Alfaro Navarro et al., 2017). For municipal managers with

the desire and willingness to implement ICT, the cost of the supply will invariably and

eventually lessen (Neirotti, Raguseo, & Paolucci, 2018). Lastly, municipal managers may also

apply for federal subsidy programs to provide for the initial municipal budget required of ICT

infrastructure, knowing that these programs may not provide for the ongoing operating expenses

(Vogelsang, 2017).

Smart city ICT investment is necessary for municipal managers as the technology is

utilized for the future of urban development, efficient municipal operations, and the delivery of

municipal services (Kumar, Singh, Gupta, & Madaan, 2018). The investment plan in smart city

ICT includes, but is not limited to, the purchase and implementation of sensors, traffic control

devices, security cameras, computing equipment, and telecommunication components (Kumar et

al., 2018). The municipal manager must also hire and train additional staff as part of a smart

city ICT investment plan (Kumar et al., 2018). The municipal manager is faced with providing

39
advanced services for the community with a continually shrinking municipal budget (Kumar et

al., 2018). Even though the municipal budget continues to shrink, the municipal manager must

develop and implement smart city ICT as part of an urban development plan to keep the city

competitive and secure (Kumar et al., 2018). Advancements in tourism, security, healthcare, and

utilities, are solutions reliant upon an investment made in smart city ICT infrastructure through

citizen participation and direction by the municipal manager (Kumar et al., 2018). Funding

through the municipal ICT budget, by the municipal manager, should create a tourist destination

complete with activities, technology, and smart ICT infrastructure (Kumar et al., 2018).

The leaders of some public safety agencies integrate emergency vehicles with traffic

signaling communication technology that allows emergency vehicles to control the flow of

traffic while transporting people for medical emergencies (Asensio et al., 2015). The use of

smart signal sensors in an IoT environment can alert drivers to avoid traffic areas where

emergencies are taking place by way of traffic light signaling (Asensio et al., 2015). Smart

signal communication mesh networks can interact with one another in neighboring

municipalities to share the location of emergency personnel in an emergency management

environment and to promote traffic efficiency (Asensio et al., 2015).

Management efficiencies such as managing traffic and human flow can involve

implementing IoT communication through sensor networks such as radio frequency

identification (Mora-Mora, Gilart-Iglesias, Gil, & Sirvent-Llamas, 2015). In 1998, municipal

leaders of the City of Santa Monica, California, created a technology plan to lay fiber optic

cables around the city to serve the technological needs of its residents, schools, and the overall

city. The initiative has continued to save the city leaders $700,000 a year by eliminating the

need to lease telecommunication services (Downs, 2016). The New York City Police

40
Department was the first public safety agency to integrate real-time geographic information

system data into daily policing meetings, and several public safety agencies now include this

practice as normal and routine (Gil-Garcia et al., 2014).

Nam and Pardo (2011) commented, “Making a city smart is a new approach to urban

development” (p. 185), and the integration of technology may have privacy challenges.

Although GPS may be a perfectly acceptable method to track the vehicular assets of a

municipality, the usage of GPS may not be efficacious or morally right to track the human traffic

flow of a municipality’s residents or its tourists (Mora-Mora et al., 2015). Municipal managers

should know that enabling a city to become a smart city might bring about unintended

consequences such as privacy violations and problems regarding data sharing (Gil-Garcia et al.,

2014). The next section includes an examination of sharing municipal data for smart cities.

Sharing Municipal Data for Smart Cities

Public and private sectors alike can realize a gain in employee morale and organizational

effectiveness with the development of reservation and distribution systems (Law et al., 2014).

Organizational leaders spend heavily on knowledge management systems to store coded and

noncoded information, as project stakeholders may not yet realize the value of that information

(Davison, Ou, & Martinsons, 2013). The stored data, which is shared amongst municipal

agencies of a smart city network, is required by municipal managers in an appropriate form to

make informed decisions (Stewart, 2012). Sharing knowledge can lead to collaboration on issue

resolution, foster an exchange of ideas, and promote social networking (Sarka & Ipsen, 2017).

As information sharing occurs more frequently through the Internet, the practice of

information sharing has become the flagship research tool for travelers by providing vast

amounts of tourism-related information (Law et al., 2014) for multiple travel destinations

41
simultaneously. When organizational leaders understand and comprehend the value of sharing

knowledge, they put practices and policies in place to promote knowledge sharing (Sarka &

Ipsen, 2017), as well as to promote partnerships, business, and development through ICT

(Tonelli, de Souza Bermejo, Aparecida Dos Santos, Zuppo, & Zambalde, 2017).

Shared networks can accomplish many complex tasks by being efficient, innovative, and

by consisting of various participants focused on tackling problems that arise within the

connected smart city networks (Head, Brian, & John, 2015). A collaborative network of

agencies can allocate resources to tackle problems such as tourism decline by investing in ICTs

that mutually benefit municipal networks (Choudhury & Goswami, 2013). These collaborative

capacity builders share knowledge to influence municipal management (Head, Brian, & John,

2015). Equally as important as knowing about the information to provide to the other business

units is knowing where to efficiently get that information through shared networks (Hooper &

Bunker, 2013).

Municipal leaders can share tourism traffic from one city to another along a public-sector

knowledge network (PSKN). A PSKN is a communication channel that carries the expectation

that members will receive timely, useful, and more complete information (O'Toole, 2015).

Municipal staff can also share problems, services, and program content across the PSKN, where

residents may also benefit from collaborated information (O'Toole, 2015). Pitfalls of PSKNs

include information that is not always clear, the variety of types of information, and blurred lines

of delineation concerning whose data belong to whom. Municipal managers and legal staff will

need to solidify the legal aspects of sharing data across the city, county, and state borders (Buntz,

2016a). Without these shared networks, information on the various aspects of life and resources

in a city will not be interpretable (Kim & Kim, 2017).

42
 Researchers for the Center for International Earth Science Information Network

estimated that cities occupy 2% of the earth’s landmass yet consume 75% of the earth’s

resources (Hooke & Martín-Duque, 2012). Leaders of a smart city can employ commitments in

management, technology, and policy to handle and properly distribute resources (Nam & Pardo,

2011). Nam and Pardo (2011) espoused that cross-organizational managers in multiple areas of

a city need to embrace the need for ICTs. City leaders who brand a city as a smart city can make

the city stand out among others by being proactive in resource consumption. Cities are in

financial competition with other cities, residents, tourists, and employees to manage and share

data (Nam & Pardo, 2011).

When sharing data in a technology-driven environment, the implementation of change by

management within the public sector is shifting away from large hierarchies, competition, and a

performance-based rewards system and moving towards a focus on the social and cultural

benefits and enhancing technological bonds (Bryson, Crosby, & Bloomberg, 2014). As

management patterns change to a new method of governance and implementation, policies that

accompany and dictate change must also follow suit (Bryson et al., 2014). Management patterns

that allow the sharing of municipal data for smart cities must also be cognizant of the

interoperability of disparate smart city networks (City of Columbus, 2015). The next section

includes an examination of municipal technology interoperability.

Municipal Technology Interoperability

In 1991, when leaders of the National Science Foundation amended its acceptable use

policy to allow commercial Internet traffic across its network, the Internet service provider

business began, first in the United States, and then started spreading into other countries, which

provided a basis to allow anyone to be interoperable with another through the Internet (Spacey,

43
Muir, Cooke, & Creaser, 2017). Systems that are interoperable with one another do not require

users to be proficient in how the systems communicate with one another (Zhao & Xia, 2014).

The uniform application development and integration of how software developers design

interfaces will allow a commercial off-the-shelf implementation between systems within and

between smart cities (Zhao & Xia, 2014). From an open-source perspective, direct feedback and

input from customers can greatly enhance the functionality of interoperable components and not

require customers to conform to one monopolized standard for communicating (Åkerman et al.,

2018).

The need for communicating among dissimilar networks led to the inception of the

electronic data interchange (EDI) movement, where businesses within the same sector could

share data (Campbell-Kelly & Garcia-Swartz, 2013). The insurance, automotive, and

pharmaceutical industries were among the first entrants to the EDI movement before EDI

expanded into other markets by way of standardized formats (Campbell-Kelly & Garcia-Swartz,

2013). Those standardized formats include the American National Standards Institute and the

Electronic Business Extensible Markup Language, of which different versions also exist for

compatibility and interoperability (EDI Basics, 2016).

Interoperability requires IT leaders to partner with internal and external agencies and to

manage the capabilities of those agencies effectively (Pardo et al., 2011). Interoperability also

raises concerns regarding the complexity required to share sensed and collected information

between municipal entities. Government agencies frequently need to police interoperable

connections through policy design (Buntz, 2016a); creating interoperable connections requires

agency leaders to be responsible for managing data connections between agencies whose

standards may not be the same (Pardo et al., 2011). The development of a common

44
communication standard by nongovernmental agencies will foster industry innovation and

collaboration across markets, which will ultimately lead to a consensus on a standard and more

seamless interactions between agencies through shared data and sensors (Security Industry

Association, 2016).

Sensors embedded into mobile devices aggregate shared data through a movement of

social participation (Khan, Anjum, Soomro, & Tahir, 2015). Municipal managers can develop

strategic partnerships by sharing sensed data as population shifts frequently occur between cities

(Foley et al., 2014). Each city contributes data to the cloud, and authorized members can

retrieve, aggregate, or filter the shared data as seen fit by member city users (Khan et al., 2015).

The shared data should be accessible in a meaningful and standardized format that is also

nonproprietary (IEEE-USA, 2016), thus allowing municipal managers to change data

management or network providers and migrate data from host to host as needed, as global

commerce is dependent upon free-flowing data without the restrictions of borders (IBM, 2016).

The availability and ubiquity of mobile devices allow programmers to develop applications that

can read sensed data such as latitude, longitude, and altitude, which allows the data collector to

reap much more detailed information than what is available when accessing the Internet from a

desktop computer (Chung, 2014).

The IoT, as an extension of the Internet, provides a quantum leap in interactivity, global

connectivity, and business growth for cloud service providers (Microsoft, 2016). The service-

oriented architecture allows components in a homogeneous or heterogeneous technology

environment to maintain interoperability without placing an undue burden on IT staff (Weigelt,

2008), especially as municipal managers have stringent resources for newly created smart cities.

The next section includes an examination of big data management for newly created smart cities.

45
Big Data Management for Newly Created Smart Cities

The term big data refers to storing, converting, manipulating, and managing huge

amounts of raw data, which administrators and technologists may classify, sort, or tag at a future

point in time (Weng & Lin, 2014). The tremendous amount of unstructured data can surpass the

ability of current technology for an organization to process big data promptly (Turban et al.,

2015), which results in petabytes of unusable data (Kaneshige, 2016). The ever-increasing

bandwidth consumed across the Internet, not only from streaming media but also from the

transmission of big data, is a primary focus for Internet service providers that must sustain the

required bandwidth required by data producers, data consumers, and data operators (Firmin,

2017).

The entrance of IT operations into the IoT universe will propel IT staff into the big data

era of storage (Chen et al., 2014). This massive amount of data “brings about sound

development opportunity and great challenges to data centers” (Chen et al., 2014, p. 171).

Government administrators and staff can mine these potentially large data sets for useful

information and in-depth research for municipal managers and urban planners (Chen et al.,

2014). Cloud computing enterprises offer services for public and private storage of big data in a

marketplace that continues to expand as storage requirements also expand (Weng & Lin, 2014).

As leaders of municipal organizations of varying sizes migrate data center operations,

shrinking IT budgets for equipment and staff necessitate the option of using a public or private

cloud as a data center (Joseph et al., 2014); in some cases, cloud-first is the option. Providing

security against the threat of data theft and the possibility of microbreaches through IoT-

connected hardware (Buntz, 2017b) is a new concern for leaders of smart cities and municipal

managers desiring to host a smart city that needs addressing regardless of budgetary and

46
reliability restrictions. Maintaining safe copies of big data is but one method for municipal

managers to safeguard municipal sensed data.

Replicating copies of big data ensures a higher level of fault tolerance, and when installed

in conjunction with cloud-based services, can provide for the monitoring and reporting of that

data from almost any web-enabled device, should municipal management need to relocate

administrative functions due to a natural or manmade disaster as long as the telecommunication

infrastructure is also viable (Prandi et al., 2017). The databases used to store the big data

generated by the interactions inside and between smart cities should be relational, secured,

optimized (indexed), and constructed with an interface that can allow multiple forms of queries

to return data in varying useful output formats for managerial reporting (Prandi et al., 2017).

Smart cities and the emerging IoT industry will bloom into a business of additional data

management and the enhancement of public health initiatives such as “sustainable environments

and the delivery of ‘connected health/care’ services to citizens at home and on the move” (Kamel

Boulos & Al-Shorbaji, 2014, p. 1). As cities increasingly become a part of the knowledge

society, public sector investments shift from traditional urban facilities to digital infrastructure

(Kamel Boulos & Al-Shorbaji, 2014). The costs for the additional data generated are difficult to

disperse across the population that consumes the data rather than the population that generates

the data, as the smart city enters the business-to-consumer market, which leads to a flat-rate

charge for everyone in the population (Firmin, 2017).

Kitchin (2014) expressed that the tidal wave of data collected from smart cities could

provide a more real-time understanding of cities and the needs of residents. Each newly

connected device in a city’s M2M network will exponentially add to the vast amount of big data

stored and will contribute to the requirements of handling that data properly (Chen et al., 2015).

47
As the collection of data points continues to increase, political leaders debate privacy rights and

the benefits of those data points to the government (Kitchin, 2014). Poncela, Moreno-Roldan,

Aamir, and Alvi (2015) noted, “M2M connections in the supply industry will increase from 100

million in 2010 to 1.5 billion in 2020” (p. 409) when estimating only the North American

network traffic.

Public officials may make better use of the technology to serve residents and tourists

more effectively by becoming more transparent and proactive (Zanella et al., 2014). A unique

application of an IoT infrastructure aids in monitoring not only the health of the tourists and

residents but also the health of the urban and residential infrastructure. The connected home has

surveillance, thermostats, smoke, and CO2 sensors, as well as security monitoring that can alert a

homeowner of an issue (Perera et al., 2015). An extension of the IoT application may include

monitors for the structural integrity of a building, as well as the air quality within a building

(Zanella et al., 2014). In aiding a tourism destination, sensors can alert traffic-monitoring

officials of congestion and potential accidents. Traffic light synchronization can ease traffic

patterns, congestion, and aid public safety officials when they are responding to an alert and need

to avoid traffic congestion in a life safety event within and between adjoining cities (Smart Cities

Council, 2015).

Aurigi (2013) noted that the ubiquitous city becomes an always-on data-driven

environment where information can flow from one side of the city to another or between cities in

a shared network. Urban designers should plan to connect into and take advantage of the

expected constant flow of big data. Sharing big data as open data can benefit the research and

development community in multiple disciplines as the digital city is a city constructed for

resilience (Daries et al., 2014). Largely a commercial matter, the digital city primarily exists as

48
electronic brochures for businesses rather than by following the European model of focusing on

the offerings for public services (Rathore et al., 2018). By enabling communication and location

capabilities with knowledge of security allowances through smart devices, residents participate

in the social IoT, where the increased number of communication devices more accurately depicts

data based on the participant’s geographical location (Poncela et al., 2014).

Security concerns for managing and manipulating big data reoccur at some of the highest

levels of government, as the Federal Bureau of Investigation weighs in on cybersecurity risks for

IoT devices, which Federal Bureau of Investigation leaders consider to be any device that

automatically transmits or receives data, as such data can overrun data centers (Dopplick, 2016).

The amount of data generated through the IoT will require technological and policy

advancements yet will yield greater accomplishments with diminishing resources, which is a

budgetary constraint faced by municipal managers faced with ensuring the safety and security of

residents and tourists (Association for Automatic Identification and Mobility, 2016). Managing

the security of big data and protecting its integrity from unauthorized change access falls upon

the implementation based on the results of a vulnerability assessment provided to municipal

managers (Doty, 2015).

Summary

In summary, articles from the literature review contained historical research that included

insight for municipal managers. Municipal managers must compare technology needs with the

needs of the citizenry, budgetary constraints versus development initiatives, and generate income

for the city and respect the rights of the residents. Chapter Three will cover the methodology

utilized to gather the data for research, the sampling utilized, independent variables, dependent

variables, instrumentation, hypotheses, validity, and any ethical considerations.

49
 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY

Introduction

Researchers apply the methodology to gather and analyze data for a research study. The

purpose of Chapter Three is to restate the problem statement, explain the characteristics of the

population and the sample size, explain the methodology used to analyze the data, and provide

peer-reviewed sources that justify the methodology chosen. In a research study, data collection

must be orderly and involve the use of a set of tools to predict a future outcome or response,

categorize, or compare a relationship between criteria (Kostewicz, King, Datchuk, Brennan, &

Casey, 2016).

Chapter Three includes the problem statement as restated in Chapter One. The chapter

also includes a restatement of the purpose of the study, as well as a definition of the independent

and dependent variables. The next section includes the research questions and the characteristics

of the sample, the sample size, and the reasons for using that sample. A restatement of the data

gathering process and an explanation of the measurement of validity, reliability, and any ethical

considerations concludes the chapter.

Design and Methodology

In a quantitative study, researchers gather data and analyze them against one or more

independent and dependent variables to answer a question or to make a prediction (Creswell,

2015). Correlational research with a nonexperimental design involves an attempt to determine if

a relationship exists among variables by examining data derived from one or more specified

populations. Performing a research study as an ex post facto research study, as was the case for

this study, involves using data “formulated after the fact” (Merriam-Webster, 2016) and not

originally collected as part of the research study.

50
 This research study was designed to last approximately three months to collect data. The

researcher gathered quantitative data (municipal ICT budgets, annual city-visitor counts, and

state annual tourism income) over 11 fiscal years. Each municipality operated on an October

through September fiscal year. This study was designed to be repeatable by utilizing a

standardized format for the data, the independent and the dependent variables (Explorable.com,

2017). The next section includes an examination of the independent and dependent variables.

Independent and Dependent Variables

Variables are the events or incidents that change depending upon actions or forces taken

against them (McDonald & Simpson, 2014). The purpose of correlational research is to

determine if a relationship exists between one or more independent and dependent variables. For

this research, the municipal ICT budget was the independent variable. The annual city-visitor

counts, and state annual tourism income were the dependent variables. State annual tourism

income was recorded at the state level as managers of tourism boards and municipalities could

not present annual tourism income for the city as a unit of analysis.

The municipal ICT budget variable is defined as the annual municipal fiscal year dollar

amount allocated by a municipal manager to spend on ICT. The annual city-visitor count

variable is defined as the annual count of visitors to a city. The state annual tourism income

variable is defined as the annual dollar amount of income received from tourists, as reported by a

state board of tourism. The research involved studying and measuring independent and

dependent variables to see if correlations existed between them from the sample that provided

the observations. The next section includes an examination of the population and sampling.

51
 Population and Sampling

Previous research related to smart city ICT and its implementation was focused on the

theoretical usage of such technology (Angelidou, 2015) or its political implications (Meijer et al.,

2015). These previous qualitative studies conceptualized the implementation of smart city ICT

to influence government, climate, business, and tourism (Angelidou, 2015). X. Wang, Li, Zhen,

and Zhang (2016) utilized a convenience sample to study tourists and the tourists’ desire for

smart tourism with attractions supported by ICT. In X. Wang et al.’s (2016) study, the sample

was one of convenience whereby the participants were chosen from one geographical area.

None of the previous studies attempted to quantify any correlations between the municipal ICT

budget, annual city-visitor counts, and state annual tourism income.

The population for this study consisted of municipalities with the ability to maintain and

reproduce public records. This initial population yielded thousands of potential research subjects

and therefore was reduced due to convenience. The resulting sample was one of convenience

due to the researcher’s location within the southeastern United States of America. For the

sampling from states in this research study, the southeastern United States was limited to the

states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and

Texas. The sample for this study consisted of 27 municipalities utilizing 11 fiscal years of

municipal data. Once the requirement for a midsized city was defined as the minimum

qualification, the researcher located cities within eight states in the southeastern United States to

create the sample. The researcher was located within the city that originally derived the basis of

this research, and thus, that city’s 2010 Census population was utilized to quantify the minimum

population for a midsized city. While convenience sampling may not be entirely representative

of the overall population from which the sample originated, its practice can be used in most

52
study designs to easily recruit or find subjects due to its ease (Sedgwick, 2013). The next section

includes an examination of the research setting.

Setting

The setting for this study was municipal agencies in 27 midsized cities in the southeastern

United States as no study of this kind had been performed on that sample. The absence of

frequent extreme weather and an abundance of sunshine in the southeastern United States makes

the region an extremely desirable travel destination (Romão, Kourtit, Neuts, & Nijkamp, 2018).

Methods of business development including tourism advancement through technology

should be explored because municipal managers are responsible for the urban development and

financial sustainability of municipal agencies (Navío-Marco et al., 2018). ICTs develop at a rate

that makes them increasingly difficult to assimilate effective usage (Navío-Marco et al., 2018)

and this difficulty contributes to one-third of projects failing due to being over budget or delayed

(Moon et al., 2014).

As described in Chapter Two, the municipal manager must promote sustainable tourism

and spur urban development do deliver services to residents. Nam and Pardo (2011) noted that

urban development would require having a smart city. ICT usage provides an effective method

to gather sentiment from residents (Navío-Marco et al., 2018) and as municipal ICT budgets are

limited, municipal managers require assistance in cultivating technology projects for municipal

agencies (Vogelsang, 2017). The data for the study were collected through public records

requests submitted to municipal agencies in the sample and collected over the course of three

months. The next section includes an examination of the data collection process.

53
 Data Collection

This quantitative study of municipal agencies included a sample of 27 midsized cities in

the southeastern United States. State tourism data was requested from each of the eight state

tourism boards that represented each of the sample cities. The data collection process was

initiated through a series of public records requests that were all formulated utilizing the same

language. The public records requests were sent by the researcher to the population of 49

municipal agencies. Some municipal agencies developed specialized processes for receiving and

processing public records requests while others relied on e-mail to receive and process public

records requests. The researcher also gathered and researched data from the publicly available

municipal websites when directed to do so by municipal staff.

Requests for information began on March 31, 2017, and the responses arrived through

July 26, 2017. Some of the municipal agencies and state tourism boards required registrations

into specialized visitor systems to submit requests. A deadline for the return of data was not

enforceable as municipal agencies can have a reasonable length of time to respond to a public

records request. The term reasonable is not quantified or defined by the municipal agencies.

The state and municipal governments do not define in operational charters the length of time that

is a reasonable time limit to respond to public records requests.

After July 26, 2017, the researcher waited an additional seven days before closing the

response window. The researcher collected and gathered the municipal ICT budgets

(independent variable), annual city-visitor counts (dependent variable), and state annual tourism

income (dependent variable) obtained through public records requests from the sample.

Appendix A contains the information requested from the municipal agencies as part of the public

records requests. Appendix A also contains the information requested from the state tourism

54
boards that represent each city within the sample. The next section includes an examination of

the instrumentation.

Instrumentation

The instrument utilized for this data collection was a measurement tool in the form of

public records request questionnaires (EBSCO Information Services, 2018) that requested data:

the municipal ICT budgets, annual city-visitor counts, and state annual tourism income for 11

fiscal years from municipal agencies and state tourism boards. The instrument was comprised of

requests for quantitative data and contained no other measurements. As the data collection was

conducted through the public records request process, no previous instrument existed for this

collection process. The public records request process is an open government process for

requesting existing data from governmental agencies (ben-Aaron, Denny, Desmarais, & Wallach,

2017). The next section includes a restatement of the hypotheses.

Hypotheses

The following research questions, restated from Chapter One, directed and narrowed the

literature review, research methodology, and the analysis of data:

Research Question 1: What is the correlation, if any, between the municipal budget

allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and annual city-visitor counts? From this research question, the following null

and alternate hypotheses emerged:

H01: There is no correlation between the municipal budget allocated for Information and

Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and annual

city-visitor counts.

55
 Ha1: There is a correlation between the initial municipal budget allocated for Information

and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and

annual city-visitor counts.

Research Question 2: What is the correlation, if any, between the municipal budget

allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and state annual tourism income received? From this research question, the

following null and alternate hypotheses emerged:

H02: There is no correlation between the initial municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and state annual tourism income received.

Ha2: There is a correlation between the initial municipal budget allocated for Information

and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and

state annual tourism income received.

The next section includes an examination of the data analysis.

Data Analysis

Research Question 1/Hypothesis 1 was tested with the Pearson r. The predictor

(independent) variable was the municipal budget allocated for Information and Communication

Technologies. The criterion (dependent) variable was the annual city-visitor counts. If the data

did not meet the assumptions for the Pearson r, the Spearman’s rho was used.

Research Question 2/Hypothesis 2 was also tested with the Pearson r. The predictor

(independent) variable was the municipal budget allocated for Information and Communication

Technologies. The criterion (dependent) variable was the state annual tourism income. If the

56
data did not meet the assumptions for the Pearson r, the Spearman’s rho was used. Table 1

provides the hypotheses, statistical tests, and variables of interest.

Table 1. Hypothesis, Statistical Test, Predictor and Criterion Variables

Hypotheses, Statistical Test, Predictor and Criterion Variables

Hypothesis Statistical Predictor Criterion

Test Variable Variable
H01: There is no significant correlation between the Pearson r municipal Annual city-
municipal budget allocated for Information and budget visitor count
Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern
tourist municipalities and annual city-visitor counts.

H02: There is no significant correlation between the Pearson r municipal State annual
municipal budget allocated for Information and budget tourism
Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern income
tourist municipalities and state annual tourism income
received.

Alpha Level

The alpha level is the value at which the null hypothesis will be rejected under the

assumption that the null hypothesis is true. In social sciences, the alpha level is p < .05 (Brace,

Kemp, & Snelgar, 2013). This means that the probability of a significant result occurring due to

chance is less than five times out of 100.

Power Analysis

An a priori power analysis was conducted with G*Power 3.1 (Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, &

Buchner, 2007). G*Power uses an analysis-by-design approach to computing the required

sample size based on certain input parameters. The first parameter was selecting the statistical

test. The statistical test was the Pearson r, which corresponded to the “bivariate normal model”

in G*Power. The second input parameter was tails. Tails are related to the direction of the

57
hypothesis. Since the hypotheses are non-directional, two tails were selected as the input option.

The third input parameter was the effect size. Effect sizes are classified as small, medium, or

large (Cohen, 1988). For the proposed study, a medium effect size (.34) was selected. Another

required input parameter was the alpha level. As aforementioned, the alpha level was .05.

Statistical power must also be selected. The statistical power is a measure of how much

confidence the researcher can have in the results. In social sciences, the minimum acceptable

power level is .80 (Brace, et al., 2013). Thus, for the proposed study, with the input parameters,

a minimum sample size of 65 was required. See Table 2.

Table 2. Input Parameters for A Priori Power Analysis

Exact - Correlation: Bivariate normal model

Options: exact distribution
Analysis: A priori: Compute required sample size
Input: Tail(s) = Two
&RUUHODWLRQȡ+ = .34
ĮHUUSURE = 0.05
Power (1-ȕHUUSURE = 0.80
&RUUHODWLRQȡ+ = 0
Output: Lower critical r = -0.2441482
Upper critical r = 0.2441482
Total sample size = 65
Actual power = 0.8024531

Statistical power increases as the sample size increases. For instance, if the power level

were increased to .95, then a sample size of 106 would be required. This is illustrated in Figure

1.

58
 ([DFW&RUUHODWLRQ%LYDULDWHQRUPDOPRGHO
7DLOV 7ZR&RUUHODWLRQ˨+ ˙HUUSURE &RUUHODWLRQ˨+ 




7RWDOVDPSOHVL]H











       

3RZHU˚HUUSURE

Figure 1. A Priori Power Analysis

Assumptions of Pearson r

There are several assumptions of the Pearson r (Warner, 2013). The data must be on an

interval or ratio scale of measurement. Each score for the predictor variable must be independent

of other scores for the predictor variables and each score for the criterion variable must be

independent of every other criterion score. There must be a linear relationship between the

variables of interest. There should be no significant statistical outliers. The variables should

approximately be normally distributed. These assumptions were examined using customary data

screening techniques such as skewness and kurtosis statistics, normality tests, histograms,

boxplots, and scatterplots.

59
 Appendices C and D contain tabled representations of the data collected. Data for this

study was assumed to be valid. The next section includes an examination of validity and

reliability.

Validity and Reliability

In a quantitative study, validity and reliability are the accuracy and consistency of the

measurement analysis used against data. A measurement tool is valid if the tool measures the

intended content (Heale & Twycross, 2015). A measurement tool is reliable if the tool

consistently returns a similar result (Heale & Twycross, 2015). Researchers often discuss

systematic error (validity) in relation to random error (reliability) (Johnston et al., 2014). In a

qualitative study, validity refers to a statistical tool’s appropriateness, and reliability refers to the

ability to replicate processes and results (Leung, 2015). In terms of remaining valid and

providing reliability, sets of data with larger sample approximations perform well with fewer

variables (Ullah & Jones, 2015).

The breadth of data gathered in a quantitative study, similar to that of a qualitative study,

justifies the rigor used to ascertain one or more research findings (Noble & Smith, 2015). Noble

& Smith (2015) also espoused on the validation of the research process through demonstrating

the reliability of data and the validity of its testing process or processes. Biased data, which are

data gathered with errors, can still be valid if testing and research methodologies applied to the

data are repeatable and yield the same or similar results by additional researchers (Johnston et

al., 2014).

In quantitative research, multiple researchers should be able to ascertain consistent results

when applying the same set of research tools to the same data (Noble & Smith, 2015).

Researchers can draw a representative sample of the study’s potential population using variables

60
from within the study (Noble & Smith, 2015). Content, criterion-related, and construct validity

relate to a population’s ability to undergo testing, the relevance of test questions, and the

relationship of theoretical constructs included in the study; and these validity measures address

the internal validity of the study and influence the results (Noble & Smith, 2015).

Reliability is critical to quantitative measurement (Arab & Feng, 2014). Data collected

for quantitative research may contain false and duplicated information. This extraneous data

may generate false or unreliable results, and researchers must exclude them before the analysis

of data to create trend reports (Noble & Smith, 2015). Moss (1994) and Mishler (1990) proposed

that validity could exist in the absence of reliability. Moss (1994) did not advocate for

performing all scholarly research in the absence of reliability, but rather, for ethical purposes.

The next section includes an examination of ethical considerations.

Ethical Considerations

This research study involved examining primary categorical data that contained publicly

available statistics of municipal budgets and strategic plans. The data contained counts of

visitors to the sample cities and states. Some state tourism boards classified some visitors by

ethnic diversity, gender, and age group. These visitor statistics data were available by way of

public websites or through purchased visitor research handbooks. For this research, midsized

cities in the southeastern United States were chosen through convenience sampling within

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. The

resident population of the city where the researcher was located created the basis for the

convenience sample. That city’s 2010 Census population was utilized to quantify the minimum

population for a midsized city in the sample.

61
 Summary

This research involved an attempt to identify any correlation between the municipal ICT

budget, annual city-visitor counts, and state annual tourism income. Since the data did not meet

the normality assumptions, the Spearman’s rho was used to test the hypotheses. Chapter Four

discusses the results of the data collection process and the findings of the research.

62
 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS

Introduction

The purpose of this quantitative ex post facto correlation research study was to explore if

there was any correlation between the municipal budget allocated for Information and

Communication Technologies (ICT) by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities, annual city-

visitor counts, and state annual tourism income. No research existed regarding these research

questions for municipal managers in the southeastern United States sample area. Data were

collected by reviewing municipal ICT budgets and annual city-visitor counts from 27 midsized

southeastern cities. State annual tourism income data were also collected from the state tourism

boards of the sample cities. Historical data spanning 11 fiscal years (October through

September) was collected for this study. The study protocol involved gathering and researching

data requested via municipal and state websites. An active tourism base can add to the array of

funds and taxes collected by the population of residents and business owners to enhance funding

most municipal operations (A. Popescu, 2014). The tourism industry and its financial

contributions directly relate to local and global economic development through job creation and

the stimulation of the housing market (Zhang, 2015).

Chapter Four is organized by an introduction, the sample demographics, descriptive

statistics, data screening, and research questions/hypothesis testing. Data were analyzed with

SPSS 23 for Windows. The following provides a discussion of the sample demographics.

Data Collection Results

Data were obtained from fiscal years (FY) 2005 to 2015. The data were copied and

pasted from Microsoft Excel Professional 2016 to SPSS for analysis. The data set consisted of

296 cases. The cases in the data set represented cities from Alabama (3.4%, n = 10), Florida

63
(29.7%, n = 88), Georgia (3.7%, n = 11), Louisiana (3.7%, n = 11), Mississippi (3.7%, n = 11),

North Carolina (7.4%, n = 22) and Texas (44.6%, n = 132). Data were obtained on 12 cities in

the state of Texas for each FY. The Texas cities included Amarillo (3.7%, n = 11), Arlington

(3.7%, n = 11), Austin (3.7%, n = 11), and Brownville (3.7%, n = 11) to name a few. The state

of North Carolina cities included Fayetteville (3.7%, n = 11) and Greensboro (3.7%, n = 11).

See Table 3.

Table 3. Data Collection Results

Cities
City n %
City of Amarillo, TX 11 3.7
City of Arlington, TX 11 3.7
City of Austin, TX 11 3.7
City of Brownsville, TX 11 3.7
City of Cape Coral, FL 11 3.7
City of Columbus, GA 11 3.7
City of Corpus Christi, TX 11 3.7
City of Fayetteville, NC 11 3.7
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL 11 3.7
City of Ft. Worth, TX 11 3.7
City of Garland, TX 11 3.7
City of Grand Prairie, TX 11 3.7
City of Greensboro, NC 11 3.7
City of Hialeah, FL 11 3.7
City of Hollywood, FL 11 3.7
City of Houston, TX 11 3.7
City of Huntsville, AL* 10 3.4
City of Jackson, MS 11 3.7
City of Jacksonville, FL 11 3.7
City of Laredo, TX 11 3.7
City of Miami, FL 11 3.7
City of New Orleans, LA 11 3.7
64
City of Orlando, FL 11 3.7
City of Pembroke Pines, FL 11 3.7
City of Plano, TX 11 3.7
City of San Antonio, TX 11 3.7
City of Tampa, FL 11 3.7
Total 296 100.0
*Note. Data were missing for the year 2005.

Descriptive Analysis

Municipal budgets allocated for ICT ranged from $0 to $57.42 million (M = 11.69, SD =

13.16) with a median of $6.24 million. City visitors ranged from 2.65 million to 66 million (M =

19.54, SD =71.14) with a median of 11.59 million visitors. State visitors ranged from 18.20

million to 255.98 million (M = 139.90, SD =73.11) with a median of 105 million visitors. State

tourism income ranged from $0 to $109 billion (M = 54.99, SD = 25.73) with a median of $61.10

billion. Descriptive statistics are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive Statistics
ICT Budget in City Visitors in State Visitors in State Tourism Income
Millions Millions Millions in Billions
Mean $11.69 19.54 139.90 $54.99
N 296 67 268 296
Std. Deviation $13.16 17.14 73.11 $25.73
Minimum $0.00 2.65 18.20 $0.00
Maximum $57.42 66.00 255.98 $109.00
Range $57.42 63.35 237.78 $109.00
Median $6.24 11.59 105.00 $61.10
Skewness 1.72 1.32 -.004 -.460
Std. Error of .142 .293 .149 .142
Skewness
Kurtosis 2.27 .528 -1.37 .274

65
Std. Error of .282 .578 .297 .282
Kurtosis

The data were screened for normality with skewness and kurtosis statistics, the Shapiro

Wilk Test of Normality and examined visually with histograms. In SPSS, distributions are

within normal limits if the absolute values of their skewness and kurtosis coefficients are less

than two times their standard errors (George & Mallery, 2010). All of the variables of interest

were not normally distributed. See Table 2. In addition, the normality was examined with the

Shapiro Wilk Test of Normality. Distributions deviate significantly from normality when the p-

value is less than .05. All of the distributions for the variables of interest significantly deviated

from normality (p < .001) as indicated in Table 5.

Table 5. Shapiro-Wilk Test of Normality

Shapiro-Wilk Test of Normality

Shapiro-Wilk
Variable Statistic df p
ICT Budget in Millions .769 60 < .001
City Visitors in Millions .812 60 < .001
State Visitors in Millions .833 60 < .001
State Tourism Income in Billions .826 60 < .001

The distributions were also illustrated and examined with histograms. For ICT budget,

there was a significant positive skew (p < .001). The skewness was 12.11 times the standard

error and the kurtosis was 8.05 times the standard error. The histogram of ICT budget is

66
presented in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Histogram for ICT Budget

For city visitors, there was a significant positive skew (p < .001). The skewness was 4.51

times the standard error and the kurtosis was 0.91 times the standard error. The histogram of city

visitors is presented in Figure 3.

67
Figure 3. Histogram for City Visitors

For state visitors, the skewness was 0.03 times the standard error and the kurtosis was

4.61 times the standard error. The distribution was a significant departure from normality (p <

.001). The histogram of state visitors is presented in Figure 4.

68
Figure 4. Histogram for State Visitors

For state tourism income, the skewness was 3.24 times the standard error and the kurtosis

was 0.97 times the standard error. The distribution was a significant departure from normality (p

< .001). The histogram of state tourism income is presented in Figure 5.

69
Figure 5. Histogram for State Tourism Income

The data were further screened for the presence of statistical outliers. An outlier is a

value that lies beyond the whiskers of a box-and-whisker plot, which is computationally defined

as limited to 1.5 times the interquartile range from the upper/lower quartile (Warner, 2013). The

interquartile range is the length of the box and whisker plot. For ICT budget, there were 13

statistical outliers. $QRXWOLHUZDV• 36. The interquartile range was 10.54. The box and

whisker plot for ICT budget is presented in Figure 6.

70
Figure 6. Box and Whisker Plot for ICT Budget

For city visitors, the interquartile range was 22.33. There were two statistical RXWOLHUV•

62. The box and whisker plot for city visitors is presented in Figure 7.

71
Figure 7. Box and Whisker Plot for City Visitors

For state visitors, the interquartile range was 106.41. There were no statistical outliers.

The box and whisker plot for state visitors is presented in Figure 8.

72
Figure 8. Box and Whisker Plot for State Visitors

For state tourism income, the interquartile range was 109. There were 11 statistical

RXWOLHUVZHUH”DQGZHUH•7KHER[DQGZKLVNHUSORWIRUVWDWHWRXULVPLncome is

presented in Figure 9.

73
Figure 9. Box and Whisker Plot for State Tourism Income

Analysis of Hypotheses

Two research questions and two related hypotheses were developed for investigation. The

research questions were as follows:

Research Question 1: What is the correlation, if any, between the municipal budget

allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and annual city-visitor counts?

H01: There is no significant correlation between the municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and annual city-visitor counts.

74
 H1: There is a significant correlation between the municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and annual city-visitor counts.

Research Question 2: What is the correlation, if any, between the municipal budget

allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and state annual tourism income received?

H02: There is no significant correlation between the municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and state annual tourism income received.

H2: There is a significant correlation between the municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and state annual tourism income received.

Since the data did not meet the normality assumptions, the Spearman’s rho was used to

test the hypotheses. A correlation matrix is presented in Table 6.

75
Table 6. Correlation Matrix

Correlation Matrix
State
ICT Budget City Visitors State Visitors Tourism
in Millions in Millions in Millions Income in
Billions
ICT Budget in Correlation
__ .559*** .231*** .317***
Millions Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) . .000 .000 .000
N 296 67 268 296
City Visitors in Correlation
__ .058 .429***
Millions Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) . .657 .000
N 60 67
State Visitors in Correlation
__ .331***
Millions Coefficient
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 268
Note. ***p < .001, two-tailed.

Research Question One/Hypothesis One

What is the correlation, if any, between the municipal budget allocated for Information

and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and annual

city-visitor counts? The predictor (independent) variable was the municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies. The criterion (dependent) variable was annual

city-visitor counts. There was a strong, positive relationship between the municipal budget

allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and annual city-visitor counts, rrho(65) = .559, p < .001, two-tailed. A scatterplot

of this relationship is presented in Figure 10.

76
Figure 10. Scatterplot of ICT Budget and City Visitors

H01 stated that there is no significant correlation between the municipal budget allocated

for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and annual city-visitor counts. There was a strong, positive relationship between

the municipal budget allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized

southeastern tourist municipalities and annual city-visitor counts, rrho(65) = .559, p < .001, two-

tailed. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected.

Research Question Two/Hypothesis Two

77
 What is the correlation, if any, between the municipal budget allocated for Information

and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and state

annual tourism income received? The predictor (independent) variable was the municipal budget

allocated for Information and Communication Technologies. The criterion (dependent) variable

was state annual tourism income. There was a significant, moderate positive relationship

between the municipal budget allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by

midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and state annual tourism income received, rrho (294)

= .317, p < .001, two-tailed. A scatterplot of this relationship is presented in Figure 11.

Figure 11. Scatterplot of ICT Budget and State Tourism Income

78
 H02 stated that there is no significant correlation between the municipal budget allocated

for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and state annual tourism income received. There was a significant, moderate

positive relationship between the municipal budget allocated for Information and

Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and state annual

tourism income received, rrho (294) = .317, p < .001, two-tailed. Therefore, the null hypothesis

was rejected.

Additional Analysis

An additional analysis was conducted on the data. A Spearman’s rho was conducted to

determine if a significant relationship existed between the municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities

and state visitors. The predictor (independent) variable was ICT budget and the criterion

(dependent) variable was state visitors. There was a weak, positive relationship between the

municipal budget allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized

southeastern tourist municipalities and state visitors, rrho(266) = .231, p < .001, two-tailed. A

scatterplot of this relationship is presented in Figure 12.

79
Figure 12. Scatterplot of ICT Budget and State Visitors

The research questions and hypothesis outcomes are summarized in Table 5.

Table 5

Hypothesis Summary and Outcomes

Hypothesis Statistical Significance Outcome
Test
H01: There is no significant correlation between the Spearman’s p < .001 Null
municipal budget allocated for ICT by midsized rho Rejected
southeastern tourist municipalities and annual city-visitor
counts.

H02: There is no significant correlation between the Spearman’s p < .001 Null
municipal budget allocated for ICT by midsized rho Rejected
southeastern tourist municipalities and state annual tourism
income received.

80
 Summary

Two research questions and related hypotheses were investigated with the Spearman’s

rho. The Spearman’s rho was selected as the appropriate statistical test because the data did not

meet the assumption of distribution normality. The determination was made that there was a

strong, positive relationship between the municipal budget allocated for Information and

Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and annual city-

visitor counts. There was a significant, moderate positive relationship between the municipal

budget allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern

tourist municipalities and state annual tourism income received. An additional analysis was

conducted on the data. A Spearman’s rho was conducted to determine if a significant

relationship existed between the municipal budget allocated for Information and Communication

Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and state visitors. There was a

weak, positive relationship between the municipal budget allocated for Information and

Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and state visitors.

Although ICT and smart city technology is still in its infancy and the true realizations of a

municipal leader’s investment may be years away, the investments made by the United States

federal government serve as proof that technology will help cultivate humanity (Chen et al.,

2014). Implications and recommendations will be discussed in Chapter Five.

81
 CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS

Introduction

From 2007 to 2016, tourism in the United States increased at the rate of 5–10% a year

(U.S. Travel Association, 2016b). The impulsive and planned expenditures of tourists, much

more than local shoppers, provides a financial infusion to that destination (Choi, Law, & Heo,

2018). Tourism growth not only positively affects the economy but also spurs economic

development (Cárdenas-García et al., 2015). An overseas visitor can spend $1,600 on a six-night

trip contributing to the $110 billion financial infusion tourism provides to federal, state, and local

governments of the United States (Delener, 2010). The significance of tourism redevelopment

based on municipal management policies involving the implementation of ICT is the

bootstrapping of smart city technology usage for reliable public consumption (Dohler,

Vilajosana, Vilajosana, & Llosa, 2011). Focusing on the needs of more technologically

advanced tourists will be important to attract and increase repeated tourism of cities (G. Popescu,

2015).

The purpose of this quantitative ex post facto correlation research was to describe any

correlation between the variables of municipal ICT budget, annual city-visitor counts, and state

annual tourism income by examining a sample from 27 midsized southeastern cities of the

United States and the state tourism boards of those cities. This chapter begins with a summary of

the findings from Chapter Four. The next section includes an evaluation of the research

questions.

Evaluation of Research Questions

Research Question 1: What is the correlation, if any, between the municipal budget

allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

82
municipalities and annual city-visitor counts? From this research question, the following null

and alternate hypotheses emerged:

H01: There is no significant correlation between the municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and annual city-visitor counts.

H1: There is a significant correlation between the municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and annual city-visitor counts.

This research found that there was a strong, positive relationship between the municipal

budget allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern

tourist municipalities and annual city-visitor counts. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected.

Research Question 2: What is the correlation, if any, between the municipal budget

allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and state annual tourism income received? From this research question, the

following null and alternate hypotheses emerged:

H02: There is no significant correlation between the municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and state annual tourism income received.

H2: There is a significant correlation between the municipal budget allocated for

Information and Communication Technologies by midsized southeastern tourist

municipalities and state annual tourism income received.

This research found that there was a significant, moderate positive relationship between

the municipal budget allocated for Information and Communication Technologies by midsized

83
southeastern tourist municipalities and state annual tourism income received. Therefore, the null

hypothesis was rejected. The next section includes a discussion of the findings.

Discussion of the Findings

By way of standardized and non-standardized records request procedures, each of the

responding cities was asked to produce the same type of data. While strategic and visioning

plans were not routinely created by each municipality, the municipal ICT budgets were created

annually. The researcher expected that there would have been a positive correlation between the

independent and dependent variables, where an increase in the municipal ICT budget would have

yielded a positive relationship to tourism growth (annual city-visitor counts and state annual

tourism income).

The research findings indicated that a correlation consisting of a strong, positive

relationship existed between the variables municipal budget allocated for ICT and annual city-

visitor counts. The research findings also indicated that a correlation consisting of a moderate,

positive relationship between the municipal budget allocated for ICT by midsized southeastern

tourist municipalities and state annual tourism income received. No previous research existed

pertaining to the specific hypotheses presented in this study.

The research findings supported literature by Law et al. (2014) in that municipal ICT

investment has had a profound effect on tourism. The research findings also addressed the

specific problem by demonstrating that tourism growth, as defined by this study, is achieved

when the investment in municipal ICT is made by municipal managers. The research findings

focused on one area of the application of municipal ICT towards tourism. Navío-Marco et al.

(2018) stated that municipal managers are not utilizing all available options in the promotion of

tourism with municipal ICT.

84
 Smart city and ICT infrastructure investments can expose municipal managers and city

planners to new types of tourism markets and potentially increase tourist counts and tourism

revenue (Gretzel, Sigala, Xiang, & Koo, 2015). For smart city and ICT to develop tourism, the

technology infrastructure needs to be rebuilt; businesses need to remodel operations to take

advantage of the remodeled infrastructure; and the IoT (largely incomplete) is seen as the

communications backbone to support these requirements (Gretzel et al., 2015). The next section

includes an examination of the fulfillment of research purpose.

Fulfillment of Research Purpose

The purpose of this quantitative ex post facto correlation research was to describe any

correlation between the municipal budget allocated for ICT, annual city-visitor counts and state

annual tourism income for a sample of 27 midsized cities in the states of Alabama, Florida,

Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. The results of this study

indicated that not only was there was a strong, positive relationship between the municipal

budget allocated for ICT by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and annual city-visitor

counts, but there was a significant, moderate positive relationship between the municipal budget

allocated for ICT by midsized southeastern tourist municipalities and state annual tourism

income received. This research study focused on a narrow view of ICT development for

municipal managers. Municipal managers should also consider additional venues for which to

plan the ICT infrastructure for cities.

The goal of this study was to provide municipal managers insight regarding the decision

to apply the municipal budget investment on ICT to positively affect annual city-visitor counts

and state annual tourism income. Municipal managers should also consider the long-term

benefits of ICT infrastructure for cities regarding transportation, facility management, and

85
knowledge sharing as residents become the center of services offered by municipal managers and

demand more interaction (Lee & Lee, 2014). Bifulco et al. (2016), Nam and Pardo (2011), and

Komninos et al., (2013) note that the implementation of municipal ICT cultivates a city into a

smart city and that ICT is a tool for government management and service improvement. The

next section includes an examination of the contribution to the business technical problem.

Contribution to Business Technical Problem

The research findings indicated that a correlation consisting of a strong, positive

relationship existed between the variables municipal budget allocated for ICT and annual city-

visitor counts. The research findings also indicated that a correlation consisting of a moderate,

positive relationship between the municipal budget allocated for ICT by midsized southeastern

tourist municipalities and state annual tourism income received.

While Cairney and Speak (2000) and Mora, Deakin, and Reid, (2018) noted that the

government must develop the ICT infrastructure and create development initiatives and

opportunities for businesses, no prior research was quantitatively studied regarding the

correlation between the municipal ICT budget, annual city-visitor counts, and state annual

tourism income; thus, the researcher was unable to compare any prior studies to the results of

this sample’s study. An analysis of the observations in this study showed that the municipal

managers in the sample are addressing the specific problem of this study. Municipal managers

should not use the results of this study as definitive proof regarding ICT development being

identified as a benefit or detriment to all forms of tourism growth.

The success of tourism and the appearance of tourism growth is not solely correlated to

the changes in the municipal ICT budget, annual city-visitor counts, or state annual tourism

income. Tourism growth is also associated to multiple success factors, including the private

86
sector, transportation, accommodation availability, the strength of the economy, special events,

and the prevalence of recreation or tourist attractions (Marais, du Plessis, & Saayman, 2017).

Surpassing rival destinations in the competition for the availability of accessible tourism

(providing tourism for visitors with disabilities) is also a factor in tourism growth (Domínguez

Vila, Darcy, & Alén González, 2015). The proliferation of municipal ICT infrastructure may

also negatively affect tourism growth by alienating tourists who desire less smart city

connectivity during their travel (Tribe & Mkono, 2017). The alienation of tourists due to the

proliferation of municipal ICT infrastructure may cause expected benefits of the ICT expense to

be realized in a future calendar or fiscal year (Tribe & Mkono, 2017). The next section includes

an examination of recommendations for further research.

Recommendations for Further Research

By way of a longitudinal study, researchers can revisit the research questions and

hypotheses developed for this study in approximately five years when the cost of smart city and

ICT implementations will have had a chance to decrease, and municipal managers of midsized

cities have more widely accepted, adopted, and implemented the technology. In a longitudinal

study, estimating the effect of an independent variable on a dependent variable is developed from

the time series of the dependent variable (Ye et al., 2015). This future evaluation should allow

researchers to compare results and ascertain if general ICT or specific ICT acts as a contributing

factor to the selected independent and dependent variables of this study. The next section

includes an examination of the research conclusions.

Conclusions

Leaders of municipal organizations routinely delay the implementation of new or

innovative technology. While Moore’s Law has long held that computing power doubles every

87
two years (G. Moore, n.d.), this period has shortened to every year. This time shortening has

reduced the cost to produce more advanced technology for smart city infrastructures that will

contribute to lowering the cost for municipalities to implement smart city and ICT plans in the

future (Bright, 2016).

As referenced in Chapter Two, the required accounting of finances for public sector

agencies adds to the complexity of municipal organizations (Arnaboldi et al., 2015).

Implementation assistance plans by the United States federal government are currently under

development to make ICT and smart city project implementations less worrisome for municipal

managers (The White House, 2016). Leaders of the National Science Foundation, United States

Department of Energy, National Institute of Standards and Technology, National

Telecommunications and Information Administration, United States Department of Homeland

Security, and Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Program are

working with private investors to create testing platforms and are offering additional grants to

develop connected communities with innovative technology (The White House, 2016).

Koenig (2017) noted that the residents would be happy to approve the spending of public

dollars by municipal managers to implement technology that will reduce congestion and spur

development in a newly developed smart city. Municipal managers remain cost-conscious with

the expenditure of public funds. The concerted implementation by more municipal managers

will help drive down the cost for other cities as more technology develops to perform multiple

functions with less hardware (Bright, 2016).

88
 REFERENCES

5G Americas. (2016). Comments of 5G Americas. Retrieved from

https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/5g_americas_comments_to_ntia_rfc_re_i
ot.pdf

Aftandilyants, V. Y. (2015). Management consulting for public sector. Aktual'ni Problemy

Ekonomiky = Actual Problems in Economics, 168, 109–113. Retrieved from
http://www.irbis-nbuv.gov.ua/

Åkerman, M., Stahre, J., Engström, U., Angelsmark, O., McGillivray, D., Holmberg, T., . . .
Fast-Berglund, Å. (2018). Technical Interoperability for Machine Connectivity on the
Shop Floor. Technologies, 6(3). doi:10.3390/technologies6030057

Alabama Tourism Department. (2017). Alabama Tourism Department. Retrieved from

http://tourism.alabama.gov/

Alam, M. S., & Paramati, S. R. (2016). The impact of tourism on income inequality in
developing economies: Does Kuznets curve hypothesis exist? Annals of Tourism
Research, 61, 111-126. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2016.09.008

Albino, V., Berardi, U., & Dangelico, R. M. (2015). Smart Cities: Definitions, Dimensions,
Performance, and Initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(1), 3-21.
doi:10.1080/10630732.2014.942092

Alfaro Navarro, J. L., López Ruiz, V. R., & Nevado Peña, D. (2017). The effect of ICT use and
capability on knowledge-based cities. Cities, 60, 272-280.
doi:10.1016/j.cities.2016.09.010

Ali, A., & Frew, A. J. (2014). ICT and sustainable tourism development: An innovative
perspective. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 5, 2–16. doi:10.1108/JHTT-
12-2012-0034

Angelidou, M. (2015). Smart cities: A conjuncture of four forces. Cities, 47, 95–106.
doi:10.1016/j.cities.2015.05.004

Arab, A., & Feng, Q. (2014). Reliability research on micro- and nano-electromechanical
systems: A review. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 74,
1679–1690. doi:10.1007/s00170-014-6095-x

Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., & Steccolini, I. (2015). Performance management in the public
sector: The ultimate challenge. Financial Accountability & Management, 31, 1–22.
doi:10.1111/faam.12049

Asensio, Á., Blanco, T., Blasco, R., Marco, Á., & Casas, R. (2015). Managing emergency
situations in the smart city: The smart signal. Sensors, 15, 14370–14396.
doi:10.3390/s150614370
89
Association for Automatic Identification and Mobility. (2016). Comments of the Association for
Automatic Identification and Mobility. Retrieved from
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/aim_inc_ntia_advancement_of_iot.pdf

Athanasiou, C., Tsalkidis, D., Kalogirou, E., & Voudrias, E. (2015). Feasibility analysis of
municipal solid waste mass burning in the Region of East Macedonia – Thrace in Greece.
Waste Management & Research, 33, 561–569. doi:10.1177/0734242x15587368

Aurigi, A. (2013). Reflections towards an agenda for urban-designing the digital city. Urban
Design International, 18, 131. doi:10.1057/udi.2012.32

Banker, R. D., Hu, N., Pavlou, P. A., & Luftman, J. (2011). CIO reporting structure, strategic
positioning, and firm performance. MIS Quarterly, 35, 487–504. Retrieved from:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2379597

Baskaran, S., & Mehta, K. (2016). What is innovation anyway? Youth perspectives from
resource-constrained environments. Technovation, 52–53, 4–17.
doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2016.01.005

Bawany, N. Z., & Shamsi, J. A. (2015). Smart city architecture: Vision and challenges.
International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 6(11), 246–255.
doi:10.14569/IJACSA.2015.061132

ben-Aaron, J., Denny, M., Desmarais, B., & Wallach, H. (2017). Transparency by Conformity: A
Field Experiment Evaluating Openness in Local Governments. Public Administration
Review, 77(1), 68-77. doi:10.1111/puar.12596

Ben-Elia, E., Alexander, B., Hubers, C., & Ettema, D. (2014). Activity fragmentation, ICT and
travel: An exploratory Path Analysis of spatiotemporal interrelationships. Transportation
Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 68, 56-74. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2014.03.016

Bhumgara, A., & Sayyed, I. (2017). Enterprise resource planning systems. International Journal
of Advances in Engineering & Technology, 10, 283–284. Retrieved from
http://www.ijaet.org

Bifulco, F., Tregua, M., Amitrano, C. C., & D'Auria, A. (2016). ICT and sustainability in smart
cities management. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(2), 132-
147. doi:10.1108/IJPSM-07-2015-0132

Bjorlin, C. (2017). US Senate introduces IoT legislation. Internet of Things Institute. Retrieved
from http://www.ioti.com/print/3315

Blanck, M., Ribeiro, J. L. D., & Anzanello, M. J. (2019). A relational exploratory study of
business incubation and smart cities - Findings from Europe. Cities, 88, 48-58.
doi:10.1016/j.cities.2018.12.032

90
Bock, K. (2015). The changing nature of city tourism and its possible implications for the future
of cities. European Journal of Futures Research, 3, 1–8. doi:10.1007/s40309-015-0078-5

Brace, N., Kemp, R., & Snelgar, R. (2013). SPSS for Psychologists. New York, NY: Routledge
Taylor & Francis Group

Kamel Boulos, M. N., & Al-Shorbaji, N. M. (2014). On the internet of things, smart cities and
the WHO healthy cities. International Journal of Health Geographics, 13, 10–15.
doi:10.1186/1476-072X-13-10

Bright, P. (2016). Moore’s law is really dead this time. Ars Technica. Retrieved from
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/02/moores-law-really-is-dead-this-
time/

Brown, M. M., & Brudney, J. L. (1998). Public sector information technology initiatives:
Implications for programs of public administration. Administration & Society, 30, 421–
442.

Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public Value Governance: Moving
beyond Traditional Public Administration and the New Public Management. Public
Administration Review, 74(4), 445-456. doi:10.1111/puar.12238

Bueno, S., & Gallego, M. D. (2017). Managing top management support in complex information
systems projects. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 19(1/2), 151-164.
doi:10.1108/JSIT-06-2017-0043

Buhalis, D., & Law, R. (2008). Progress in information technology and tourism management: 20
years on and 10 years after the Internet—The state of eTourism research. Tourism
Management, 29, 609–623. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.01.005

Buntz, B. (2016a). How to transform IoT from a buzzword to a competitive advantage. Internet
of Things Institute. Retrieved from http://www.ioti.com/print/938

Buntz, B. (2016b). Moving beyond buzzwords: Making digital transformation a reality. Internet
of Things Institute. Retrieved from http://www.ioti.com/print/1227

Buntz, B. (2017b). With internet of things security, small attacks could have big consequences.
Internet of Things Institute. Retrieved from http://www.ioti.com/print/2257

Cairney, T., & Speak, G. (2000). Developing a ‘Smart City’: Understanding Information
Technology Capacity and Establishing an Agenda for Change. Kingswood: School of
Social Ecology & Lifelong Learning, University of Western Sydney.

Campbell-Kelly, M., & Garcia-Swartz, D. D. (2013). The history of the internet: The missing
narratives. Journal of Information Technology, 28, 18–33. doi:10.1057/jit.2013.4

91
Cárdenas-García, P. J., Sánchez-Rivero, M., & Pulido-Fernández, J. I. (2015). Does tourism
growth influence economic development? Journal of Travel Research, 54, 206–221.
doi:10.1177/0047287513514297

Celino, I., & Kotoulas, S. (2013). Smart cities. IEEE Internet Computing, 17(6), 8–11.
doi:10.1109/MIC.2013.117

Chang, Y. S., Wang, W. J., & Hung, Y. S. (2013). A near field communication-driven home
automation framework. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17(1), 169–185.
doi:10.1007/s00779-011-0484-z

Chen, F., Deng, P., Wan, J., Zhang, D., Vasilakos, A. V., & Rong, X. (2015). Data mining for
the internet of things: Literature review and challenges. International Journal of
Distributed Sensor Networks, 2015. doi:10.1155/2015/431047

Chen, M., Mao, S., & Liu, Y. (2014). Big data: A survey. Mobile Networks and Applications, 19,
171–209. doi:10.1007/s11036-013-0489-0

Chen, M., Wan, J., & Li, F. (2012). Machine-to-machine communications: Architectures,
standards and applications. KSII transactions on Internet and information systems, 6(2),
480-497. doi:10.3837/tiis.2012.02.002

Chi-Fu, H., & Yu-Chee, T. (2005). The coverage problem in a wireless sensor network. Mobile
Networks and Applications, 10, 519–528. doi:10.1007/s11036-005-1564-y

Choi, M., Law, R., & Heo, C. Y. (2018). An Investigation of the Perceived Value of Shopping
Tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 57(7), 962-980. doi:10.1177/0047287517726170

Choudhury, B., & Goswami, C. (2013). Tourism revenue leakage check. SCMS Journal of
Indian Management, 10(1), 67-77. Retrieved from https://www.scms.edu.in/journal

Chourabi, H., Nam, T., Walker, S., Gil-Garcia, J. R., Mellouli, S., Nahon, K., & Scholl, H. J.
(2012). Understanding smart cities: An integrative framework. Paper presented at the
2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, HI.
doi:10.1109/HICSS.2012.615

Chung, Y. (2014). Architecture approach for mobile service security. International Journal of
Software Engineering and Its Applications, 8(5), 43–52. doi:10.14257/ijseia.2014.8.5.05

City of Austin. (2015). Capital improvements program (Five year plan). Retrieved from
http://www.austintexas.gov/department/capital-improvement-program-overview

City of Brownsville. (2017). City of Brownsville archived budgets. Retrieved from

http://www.cob.us/Archive.aspx?AMID=38

92
City of Cape Coral. (2015). Cape Coral strategic plan 2015–2017. Retrieved from
http://www.capecoral.net/department/information_technology_services/docs/Strategic_Pl
an_Elements_and_Initiatives__2_.pdf

City of Columbus. (2015). Smart City: The City of Columbus. Retrieved from
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/Columbus%20OH%20Vision%20
Narrative.pdf.

City of Corpus Christi. (2017). City of Corpus Christi budget and strategic management.
Retrieved from http://www.cctexas.com/departments/budget-strategic-management

City of Fayetteville. (2016, January 26). City of Fayetteville Citizen Engagement––Strategic

Planning Session. Retrieved from
https://fayettevillenc.gov/home/showdocument?id=4222

City of Fayetteville. (2017). Public computer and Internet usage. Retrieved from
http://fayettevillenc.gov/government/city-departments/information-technology/public-
computer-and-internet-usage

City of Fort Worth. (2017). City of Fort Worth budget and research. Retrieved from
http://fortworthtexas.gov/budget/

City of Ft. Lauderdale. (2015). City of Ft. Lauderdale strategic planning and budgeting cycle.
Retrieved from http://www.fortlauderdale.gov/departments/city-manager-s-office/budget-
cip-and-grants-division/strategic-planning-and-budgeting-cycle

City of Greensboro. (2017). City of Greensboro Connections 2025 Plan. Retrieved from
http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=25742

City of Hollywood Budget Division. (2017). Budget Division. Retrieved from

http://www.hollywoodfl.org/214/Budget-Division

City of Houston. (2017). City of Houston fiscal year operating budgets. Retrieved from
http://www.houstontx.gov/budget/

City of Laredo. (2017). City of Laredo budget department. Retrieved from

http://www.cityoflaredo.com/Budget/Budget_Index.htm

City of Miami. (2015). City of Miami strategic plan (2015–2017). Retrieved from
http://www.miamigov.com/strategicPlanning/docs/strategicPlanning/Strategic-Plan-12-
28.pdf

City of New Orleans. (2010). Plan for the 21st century. New Orleans, LA: City of New Orleans.

City of New Orleans. (2015). 2015 Executive Proposed Capital Improvement Plan. New
Orleans, LA: City of New Orleans.

93
City of Oakley. (2016). Smart city program for City of Oakley. Retrieved from
http://www.ci.oakley.ca.us/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/text5.1.pdf

City of Orlando. (2016). City of Orlando Fiscal Year 2016–2017 capital improvement plan.
Retrieved from http://www.cityoforlando.net/obfs/budget-reports/

City of Plano. (2015). City of Plano’s city manager recommended budget and proposed CIP.
Retrieved from https://www.plano.gov/DocumentCenter/View/14070

City of San Antonio. (2016). City of San Antonio Office of Management and Budget. Retrieved
from https://www.sanantonio.gov/budget

Coalition for Cybersecurity Policy & Law. (2016). Comments of the Coalition for Cybersecurity
Policy & Law. Retrieved from
https://www.nist.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2016/09/15/ccpl_rfi_response.pdf

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, (2nd ed.). HIllsdale,
N.J.: Earlbaum

Cohen, S. L., Susan, L. C., & Mary, T. (2018). Managing Technological Transitions by Building
Bridges. Academy of Management Journal, 61(6), 2319-2342.
doi:10.5465/amj.2015.0690

Comcast. (2016). XFINITY WiFi. Retrieved from http://wifi.xfinity.com/

Creswell, J. W. (2015). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review.
Journal of Management, 31, 874–900. doi:10.1177/0149206305279602

Cunningham, J. A., Menter, M., & Young, C. (2017). A review of qualitative case methods
trends and themes used in technology transfer research. Journal of Technology Transfer,
42(4), 923-956. doi:10.1007/s10961-016-9491-6

Dameri, R. P., & Benevolo, C. (2016). Governing smart cities: An empirical analysis. Social
Science Computer Review, 34, 693–707. doi:10.1177/0894439315611093

Daries, J. P., Reich, J., Waldo, J. I. M., Young, E. M., Whittinghill, J., Dean Ho, A., . . . Chuang,
I. (2014). Privacy, anonymity, and big data in the social sciences. Communications of the
ACM, 57(9), 56–63. doi:10.1145/2643132

Das, A., Singh, H., & Joseph, D. (2017). A longitudinal study of e-government maturity.
Information & Management, 54(4), 415-426. doi:10.1016/j.im.2016.09.006

Davies, A., Elwyn, J., & Thomas, A. (2014). Corporate strategy development via numerical
situation analysis. Benchmarking, 21, 619–633. doi:10.1108/BIJ-05-2012-0033
94
Davison, R. M., Ou, C. X. J., & Martinsons, M. G. (2013). Information technology to support
informal knowledge sharing. Information Systems Journal, 23, 89–109.
doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2012.00400.x

Delener, N. (2010). Current trends in the global tourism industry: Evidence from the United
States. Revista de Administração Pública, 44, 1125–1137. doi:10.1590/S0034-
761220100005000006

Ding, Y., Zhou, X. W., Cheng, Z. M., & Lin, F. H. (2013). A security differential game model
for sensor networks in context of the internet of things. Wireless Personal
Communications, 72, 375–388. doi:10.1007/s11277-013-1018-y

Dohler, M., Vilajosana, I., Vilajosana, X., & Llosa, J. (2011, December). Smart cities: An action
plan. Paper presented at the Proc. Barcelona Smart Cities Congress, Barcelona, Spain.
Domínguez Vila, T., Darcy, S., & Alén González, E. (2015). Competing for the disability
tourism market – A comparative exploration of the factors of accessible tourism
competitiveness in Spain and Australia. Tourism Management, 47, 261-272.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2014.10.008
Dopplick, R. (2016, June 3). ACM U.S. public policy council comments on the Internet of things
[Web log post]. Retrieved from https://techpolicy.acm.org/2016/06/acm-u-s-public-
policy-council-comments-on-the-internet-of-things/

Doty, P. (2015). U.S. homeland security and risk assessment. Government Information
Quarterly, 32(3), 342-352. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2015.04.008

Downs, T. (2016). Why Santa Monica is a smart city trailblazer. San Francisco, CA: Internet of
Things Institute.
Dutton, W. H. (2014). Putting things to work: Social and policy challenges for the internet of
things. Info: The Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunications,
Information and Media, 16(3), 1–21. doi:10.1108/info-09-2013-0047
EBSCO Information Services. (2018). In CINAHL, what are Research Instruments? Retrieved
from
https://help.ebsco.com/interfaces/CINAHL_MEDLINE_Databases/CINAHL/CINAHL_
Research_Instruments
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) Basics. (2016). What is EDI (Electronic Data Interchange)?
Retrieved from http://www.edibasics.com/what-is-edi/
Elias, A. A., & Davis, D. (2018). Analysing public sector continuous improvement: a systems
approach. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 31(1), 2-13.
doi:10.1108/IJPSM-08-2016-0135

95
Engel, R., Krathu, W., Zapletal, M., Pichler, C., Bose, R. P., Jagadeesh, . . . Huemer, C. (2016).
Analyzing inter-organizational business processes. Information Systems and eBusiness
Management, 14, 577–612. doi:10.1007/s10257-015-0295-2
Ensmenger, N. (2012). The digital construction of technology: Rethinking the history of
computers in society. Technology and Culture, 53, 753–776. doi:10.1353/tech.2012.0126
Euchner, J. (2013). Innovation is change management. Research–Technology Management,
56(4), 10-11. doi:10.5437/08956308X5604002
Explorable.com. (2017). Quantitative research design. Retrieved from
https://explorable.com/quantitative-research-design
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical
power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior
Research Methods, 39, 175-191
Firmin, M. M. (2017). Net Neutrality and scenarios of Internet Pricing. International Journal of
Computer Science Issues (IJCSI), 14(1), 108-114. doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.4668127
Flannigan, R. (2017). CONTESTING PUBLIC SERVICE FIDUCIARY ACCOUNTABILITY.
University of Queensland Law Journal, 36(1), 7-37. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3008800
Florida Building Commission. (1999). The Florida building code. Retrieved from
https://www.floridabuilding.org/fbc/publications/fbc.pdf

Florida Department of Revenue. (2017). Florida Department of Revenue quick facts. Retrieved
from http://floridarevenue.com/opengovt/Pages/quick_facts.aspx

Florida Government. (2016). Gov. Scott: Florida welcomed a record 105 million tourists in
2015. Retrieved from http://www.flgov.com/2016/02/18/gov-scott-florida-welcomed-a-
record-105-million-tourists-in-2015/

Foley, R. W., Petrucci, D., & Wiek, A. (2014). Imagining the future city. Issues in Science and
Technology, 31(1), 80–90. Retrieved from http://issues.org/31-1/imagining-the-future-
city/

Frost, J. (2015). Understanding hypothesis tests: Significance levels (alpha) and P values in
statistics. Retrieved from http://blog.minitab.com/blog/adventures-in-statistics-
2/understanding-hypothesis-tests%3A-significance-levels-alpha-and-p-values-in-statistics

Furukawa, M., & Minami, A. (2013). A study on the “flexibility” of information systems (Part
1): Why do they need to be flexible? International Journal of Business and Management,
8(20), 48-61. Retrieved from www.ccsenet.org/ijbm

Furukawa, M., Hirobayashi, S., & Misawa, T. (2014). A study on the “flexibility” of information
systems (Part 3): MIS flexibility planning scheme for IT/business strategy alignment.

96
 International Journal of Business and Management, 9(6), 88–97.
doi:10.5539/ijbm.v9n6p88

Ganglmair-Wooliscroft, A., & Wooliscroft, B. (2016). Diffusion of innovation: The case of

ethical tourism behavior. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 2711-2720.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.11.006

García, F. A., Balbuena, A., & Macías, R. C. (2015). Resident’s attitudes towards the impacts of
tourism. Tourism Management Perspectives, 13, 33–40. doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2014.11.002

Gastaud, E. (2017). FROM INTERNET OF THINGS TO SMART DATA FOR SMART

URBAN MONITORING. The International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote
Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XLII-4/W3, 19. doi:10.5194/isprs-archives-
XLII-4-W3-19-2017
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and
Reference 17.0 Update. 10th Edition. Boston: Pearson
Gil-Garcia, J. R., Helbig, N., & Ojo, A. (2014). Being smart: Emerging technologies and
innovation in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 31, I1–I8.
doi:10.1016/j.giq.2014.09.001

Gil-Garcia, J. R., Pardo, T. A., & Nam, T. (2015). What makes a city smart? Identifying core
components and proposing an integrative and comprehensive conceptualization.
Information Polity: The International Journal of Government & Democracy in the
Information Age, 20(1), 61-87. doi:10.3233/IP-150354

Glavas, C., Mathews, S., & Bianchi, C. (2017). International opportunity recognition as a critical
component for leveraging Internet capabilities and international market performance.
[Reconocimiento de oportunidad internacional como un componente critico para
apalancar capacidades de Internet en el desempeño de mercados internacionales]. Journal
of International Entrepreneurship, 15(1), 1-35. doi:10.1007/s10843-016-0191-y

Godfrey, A. N. (2016). 2015 Travel and tourism in Georgia. Retrieved from

http://www.marketgeorgia.org/master/files/resources/633/2015%20Travel%20FAQs.pdf

Goldfinch, S. (2007). Pessimism, computer failure, and information systems development in the
public sector. Public Administration Review, 67, 917–929. doi:10.1111/j.1540-
6210.2007.00778.x

Greater Ft. Lauderdale Alliance. (2017). Greater Ft. Lauderdale Alliance. Retrieved from
http://www.gflalliance.org/

Gretzel, U., Sigala, M., Xiang, Z., & Koo, C. (2015). Smart tourism: foundations and
developments. Electronic Markets, 25, 179-188. doi:10.1007/s12525-015-0196-8

97
Hall, P. (2014). Cities of tomorrow: An intellectual history of urban planning and design since
1880 (4th ed.). Somerset, England: Wiley-Blackwell.

Haug, A. V. (2018). Innovation and network leadership: The bureaucracy strikes back?
Information Polity: The International Journal of Government & Democracy in the
Information Age, 23(3), 325-339. doi:10.3233/IP-170052

Head, B. W., Brian, W. H., & John, A. (2015). Wicked Problems: Implications for Public Policy
and Management. Administration & Society, 47(6), 711-739.
doi:10.1177/0095399713481601

Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evidence-
based nursing, 18(3), 66–67. doi:10.1136/eb-2015-102129

Henry, R. L. (2015). Institutional citizenship: Supporting successful technology initiatives.

Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41, 358–359. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2015.02.015

Holum, M. L., & Marthe Liss, H. (2016). Governance of a public sector joint venture: the control
challenges of dominated owners. Local government studies, 42(6), 1004-1023.
doi:10.1080/03003930.2016.1207631

Hooke, R. L., & Martín-Duque, J. F. (2012). Land transformation by humans: A review. GSA
Today, 12(12), 4–10. doi:10.1130/gsat151a.1

Hooper, V., & Bunker, B. (2013). The role and requisite competencies of the public sector CIO:
A two-sided perspective. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 16, 189–
200. Retrieved from http://www.ejise.com

Hoque, S. M. S., & Alam, S. M. S. (2010). The role of Information and Communication
Technologies (ICTs) in delivering higher education – A case of Bangladesh.
International Education Studies, 3, 97-106. doi:10.5539/ies.v3n2p97

HornbÆK, K., & Hertzum, M. (2017). Technology Acceptance and User Experience: A Review
of the Experiential Component in HCI. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human
Interaction (TOCHI), 24(5), 1-30. doi:10.1145/3127358

Hoyng, R. (2016). From infrastructural breakdown to data vandalism: Repoliticizing the smart
city? Television & New Media, 17, 397–415. doi:10.1177/1527476415617032

Hughes, O. (2017). Public management: 30 years on. The International Journal of Public Sector
Management, 30(6-7), 547-554. doi:10.1108/IJPSM-06-2017-0174

Hultman, K. E., & Hultman, J. M. (2015). Organization development as identity change.

Organization Development Journal, 33(3), 39–54. Retrieved from
http://www.kenhultman.com/uploads/Organization_Development_as_Identity_Change.p
df

98
Hwang, Y., Al-Arabiat, M., & Shin, D. H. (2016). Understanding technology acceptance in a
mandatory environment: A literature review. Information Development, 32, 1266–1283.
doi:10.1177/0266666915593621

IBM. (2016). Comments of IBM. Retrieved from

https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/ibm_submission_to_doc_rfc_on_iot_060
22016.pdf

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA (IEEE-USA). (2016). Comments of IEEE-

USA. Retrieved from
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/ieeeusa_comments_to_ntia.pdf

International Institute for Analytics. (2015). The internet of things: Opportunities and
applications across industries. Portland, OR: Mann, Jason.

Jacobson, W. S., & Sowa, J. E. (2016). Municipal Human Resource Management. State & local
government review, 48(2), 121-131. doi:10.1177/0160323X16658696

Jin, S., & Cho, C. M. (2015). Is ICT a new essential for national economic growth in an
information society? Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 253-260.
doi:10.1016/j.giq.2015.04.007

Johnston, M., Dixon, D., Hart, J., Glidewell, L., Schröder, C., & Pollard, B. (2014). Discriminant
content validity: A quantitative methodology for assessing content of theory-based
measures, with illustrative applications. British Journal of Health Psychology, 19(2),
240-257. doi:10.1111/bjhp.12095

Joseph, A. O., Kathrine, J. W., & Vijayan, R. (2014). Cloud security mechanisms for data
protection: A survey. International Journal of Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering,
9(9), 81–90. doi:10.14257/ijmue.2014.9.9.09

Kamal, M. M., Bigdeli, A. Z., Themistocleous, M., & Morabito, V. (2015). Investigating factors
influencing local government decision makers while adopting integration technologies
(IntTech). Information & Management, 52(2), 135-150. doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.06.007

Kan, M. (2016, September 12). Crafty malware is found targeting U.S. government employees.
CSO. Boston, MA: IDG News Service. Retrieved from
https://www.csoonline.com/article/3118887/security/crafty-malware-is-found-targeting-
us-government-employees.html?token=%23tk.CSONLE_nlt_cso_update_2016-09-
12&idg_eid=81b8dfbb1d92f0f6c988f5391817a6fc&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium
=email&utm_campaign=New%20Campaign%202016-09-
12&utm_term=cso_update#tk.CSO_nlt_security_awareness_weekly_2016-09-12

Kaneshige, T. (2016, October 11). 8 Internet of things roadblocks. San Francisco, CA: Internet
of Things Institute.

99
Kantar, T. N. S. (2014). Calendar Year 2014 Louisiana TravelsAmerica visitor profile report.
Retrieved from https://www.crt.state.la.us/Assets/Tourism/research/documents/2014-
2015/Louisiana%202014%20Visitor%20Profile.pdf

Kapmeier, F., Florian, K., & Paulo, G. (2018). Wasted paradise? Policies for Small Island States
WRPDQDJHWRXULVPဨGULYHQJURZWKZKLOHFRQWUROOLQJZDVWHJHQHUDWLRQWKHFDVHRIWKH
Maldives. System dynamics review, 34(1-2), 172-221. doi:10.1002/sdr.1607

Kathuria, V. (2016). Access and Investment in the ICT Sector for Developing Countries. Law
and Development Review, 9(1), 1-27. doi:10.1515/ldr-2015-0013

Keta, M. (2015). Smart city, smart administration and sustainable development. Romanian
Economic and Business Review, 10(3), 43–56. Retrieved from
https://ideas.repec.org/a/rau/journl/v10y2015i3p43-56.html

Khan, Z., Anjum, A., Soomro, K., & Tahir, M. A. (2015). Towards cloud based big data
analytics for smart future cities. Journal of Cloud Computing, 4(1), 1-11.
doi:10.1186/s13677-015-0026-8

Kickert, W. J. M., & Walter, J. M. K. (2014). Specificity of Change Management in Public

Organizations: Conditions for Successful Organizational Change in Dutch Ministerial
Departments. American review of public administration, 44(6), 693-717.
doi:10.1177/0275074013483871

Kim, D., & Kim, S. (2017). The Role of Mobile Technology in Tourism: Patents, Articles, News,
and Mobile Tour App Reviews. Sustainability, 9(11), 2082. doi:10.3390/su9112082

Kim, G. H., Trimi, S., & Chung, J. H. (2014). Big-data applications in the government sector.
Communications of the ACM, 57, 78–85. doi:10.1145/2500873

Kitchin, R. (2014). The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal, 79, 1–14.
doi:10.1007/s10708-013-9516-8

Knisley, J. R. (2016, December 16). Power over ethernet matures. EC & M. Retrieved from
http://www.ecmweb.com/low-voltagecommunications/power-over-ethernet-matures

Koenig, S. (2017). The future is bright for smart cities [Web log post]. Retrieved from
https://www.cta.tech/News/Blog/Articles/2017/August/Smart-Cities-The-Next-Big-
Thing.aspx

Komninos, N., Pallot, M., & Schaffers, H. (2013). Special issue on smart cities and the future
internet in Europe. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 4, 119–134. doi:10.1007/s13132-
012-0083-x

100
Kostewicz, D. E., King, S. A., Datchuk, S. M., Brennan, K. M., & Casey, S. D. (2016). Data
collection and measurement assessment in behavioral research: 1958–2013. Behavior
Analysis: Research and Practice, 16(1), 19-33. doi:10.1037/bar0000031

Kumar, H., Singh, M. K., Gupta, M. P., & Madaan, J. (2018). Moving towards smart cities:
Solutions that lead to the Smart City Transformation Framework. Technological
Forecasting and Social Change. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.04.024

La Rocca, R. A. (2014). Smart city challenges: Planning for smart cities. Dealing with new urban
challenges. Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment, 7, 267–287.
doi:10.6092/1970-9870/2866.

Lamers, M., van der Duim, R., & Spaargaren, G. (2017). The relevance of practice theories for
tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research, 62, 54–63.
doi:10.1016/j.annals.2016.12.002

LaMorte, W. N. (2016). Diffusion of innovation theory. Retrieved from

http://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/MPH-Modules/SB/BehavioralChangeTheories
/BehavioralChangeTheories4.html

Lanza, J., Sanchez, L., Muñoz, L., Galache, J. A., Sotres, P., Santana, J. R., & Gutierrez, V.
(2015). Large-scale mobile sensing enabled internet-of-things testbed for smart city
services. International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 2015, 1–15.
doi:10.1155/2015/785061

Lanza, J., Sánchez, L., Gutiérrez, V., Galache, J., Santana, J., Sotres, P., & Muñoz, L. (2016).
Smart city services over a future internet platform based on internet of things and cloud:
The smart parking case. Energies, 9, 719. doi:10.3390/en9090719

Lara, A. P., Moreira Da Costa, E., Furlani, T. Z., & Yigitcanlar, T. (2016). Smartness that
matters: towards a comprehensive and human-centred characterisation of smart cities.
Journal of open innovation, 2(1). doi:10.1186/s40852-016-0034-z

Lavassani, K. M., Movahedi, B., & Parry, G. (2014). Broadband internet adoption challenge: An
investigation of broadband utilization in the United States. Transforming Government:
People, Process and Policy, 8, 620–644. doi:10.1108/TG-11-2013-0050

Law, R., Buhalis, D., & Cobanoglu, C. (2014). Progress on information and communication
technologies in hospitality and tourism. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 26(5), 727-750. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-08-2013-0367

Lee, H. J. (2015). A study on social issue solutions using the “Internet of things” (Focusing on a
crime prevention camera system). International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks,
2015, 747593–747601. doi:10.1155/2015/747593

101
Lee, J., & Lee, H. (2014). Developing and validating a citizen-centric typology for smart city
services. Government Information Quarterly, 31, S93-S105.
doi:10.1016/j.giq.2014.01.010

Leung, L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of

Family Medicine and Primary Care, 4, 324–327. doi:10.4103/2249-4863.161306

Liao, H., Wang, B., Li, B., & Weyman-Jones, T. (2016). ICT as a general-purpose technology:
The productivity of ICT in the United States revisited. Information Economics and
Policy, 36, 10-25. doi:10.1016/j.infoecopol.2016.05.001

Liu, S., & Wang, L. (2014). Understanding the impact of risks on performance in internal and
outsourced information technology projects: The role of strategic importance.
International Journal of Project Management, 32, 1494–1510.
doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.01.012

Longwoods International. (2014). Jacksonville 2013 visitor report. Retrieved from http://visit-
jax.s3.amazonaws.com/4594/jacksonville_2013_visitor_report_final_-_copy.pdf

Lorences, P. P., & Ávila, L. F. G. (2013). The evaluation and improvement of IT governance.
Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management: JISTEM, 10, 219–234.
doi:10.4301/S1807-177520130002000002

Lowry, P. B., Gaskin, J. E., Twyman, N. W., Hammer, B., & Roberts, T. L. (2013). Taking “fun
and games” seriously: Proposing the hedonic-motivation system adoption model
(HMSAM). Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14, 617–671. Retrieved
from http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol14/iss11/2/

Lynggaard, P., & Skouby, K. (2016). Complex IoT systems as enablers for smart homes in a
smart city vision. Sensors, 16, 1840. doi:10.3390/s16111840

Ma, S., Chen, X., Li, Z., & Yang, Y. (2018). A Retrieval Optimized Surveillance Video Storage
System for Campus Application Scenarios. Journal of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, 2018, 10. doi:10.1155/2018/3839104

Maddison, R., & Ni Mhurchu, C. (2009). Global positioning system: A new opportunity in
physical activity measurement. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and
Physical Activity, 6(1), 73. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-6-73

Mallya, J., & Sethumadhavan, L. (2017). Factors Influencing Usage of Internet for Academic
Purposes Using Technology Acceptance Model. DESIDOC Journal of Library &
Information Technology, 37(2), 119-124. doi:10.14429/djlit.37.2.10694

Marais, M., du Plessis, E., & Saayman, M. (2017). A review on critical success factors in
tourism. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 31, 1-12.
doi:10.1016/j.jhtm.2016.09.002
102
Martins, A. (2014). Managing tourism: A municipal enterprise and unfulfilled financial hopes.
Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 15, 60-71. Retrieved from http://na-
businesspress.homestead.com/JMPP/MartinsA_Web15_2_.pdf

Maylor, H. R., Turner, N. W., & Murray-Webster, R. (2013). How hard can it be? Research
Technology Management, 56(4), 45–51. doi:10.5437/08956308X5602125

McBurney v. Young, 569 U.S. (2013). Retrieved from

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-17_d1o2.pdf

McCauley, R. (2016, October 28). What small cities should know about getting smarter. Digital
Communities. Retrieved from http://www.govtech.com/fs/what-small-cities-should-
know-about-getting-smarter.html

McDonald, S., & Simpson, B. (2014). Shadowing research in organizations: the methodological
debates. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 9(1), 3-20.
doi:10.1108/QROM-02-2014-1204

Meijer, A. (2015). E-governance innovation: Barriers and strategies. Government Information

Quarterly, 32(2), 198-206. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2015.01.001

Meijer, A., & Bolívar, M. P. R. (2016). Governing the smart city: A review of the literature on
smart urban governance. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 82(2), 392–
408. doi:10.1177/0020852314564308

Meijer, A. J., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Bolivar, M. P. R. (2015). Smart city research: Contextual
conditions, governance models, and public value assessment. Social Science Computer
Review, 34, 647–656. doi:10.1177/0894439315618890

Meller, H., & Hein, C. (2016). Report on ‘Planning History Workshop’ held at TU Delft, June
11–13, 2015. Planning Perspectives, 31(1), 121-129.
doi:10.1080/02665433.2015.1092881

Merriam-Webster. (2016). Ex Post Facto. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/ex%20post%20facto.

Michaels, J., & Jon, D. M. (2015, February 10). Running government like a business ... Then and
now. Harvard Law Review, 128(4). Retrieved from https://harvardlawreview.org

Microsoft. (2016). Comments of Microsoft. Retrieved from

https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/microsofts_response_to_iot_rfc.pdf.

Mishler, E. G. (1990). Validation in inquiry-guided research: The role of exemplars in narrative

studies. Harvard Educational Review, 60, 415–443.
doi:10.17763/haer.60.4.n4405243p6635752

103
Mishra, A., Das, S., & Murray, J. (2015). Managing risks in federal government information
technology projects: Does process maturity matter? Production & Operations
Management, 24, 365–368. doi:10.1111/poms.12258_4

Mississippi Development Authority Tourism Division. (2011, September 28). Travel and
tourism in Mississippi. Retrieved from
http://www.mississippi.edu/urc/downloads/presentations/mbwilkerson_110928.pdf

Mongelas, R. (2016). Enabling tomorrow’s connected infrastructure for IoT. San Francisco, CA:
Legrand. Retrieved from
https://www.anixter.com/content/dam/Suppliers/Ortronics/White%20Papers/ORT-
WhitePaper-IoT-INT_R2.pdf

Moon, M. J., Jooho, L., & Chul-Young, R. (2014). The Evolution of Internal IT Applications and
e-Government Studies in Public Administration: Research Themes and Methods.
Administration & Society, 46(1), 3-36. doi:10.1177/0095399712459723

Moore, G. E. (n.d.). Moore’s law. Retrieved from http://www.mooreslaw.org/

Mora, L., Deakin, M., & Reid, A. (2018). Strategic principles for smart city development: A
multiple case study analysis of European best practices. Technological Forecasting and
Social Change (0040-1625). doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.035

Mora-Mora, H., Gilart-Iglesias, V., Gil, D., & Sirvent-Llamas, A. (2015). A computational
architecture based on RFID sensors for traceability in smart cities. Sensors, 15, 13591–
13626. doi:10.3390/s150613591

Moss, P. A. (1994). Can there be validity without reliability? Educational Researcher, 23(2), 5–
12. doi:10.2307/1176218

Motorola Solutions Inc. (2016). Comments of Motorola Solutions, Inc. Retrieved from
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/msi_iot_rfc_comments_060216.pdf

Muller, H. (2015). The big shift in IT leadership: How great CIOs leverage the power of
technology for strategic business growth in the customer-centric economy. Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley.

Nam, T., & Pardo, T. A. (2011, October 26–28). Smart city as urban innovation: Focusing on
management, policy, and context. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 5th
International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, Tallinn,
Estonia.

Nasiri, S. (2017). Investigating the Mediating Role of Information Technology in Effectiveness

of Structure on Professional Performance of the Organizations. International Journal of
Economic Perspectives, 11(2), 877-891.

104
Navío-Marco, J., Ruiz-Gómez, L. M., & Sevilla-Sevilla, C. (2018). Progress in information
technology and tourism management: 30 years on and 20 years after the internet -
Revisiting Buhalis & Law's landmark study about eTourism. Tourism Management, 69,
460-470. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2018.06.002

Neher, C., Duffield, J., & Patterson, D. (2013). Valuation of National Park System Visitation:
The Efficient Use of Count Data Models, Meta-Analysis, and Secondary Visitor Survey
Data. Environmental Management, 52(3), 683-698. doi:10.1007/s00267-013-0080-2

Neirotti, P., Raguseo, E., & Paolucci, E. (2018). How SMEs develop ICT-based capabilities in
response to their environment. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 31(1),
10-37. doi:10.1108/JEIM-09-2016-0158

Nelson, K. L., & Svara, J. H. (2012). Form of government still matters: Fostering innovation in
U.S. municipal governments. The American Review of Public Administration, 42, 257–
281. doi:10.1177/0275074011399898

Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2014). A typology of technology-enhanced tourism
experiences. International Journal of Tourism Research, 16, 340-350.
doi:10.1002/jtr.1958

1LFKROVRQဨ&URWW\61LFKROVRQဨ&URWW\- )HUQDQGH]63HUIRUPDQFHDQG

Management in the Public Sector: Testing a Model of Relative Risk Aversion. Public
Administration Review, 77(4), 603-614. doi:10.1111/puar.12619

Noble, H., & Smith, J. (2015). Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. Evidence -
Based Nursing, 18(2), 34. doi:10.1136/eb-2015-102054

North Carolina Department of Commerce. (2014). 2013 North Carolina visitor profile. Retrieved
from
https://www.nccommerce.com/Portals/8/Documents/Research/Visitation/2013%20North
%20Carolina%20Visitor%20Profile%20NEW.pdf

North Carolina Department of Commerce. (2017). Visitor profile reports. Retrieved from
https://www.nccommerce.com/tourism/research/visitation-research/visitor-profile-reports

Nuijten, A., Keil, M., & Commandeur, H. (2016). Collaborative partner or opponent: How the
messenger influences the deaf effect in IT projects. European Journal of Information
Systems, 25(6), 534-552. doi:10.1057/ejis.2016.6

Nwankpa, J. K., & Datta, P. (2017). Balancing exploration and exploitation of IT resources: the
influence of Digital Business Intensity on perceived organizational performance.
European Journal of Information Systems, 26(5), 469-488. doi:10.1057/s41303-017-
0049-y

105
Nyland, K., & Pettersen, I. J. (2015). Hybrid controls and accountabilities in public sector
management. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 28, 90–104.
doi:10.1108/IJPSM-07-2014-0085

O'Toole, L. J. (2015). Networks and Networking: The Public Administrative Agendas. In (Vol.
75, pp. 361-371): Wiley-Blackwell

Oesterle, S., Buchwald, A., & Urbach, N. (2016, December 11). Understanding the co-creation
of value emerging from the collaboration between IT consulting firms and their
customers. Paper presented at the Thirty Seventh International Conference on
Information Systems, Dublin, Ireland

Ortiz, M. J., Mihai, M. M., & Sanga, P. R. (2015). Louisiana Tourism Forecast 2015–2018.
Retrieved from https://www.crt.state.la.us/Assets/Tourism/research/documents/2014-
2015/Louisiana%20Tourism%20Forecast%20Report%204%2015%2015.pdf

Palermo, T. (2014). Accountability and expertise in public sector risk management: A case
study. Financial Accountability & Management, 30, 322–341. doi:10.1111/faam.12039

Pang, M. S. (2014). IT governance and business value in the public sector organizations—The
role of elected representatives in IT governance and its impact on IT value in U.S. state
governments. Decision Support Systems, 59, 274–285. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2013.12.006

Pang, M. S., Lee, G., & DeLone, W. H. (2014). IT resources, organizational capabilities, and
value creation in public-sector organizations: A public-value management perspective.
Journal of Information Technology, 29, 187–205. doi:10.1057/jit.2014.2

Pardo, T. A., Nam, T., & Burke, G. B. (2011). E-Government Interoperability: Interaction of
Policy, Management, and Technology Dimensions. Social Science Computer Review,
30(1), 7-23. doi:10.1177/0894439310392184

Paroutis, S., Bennett, M., & Heracleous, L. (2014). A strategic view on smart city technology:
The case of IBM smarter cities during a recession. Technological Forecasting and Social
Change, 89, 262–272. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2013.08.041

Partala, T., & Saari, T. (2015). Understanding the most influential user experiences in successful
and unsuccessful technology adoptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 381-395.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.012

Pei, X. L., Wang, X., Wang, Y. F., & Li, M. K. (2013). Internet of things based education:
Definition, benefits, and challenges. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 411–414, 2947.
doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.411-414.2947

Pennsylvania State University. (2016). Hypothesis testing (P-value approach). Retrieved from
https://onlinecourses.science.psu.edu/statprogram/node/138

106
Perera, C., Ranjan, R., Wang, L., Khan, S. U., & Zomaya, A. Y. (2015). Big data privacy in the
internet of things era. IT Professional, 17(3), 32–39. doi:10.1109/mitp.2015.34

Pinzur, M. S. (2018). The Peer Review Process. Foot & ankle international, 39(11), 1383-1384.
doi:10.1177/1071100718797614

Piovano, L., Garrido, D., Silva, R., & Galloso, I. (2014). What (smart) data visualizations can
offer to smart city science (*). Communications & Strategies, 96, 89–112, 165, 167.

Poncela, J., Moreno-Roldan, J., Aamir, M., & Alvi, B. A. (2015). M2M challenges and
opportunities in 4G. Wireless Personal Communications, 85, 407–420.
doi:10.1007/s11277-015-2746-y

Poncela, J., Vlacheas, P., Giaffreda, R., De, S., Vecchio, M., Nechifor, S., & Demestichas, P.
(2014). Smart cities via data aggregation. Wireless Personal Communications, 76, 149–
168. doi:10.1007/s11277-014-1683-5

Popescu, A. (2014). Considerations on the trends of international tourism receipts. Scientific

Papers Series: Management, 14, 201–210. Retrieved from
http://managementjournal.usamv.ro/pdf/vol14_4/art32.pdf

Popescu, G. H. (2015). The economic value of smart city technology. Economics, Management
& Financial Markets, 10(4), 76–82. Retrieved from
https://addletonacademicpublishers.com/economics-management-and-financial-markets

Prandi, C., Mirri, S., Ferretti, S., & Salomoni, P. (2017). On the Need of Trustworthy Sensing
and Crowdsourcing for Urban Accessibility in Smart City. ACM Trans. Internet Technol.,
18(1), 1-21. doi:10.1145/3133327

Quinones, B., & Benjamin, B. Q. (1994). Redevelopment redefined: Revitalizing the central city
with resident control. Journal of Law Reform, 27, 689–963.

Rathore, M. M., Paul, A., Hong, W.-H., Seo, H., Awan, I., & Saeed, S. (2018). Exploiting IoT
and big data analytics: Defining Smart Digital City using real-time urban data.
Sustainable Cities and Society, 40, 600-610. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2017.12.022

Rich, R. (2013). The great recession (December 2007 – June 2009). Retrieved from
https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/great_recession_of_200709

Rochet, C., & Pinzón Correa, J. D. (2016). Urban lifecycle management: A research program for
smart government of smart cities. Revista de Gestão e Secretariado, 7(2), 01-20.
doi:10.7769/gesec.7i2.531

Rodríguez, I., Williams, A. M., & Hall, C. M. (2014). Tourism innovation policy:
Implementation and outcomes. Annals of Tourism Research, 49, 76-93.
doi:10.1016/j.annals.2014.08.004

107
Romão, J., Kourtit, K., Neuts, B., & Nijkamp, P. (2018). The smart city as a common place for
tourists and residents: A structural analysis of the determinants of urban attractiveness.
Cities, 78, 67-75. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2017.11.007

Sarka, P., & Ipsen, C. (2017). Knowledge sharing via social media in software development: a
systematic literature review. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 15(4), 594-
609. doi:10.1057/s41275-017-0075-5

Schindler, S., Mitlin, D., & Marvin, S. (2018). National urban policy making and its potential for
sustainable urbanism. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 34, 48-53.
doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2018.11.006

Security Industry Association. (2016). Comments of the Security Industry Association. Retrieved
from https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/secia.pdf

Sedgwick, P. (2013). Convenience sampling. BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online), 347.
doi:10.1136/bmj.f6304

Seyed Kalali, N., & Heidari, A. (2016). How was competitive advantage sustained in
management consultancies during change. Journal of Organizational Change
Management, 29(5), 661-685. doi:10.1108/JOCM-10-2015-0188

Shearmur, R., & Poirier, V. (2017). Conceptualizing nonmarket municipal entrepreneurship:

Everyday municipal innovation and the roles of metropolitan context, internal resources,
and learning. Urban Affairs Review, 53, 718–751. doi:10.1177/1078087416636482

Shichiyakh, R. A., Klyuchnikov, D. A., Balashova, S. P., Novoselov, S. N., & Novosyolova, N.
N. (2016). Smart city as the basic construct of the socio-economic development of
territories. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 6(1S), 157–162.
Retrieved from http://www.econjournals.com/index.php/ijefi/article/download/2371/pdf

Sick, N., Preschitschek, N., Leker, J., & Bröring, S. (2018). A new framework to assess industry
convergence in high technology environments. Technovation.
doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2018.08.001

Smart Cities Council. (2015, October 25). Transportation. Retrieved from

https://smartcitiescouncil.com/resources/smart-cities-readiness-guide

Smith, A. C., & Taebel, D. A. (1985). Administrative innovation in municipal government.

International Journal of Public Administration, 7, 149–199.
doi:10.1080/0190068508524487

Spacey, R., Muir, A., Cooke, L., & Creaser, C. (2017). Filtering wireless (Wi-Fi) Internet access
in public places. Journal of librarianship and information science, 49(1), 15-25.
doi:10.1177/0961000615590693

108
Speklé, R. F., & Verbeeten, F. H. M. (2014). The use of performance measurement systems in
the public sector: Effects on performance. Management Accounting Research, 25(2),
131-146. doi:10.1016/j.mar.2013.07.004

Stabrowski, F. (2015). Inclusionary Zoning and Exclusionary Development: The Politics of

'Affordable Housing' in North Brooklyn. International Journal of Urban & Regional
Research, 39(6), 1120-1136. doi:10.1111/1468-2427.12297

Statistica. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.statista.com/statistics/201182/forecast-of-

smartphone-users-in-the-us/
Stewart, T. (2012). Knowledge sharing. Behavior & Information Technology, 31, 1055–1056.
doi:10.1080/0144929X.2012.745277

Tapia, A. H., & Ortiz, J. A. (2010). Network hopes: Municipalities deploying wireless internet to
increase civic engagement. Social Science Computer Review, 28(1), 93–117.
doi:10.1177/0894439309335169

Tfaily, R. A. (2018). E-Tourism and the Competitiveness of Tourism Products in the Context of
the Global Tourism and Travel Industry Market. Revista de Management Comparat
International, 19(2), 187-195. doi:10.24818/RMCI.2018.2.187

The White House. (2016). Fact sheet: Announcing over $80 million in new federal investment
and a doubling of participating communities in the White House Smart City Initiative.
Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/09/26/fact-
sheet-announcing-over-80-million-new-federal-investment-and

Theron, M. (2014). Chipmakers sector bubbling up. Investors Chronicle. Retrieved from
https://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/2014/09/16/shares/news-and-analysis/chipmakers-
sector-bubbling-up-y71Oi2icUo8zLR8U15NQfN/article.html

Tonelli, A. O., de Souza Bermejo, P. H., Aparecida Dos Santos, P., Zuppo, L., & Zambalde, A.
L. (2017). IT governance in the public sector: a conceptual model. Information Systems
Frontiers, 19(3), 593-610. doi:10.1007/s10796-015-9614-x

Torres-Delgado, A., & Palomeque, F. L. (2014). Measuring sustainable tourism at the municipal
level. Annals of Tourism Research, 49, 122-137. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2014.09.003

Tourism Economics. (2016). The economic impact of tourism in Jacksonville, FL. Retrieved
from http://cdn.visitjacksonville.com/4594/2015_economic_impact_report.pdf

Tribe, J., & Mkono, M. (2017). Not such smart tourism? The concept of e-lienation. Annals of
Tourism Research, 66, 105-115. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2017.07.001

109
Triggs, R. (2016, January 8). WiFi standards explained: What you should know about the new
802.11 ad, ah & af standards. Retrieved from http://www.androidauthority.com/wifi-
standards-explained-802-11b-g-n-ac-ad-ah-af-666245/

Truong, N. B., Lee, H., Askwith, B., & Lee, G. M. (2017). Toward a trust evaluation mechanism
in the social internet of things. Sensors, 17(6), 1346. doi:10.3390/s17061346

Tsagaris, G. S., Seck, M. M., Keeler, J., & Rowe, R. (2016). Geographic information system
analysis of developmentally disabled adult offenders. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities
and Offending Behavior, 7(1), 4–13. doi:10.1108/JIDOB-09-2015-0028

Turban, E., Volonino, L., Wood, G. R., Sipior, J. C., & Gessner, G. H. (2015). Information
technology for management: Digital strategies for insight, action, and sustainable
performance (10th ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

U.S. Travel Association. (2016a). 2015 travel economic impact on Georgia state, counties and
regions. Retrieved from
http://www.marketgeorgia.org/master/files/resources/782/2015%20Travel%20Economic
%20Impact%20on%20Georgia_Revised.pdf

U.S. Travel Association. (2016). U.S. Travel and Tourism Overview (2016). Washington, D. C.
Retrieved from
https://www.ustravel.org/system/files/Media%20Root/Document/Research_Fact-
Sheet_US-Travel-and-Tourism-Overview.pdf.

Ullah, I., & Jones, B. (2015). Regularized Manova for high-dimensional data. Australian & New
Zealand Journal of Statistics, 57, 377–389. doi:10.1111/anzs.12126

Vanolo, A. (2014). Smart mentality: The smart city as disciplinary strategy. Urban Studies, 51,
883–898. doi:10.1177/0042098013494427

Vijayan, J. (2017). Proposed IoT security bill well-intentioned but likely hard to enforce.
Retrieved from https://www.darkreading.com/iot/proposed-iot-security-bill-well-
intentioned-but-likely-hard-to-enforce/d/d-id/1329521

Visit Mississippi. (2016). Travel and tourism economic contribution report 2015. Retrieved from
http://visitmississippi.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Mississippi-Tourism-Economic-
Contribution-Report-for-2015.pdf

Vogelsang, I. (2017). Regulatory inertia versus ICT dynamics: The case of product innovations.
Telecommunications Policy, 41, 978-990. doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2017.09.006

Walravens, N. (2015). Qualitative indicators for smart city business models: The case of mobile
services and applications. Telecommunications Policy, 39, 218-240.
doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2014.12.011

110
Wang, X., Li, X., Zhen, F., & Zhang, J. (2016). How smart is your tourist attraction?: Measuring
tourist preferences of smart tourism attractions via a FCEM-AHP and IPA approach.
Tourism Management, 54, 309-320. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2015.12.003

Warner, R. (2013). Applied Statistics: From Bivariate Through Multivariate Techniques, 2nd ed.
Los Angeles: Sage Publications

Weber, V. (2017). The synergetic smart city framework – From idea to reality. Real Estate
Issues, 75–81. Retrieved from https://www.cre.org

Weigelt, J. (2008, December). Driving innovation through interoperability. Open Source

Business Resource. Retrieved from https://timreview.ca/article/215

Weng, W. H., & Lin, W. T. (2014). Development trends and strategy planning in big data
industry. Contemporary Management Research, 10, 203–213. doi:10.7903/cmr.12288

West, D., & Blackman, D. (2015). Performance management in the public sector. Australian
Journal of Public Administration, 74, 73–81. doi:10.1111/1467-8500.12130

Wilbur, K. C. (2008). How the digital video recorder (DVR) changes traditional television
advertising. Journal of Advertising, 37(1), 143–149. doi:10.2753/JOA0091-3367370111

Woo, E., Kim, H., & Uysal, M. (2015). Life satisfaction and support for tourism development.
Annals of Tourism Research, 50, 84–97. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2014.11.001

World Health Organization. (2016). Urban population growth. Retrieved from

http://www.who.int/gho/urban_health/situation_trends/urban_population_growth_text/en/

Yeh, C.-H., Lee, G.-G., & Pai, J.-C. (2015). Using a technology-organization-environment
framework to investigate the factors influencing e-business information technology
capabilities. Information Development, 31(5), 435-450. doi:10.1177/0266666913516027

Yoo, C. W., Goo, J., Huang, C. D., Nam, K., & Woo, M. (2017). Improving travel decision
support satisfaction with smart tourism technologies: A framework of tourist elaboration
likelihood and self-efficacy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 123, 330-
341. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.10.071

Yunis, M., Tarhini, A., & Kassar, A. (2018). The role of ICT and innovation in enhancing
organizational performance: The catalysing effect of corporate entrepreneurship. Journal
of Business Research, 88, 344-356. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.030

Zammuto, R. F., Griffith, T. L., Majchrzak, A., Dougherty, D. J., & Faraj, S. (2007). Information
technology and the changing fabric of organization. Organization Science, 18, 749–762,
881–883. doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0307

111
Zanella, A., Bui, N., Castellani, A., Vangelista, L., & Zorzi, M. (2014). Internet of things for
smart cities. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 1, 22–32. doi:10.1109/jiot.2014.2306328

Zha, J., Jianping, Z., & Zhiyong, L. (2017). Drivers of tourism growth: Evidence from China.
Tourism Economics: The Business and Finance of Tourism and Recreation, 23(5).
doi:10.1177/1354816616656421

Zhang, W. B. (2015). Tourism, trade, externalities, and public goods in a three-sector growth
model. UTMS Journal of Economics, 6, 1–19. Retrieved rom
http://www.utmsjoe.mk/files/Vol.%206%20No.%201/6-1-1-
UTMS_Journal_of_Economics.pdf

Zhao, K., & Xia, M. (2014). Forming Interoperability Through Interorganizational Systems
Standards. Journal of Management Information Systems, 30(4), 269-298.
doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222300410

Zygiaris, S. (2013). Smart city reference model: Assisting planners to conceptualize the building
of smart city innovation ecosystems. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 4, 217–231.
doi:10.1007/s13132-012-0089-4

112
 STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK

Academic Honesty Policy

Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy (3.01.01) holds learners accountable for the
integrity of work they submit, which includes but is not limited to discussion postings,
assignments, comprehensive exams, and the dissertation or capstone project.
Established in the Policy are the expectations for original work, rationale for the policy, definition
of terms that pertain to academic honesty and original work, and disciplinary consequences of
academic dishonesty. Also stated in the Policy is the expectation that learners will follow APA rules
for citing another person’s ideas or works.
The following standards for original work and definition of plagiarism are discussed in the Policy:
Learners are expected to be the sole authors of their work and to acknowledge the authorship
of others’ work through proper citation and reference. Use of another person’s ideas,
including another learner’s, without proper reference or citation constitutes plagiarism and
academic dishonesty and is prohibited conduct. (p. 1)
Plagiarism is one example of academic dishonesty. Plagiarism is presenting someone else’s
ideas or work as your own. Plagiarism also includes copying verbatim or rephrasing ideas
without properly acknowledging the source by author, date, and publication medium. (p. 2)

Capella University’s Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06) holds learners accountable for research
integrity. What constitutes research misconduct is discussed in the Policy:
Research misconduct includes but is not limited to falsification, fabrication, plagiarism,
misappropriation, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly
accepted within the academic community for proposing, conducting, or reviewing research,
or in reporting research results. (p. 1)

Learners failing to abide by these policies are subject to consequences, including but not limited to
dismissal or revocation of the degree.

113
 STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK AND SIGNATURE

I have read, understood, and abided by Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy (3.01.01)
and Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06), including the Policy Statements, Rationale, and
Definitions.
I attest that this dissertation or capstone project is my own work. Where I have used the ideas or
words of others, I have paraphrased, summarized, or used direct quotes following the guidelines
set forth in the APA Publication Manual.

Learner name
and date Christophe St. Luce 3/8/2019

Mentor name
and school Dr. Kimberly Lowery, School of Business and Technology

114
 APPENDIX A. SURVEY

Leaders of each municipal agency in the survey was asked to produce the same data. The

leaders were asked by way of a public records request to produce: Information and

Communication Technology budgets (for the fiscal years 2005–2015), annual city-visitor and

annual state-visitor counts, if available (for the fiscal years 2005–2015). If a respondent queried

for the description of a visioning plan, the description provided was that of a future development

plan for the city that involved public input and suggestions. Representatives from each of the

sample states’ tourism boards were asked to provide annual city-visitor counts and the tourism

income generated.

115
 APPENDIX B. STUDY SAMPLE CITIES

The 49 cities that received public records requests were Birmingham, Huntsville, Mobile,

and Montgomery in the State of Alabama; Cape Coral, Ft. Lauderdale, Hialeah, Hollywood,

Jacksonville, Miami, Orlando, Pembroke Pines, Port St. Lucie, St. Petersburg, Tallahassee, and

Tampa in the State of Florida; Atlanta and Columbus in the State of Georgia; Baton Rouge, New

Orleans, and Shreveport in the State of Louisiana; Jackson in the State of Mississippi; Charlotte,

Durham, Fayetteville, Greensboro, Raleigh, and Winston-Salem in the State of North Carolina;

Chattanooga, Clarksville, Knoxville, Memphis, and Nashville in for the State of Tennessee; and

Amarillo, Arlington, Austin, Brownsville, Corpus Christi, Dallas, El Paso, Fort Worth, Garland,

Grand Prairie, Houston, Laredo, Lubbock, Pasadena, Plano, and San Antonio in the State of

Texas.

Of the 49 cities that received public records request, 27 responded, reducing the sample

size to 27. The responses were received from municipal leaders in Huntsville in the State of

Alabama; Cape Coral, Ft. Lauderdale, Hialeah, Hollywood, Jacksonville, Miami, Orlando,

Pembroke Pines, and Tampa in the State of Florida; Columbus in the State of Georgia; New

Orleans in the State of Louisiana; Jackson in the State of Mississippi; Fayetteville and

Greensboro in the State of North Carolina; Amarillo, Arlington, Austin, Brownsville, Corpus

Christi, Ft. Worth, Garland, Grand Prairie, Houston, Laredo, Plano, and San Antonio in the State

of Texas.

116
 APPENDIX C. STATE TOURISM COUNTS AND INCOME RECEIVED

Table C1 details the estimated annual visitors to the State of Alabama and the tourism

income generated by those visitors between 2005 and 2015. The statistics were available

through the Travel and Economic report generated each year by the Alabama Tourism

Department in conjunction with the United States Bureau of Economic Analysis. The Alabama

Tourism Department provides annual economic reports and support for destination marketing to

industries whose leaders have an interest in traveling to the State of Alabama (Alabama Tourism

Department, 2017).

Table C1. State of Alabama Visitors and Tourism Income

Year Visitors Tourism income

2005 Not on file $7,508,600,725

2006 Not on file $8,464,797,584

2007 Not on file $9,333,356,043

2008 Not on file $9,599,370,556

2009 21,000,000 $9,303,501,738

2010 23,000,000 $9,074,704,379

2011 23,600,000 $10,156,511,225

2012 23,000,000 $10,666,782,091

2013 23,500,000 $10,992,687,443

2014 24,300,000 $11,790,985,168

2015 25,000,000 $12,696,882,066

117
 Table C2 details the estimated annual visitors to the State of Florida and the tourism

income generated by those visitors between 2005 and 2015. Staff at the Florida Department of

Revenue (2017) calculated the income figures, as they collected over $30 billion annually in fees

and taxes. Visit Florida, the state’s tourism board, collects and calculates the visitor counts on

behalf of the state.

Table C2. State of Florida Visitors and Tourism Income

Annual Tourism
Year Annual Visitors
income
2005 83,600,000 $62,000,000,000

2006 83,900,000 $65,000,000,000

2007 84,500,000 $65,500,000,000

2008 84,200,000 $65,200,000,000

2009 80,900,000 $60,900,000,000

2010 82,300,000 $62,700,000,000

2011 87,300,000 $67,200,000,000

2012 91,000,000 $71,000,000,000

2013 94,700,000 $82,000,000,000

2014 98,500,000 $108,800,000,000

2015 105,000,000 $109,000,000,000

Municipal staff for the State of Georgia worked in tandem with the staff at Market

Georgia to generate tourism economic impact reports with the aid of Tourism Economics (2016),

using data from the United States Travel Association; the data, generated every other year,

included tourism dollars, but not tourist counts. Staff at the United States Travel Association

118
(2016a) developed a more comprehensive report that summarized both domestic and

international traveler expenditures and the effect of those travelers on public transportation

consumption.

Table C3 details the estimated annual visitors to the State of Georgia and the tourism

income generated by those visitors between 2005 and 2015. Staff at the firm D. K. Shifflet &

Associates, Ltd. assisted in calculating the income figures. The data were not complete for the

years requested. Staff at Market Georgia, the marketing arm for the State of Georgia, provided

more detailed information for 2015 (Godfrey, 2016).

Table C3. State of Georgia Visitors and Tourism Income

Annual Annual Tourism

Year
Visitors income
2005 0 $0

2006 48,000,000 $26,988,636,000

2007 0 $28,500,000,000

2008 0 $28,711,000,000

2009 0 $26,000,000,000

2010 0 $28,054,000,000

2011 0 $0

2012 0 $50,000,000,000

2013 0 $53,600,000,000

2014 0 $0

2015 103,400,000 $59,000,000,000

119
 Table C4 details the estimated annual visitors to the State of Louisiana for 2005 through

2015. The state commissioned a TravelsAmerica Visitor Profile report in which researchers

examined the demographics of visitors. A small sample of individuals (between 13 and 19) was

used to extrapolate the estimated tourism dollars spent per visitor (Kantar, 2014). This small

sample, based on the millions of visitors per year, did not provide adequate data to yield a

published report of annual tourism dollars received by the state. The small sample size was not

inclusive enough to eliminate potential bias and to ensure validity (Johnston et al., 2014).

Table C4. State of Louisiana Visitors and Tourism Income

Year Annual Visitors Annual Tourism income

2005 19,600,000 $8,200,000,000

2006 18,200,000 $6,600,000,000

2007 23,800,000 $9,000,000,000

2008 24,400,000 $9,500,000,000

2009 24,000,000 $8,800,000,000

2010 25,100,000 $9,500,000,000

2011 25,500,000 $10,000,000,000

2012 26,300,000 $10,700,000,000

2013 27,400,000 $10,800,000,000

2014 28,700,000 $11,200,000,000

2015 29,200,000 $11,500,000,000

120
 A 2014 report generated by researchers at the University of New Orleans Hospitality

Research Center on the expected tourism for New Orleans and the State of Louisiana for the

years 2015–2018 used the data from the United States Travel Association; the Louisiana

Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism; and the Louisiana Tourism Satellite Account to

study visitations and spending for the years 2004 through 2014 and to make forecasts for the

years 2015–2018 (Ortiz, Mihai, & Pema Sanga, 2015).

Table C5 details the estimated annual visitors to the State of Mississippi between 2005

and 2015. The state leaders did not store or provide the estimated visitor and tourism income for

2005–2007. The staff members at the City of Jackson, Mississippi, were nonresponsive in

multiple requests for public records regarding its budget. The information gathered for the State

of Mississippi came from the Mississippi Development Authority Tourism Division (Mississippi

Development Authority Tourism Division, 2011) and the Visit Mississippi state tourism office

and its economic contribution reports (Visit Mississippi, 2016).

Table C6 details the estimated annual visitors to the State of North Carolina for 2005

through 2015. The state leaders did not accurately store estimated visitor counts and used its

Tourism Satellite Account to ascertain the tourism dollars spent in its economy. Representatives

of the state retained visitor profiles for most years. These visitor profiles represented

percentages of ethnic divisions and visitor ages calculated from visits to state welcome centers

and arrivals at airports (North Carolina Department of Commerce, 2014). The most recent year

for which a visitor profile report existed was 2013 (North Carolina Department of Commerce,

2017).

121
Table C5. State of Mississippi Visitors and Tourism Income

Annual Annual Tourism

Year
Visitors income
2005 0 $0

2006 0 $0

2007 22,000,000 $0

2008 20,200,000 $6,000,000,000

2009 19,000,000 $5,600,000,000

2010 19,500,000 $5,800,000,000

2011 20,500,000 $5,970,000,000

2012 21,300,000 $6,160,000,000

2013 21,600,000 $6,250,000,000

2014 22,000,000 $6,090,000,000

2015 22,330,000 $6,170,000,000

122
Table C6. State of North Carolina Visitors and Tourism Income

Year Annual Visitors Annual Tourism income

2005 49,000,000 $14,210,000,000

2006 64,500,000 $15,400,000,000

2007 0 $16,510,000,000

2008 0 $16,860,000,000

2009 35,900,000 $15,620,000,000

2010 0 $17,020,000,000

2011 0 $18,410,000,000

2012 0 $19,410,000,000

2013 0 $20,200,000,000

2014 0 $21,300,000,000

2015 54,600,000 $0

Table C7 details the estimated annual visitors to the State of Texas for the years 2005

through 2015. The state leaders did not accurately store the estimated visitor counts for the years

prior to 2013. The researcher extrapolated the visitor counts from 2005 through 2012 with an

increment of 4% as the differences for each year between 2013 and 2015.

123
Table C7. State of Texas Visitors and Tourism Income

Annual Annual Tourism

Year
Visitors income
2005 168,437,253 $52,700,000,000

2006 175,455,472 $52,700,000,000

2007 182,766,116 $52,700,000,000

2008 190,381,371 $59,200,000,000

2009 198,313,928 $59,200,000,000

2010 206,577,009 $55,900,000,000

2011 215,184,384 $61,100,000,000

2012 224,150,400 $64,800,000,000

2013 233,490,000 $67,100,000,000

2014 243,220,000 $70,300,000,000

2015 255,980,000 $68,700,000,000

124
 APPENDIX D. STUDY SAMPLE STATISTICAL DATA

Table D1 details the sample states, sample cities, and resident populations as of the 2010

Census, organized alphabetically by state and then numerically by population in descending

order. The resident population was not utilized in the computations of the variables. The

resident population was only utilized in the determination of the minimum requirement for a city

to be classified as midsized in the sample. The cities that either cited McBurney v. Young, 569

U.S. (2013) or did not provide a response were excluded from this and the subsequent lists.

Table D1. Resident Populations From the 2010 Census of 27 Sample Cities Within Eight Sample

States

State and city Population

Alabama
Huntsville 180,105
Florida
Jacksonville 821,784
Miami 339,457
Tampa 335,709
Orlando 238,300
Hialeah 224,669
Ft. Lauderdale 165,521
Pembroke Pines 154,750
Cape Coral 154,305
Hollywood 140,768
Georgia
Columbus 189,885
Louisiana
New Orleans 343,829
Mississippi
Jackson 173,514
North Carolina
Greensboro 269,666
Fayetteville 200,564
Texas
Houston 2,099,451
San Antonio 1,327,407
Austin 790,390
Fort Worth 741,206
Arlington 365,438
Corpus Christi 305,215
Plano 259,841
Laredo 236,091
125
 Garland 226,876
Amarillo 190,695
Grand Prairie 175,396
Brownsville 175,023

Table D2 details the annual ICT budget of the City of Huntsville, Alabama, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. Municipal leaders of the City of Huntsville did not have strategic

plans or visioning plans, nor did it track visitor counts. The budgetary information for the fiscal

year 2005 was not on record with the municipality.

Table D2. City of Huntsville, Alabama Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 Not kept Not captured

2006 $3,812,505 Not captured

2007 $4,053,286 Not captured

2008 $5,475,206 Not captured

2009 $6,574,313 Not captured

2010 $5,457,569 Not captured

2011 $6,347,501 Not captured

2012 $6,119,454 Not captured

2013 $5,946,972 Not captured

2014 $6,447,512 Not captured

2015 $6,200,452 Not captured

Table D3 details the annual ICT budget in the City of Cape Coral, Florida, for fiscal years

2005 through 2015. Municipal leaders of the City of Cape Coral did have strategic plans, but it

126
did not have visitor counts. The focus of the strategic plans was on business development and

the financial stability of the city by developing multiple revenue sources and promoting a

positive city image through social media to attract future residents (City of Cape Coral, 2015).

Table D3. City of Cape Coral, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $4,409,508 Not captured

2006 $6,249,446 Not captured

2007 $9,900,250 Not captured

2008 $6,402,084 Not captured

2009 $4,685,291 Not captured

2010 $3,816,897 Not captured

2011 $3,710,797 Not captured

2012 $3,782,567 Not captured

2013 $4,017,673 Not captured

2014 $3,813,709 Not captured

2015 $5,846,141 Not captured

Table D4 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, for the

fiscal years 2005 through 2015. Municipal leaders of the City of Ft. Lauderdale drafted the 2015

strategic plan and Ft. Lauderdale 2035, using citizen surveys to recognize that its residents

desired better technology, but there were no specific details included (City of Ft. Lauderdale,

2015). Municipal leaders of the City of Ft. Lauderdale used the Greater Ft. Lauderdale Alliance,

127
an agency created to promote the city as an educational, business, and living destination (Greater

Ft. Lauderdale Alliance, 2017).

Table D4. City of Ft. Lauderdale, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $4,549,962 Not captured

2006 $4,439,960 Not captured

2007 $4,278,275 10,700,000

2008 $4,403,604 10,000,000

2009 $4,737,393 10,700,000

2010 $4,526,468 10,800,000

2011 $10,209,987 10,600,000

2012 $11,382,615 10,900,000

2013 $13,830,832 11,000,000

2014 $13,923,024 12,000,000

2015 $15,151,924 13,000,000

Table D5 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Hialeah, Florida, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. Municipal leaders of the City of Hialeah created a strategic plan early

in the budget process, during fiscal years 2005 through 2009. Municipal leaders of the City of

Hialeah did not capture visitor counts and appeared to focus its budget on department operations.

Table D5. City of Hialeah, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

128
 2005 $918,484 Not captured

2006 $1,067,117 Not captured

2007 $3,442,719 Not captured

2008 $1,676,304 Not captured

2009 $1,827,293 Not captured

2010 $1,628,107 Not captured

2011 $1,534,535 Not captured

2012 $1,398,139 Not captured

2013 $1,424,209 Not captured

2014 $1,835,286 Not captured

2015 $1,879,742 Not captured

Table D6 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Hollywood, Florida, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. Municipal leaders of the City of Hollywood created an annual

strategic planning process that was repeated until the 2010 fiscal year. A change in the

leadership occurred, coupled with little continued input, and this minimized the importance of

the annual mandated strategic planning retreat. Municipal leaders of the City of Hollywood did

not capture visitor counts and the focus of its budget was on operations.

Table D6. City of Hollywood, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $6,589,819 Not captured

2006 $7,182,388 Not captured

129
 2007 $7,303,301 Not captured

2008 $8,981,242 Not captured

2009 $8,807,633 Not captured

2010 $9,559,050 Not captured

2011 $8,656,660 Not captured

2012 $8,303,031 Not captured

2013 $8,402,048 Not captured

2014 $8,753,051 Not captured

2015 $8,365,759 Not captured

Table D7 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Jacksonville, Florida, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. Dating back to 2013, the municipal leaders of the City of Jacksonville

commissioned studies related to the use of social media in relation to travel. Jacksonville’s

municipal leaders found that compared to the national average, the city had more travelers using

social media for travel-related information, and its travelers were most likely to be in the age

group of 25–44 (Longwoods International, 2014). The City of Jacksonville’s leaders heavily

invested in tourism promotion material. The leaders did not accurately retain visitor information

prior to the 2015 fiscal year.

Table D7. City of Jacksonville, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $36,330,138 Not on file

2006 $37,809,241 Not on file

2007 $43,140,154 Not on file

130
 2008 $49,444,770 2,821,880

2009 $35,793,183 2,648,280

2010 $47,756,256 Not on file

2011 $43,155,129 Not on file

2012 $36,059,784 Not on file

2013 $29,864,822 Not on file

2014 $35,386,784 Not on file

2015 $45,199,874 5,960,075

Table D8 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Miami, Florida, for the fiscal years

2005 through 2015. The ICT budget for the City of Miami was level for the majority of years

requested, with a slow decline over the three most recent years in the sample. There was a push

to use technology to improve the community’s access to municipal services through

enhancements to the website and the purchasing process (City of Miami, 2015).

Table D8. City of Miami, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $13,256,339 11,601,600

2006 $14,978,369 11,585,000

2007 $14,611,813 12,000,000

2008 $13,071,500 13,022,000

2009 $14,245,750 11,900,000

2010 $10,890,204 12,600,000

131
 2011 $8,904,400 13,400,000

2012 $11,034,100 13,900,000

2013 $11,034,100 14,200,000

2014 $8,540,000 14,622,000

2015 $8,630,000 15,500,000

Table D9 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Orlando, Florida, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. Municipal leaders of the City of Orlando planned new development

and implementation in the latter part of 2017 through its Capital Improvement Program to allow

individuals to interact with the city information (City of Orlando, 2016). The leaders had not

developed the specific details of this initiative.

Table D9. City of Orlando, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $10,814,317 49,300,000

2006 $10,910,928 45,100,000

2007 $11,233,033 48,700,000

2008 $11,481,761 48,900,000

2009 $11,299,513 46,600,000

2010 $10,498,848 51,460,000

2011 $10,458,157 55,100,000

2012 $10,190,930 57,000,000

2013 $10,486,050 59,000,000

132
 2014 $13,968,396 62,000,000

2015 $15,018,420 66,000,000

Table D10 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Pembroke Pines, Florida, for the

fiscal years 2005 through 2015. For the years 2013–2015, the municipal leaders focused on the

construction of a new city center, upgrades for charter schools, and technology upgrades for law

enforcement. The city leaders did not focus on tourism as a key resource and did not track

visitor counts.

Table D10. City of Pembroke Pines, Florida Annual ICT Budget And Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $2,415,629 Not captured

2006 $2,757,843 Not captured

2007 $2,498,630 Not captured

2008 $2,634,399 Not captured

2009 $2,750,407 Not captured

2010 $2,580,528 Not captured

2011 $2,791,300 Not captured

2012 $2,550,046 Not captured

2013 $3,158,013 Not captured

2014 $4,768,871 Not captured

2015 $3,578,559 Not captured

Table D11 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Tampa, Florida, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. The municipal leaders spent resources for many years on the
133
development and implementation of an ERP solution and increased its projected capital

expenditure by 50% for 2011–2014 to support that initiative. The city leaders recently

developed a smartphone application to allow individuals to receive alerts pertaining to law

enforcement and traffic conditions. While the City of Tampa plays host for many tourist events

each year, the municipal leaders only track visitors to events at its convention center.

Table D11. City of Tampa, Florida Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $11,578,591 Not captured

2006 $11,810,163 Not captured

2007 $12,046,367 Not captured

2008 $11,993,637 Not captured

2009 $13,155,634 Not captured

2010 $17,095,574 Not captured

2011 $21,423,842 Not captured

2012 $32,661,999 Not captured

2013 $26,150,044 Not captured

2014 $18,730,044 Not captured

2015 $17,312,483 Not captured

Table D12 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Columbus, Georgia, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. The city’s tourism expansion efforts included upgrades to riverfront

facilities, recreational facilities, and the National Civil War Naval Museum at Port Columbus.

134
Capital improvements focused on roadway and water treatment repairs. Municipal leaders of the

City of Columbus, Georgia, did not track visitor counts.

Table D12. City of Columbus, Georgia Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $2,477,938 Not captured

2006 $2,957,809 Not captured

2007 $3,229,751 Not captured

2008 $3,464,203 Not captured

2009 $3,561,127 Not captured

2010 $3,564,141 Not captured

2011 $3,595,690 Not captured

2012 $3,753,327 Not captured

2013 $3,883,327 Not captured

2014 $3,768,234 Not captured

2015 $3,709,781 Not captured

Table D13 details the annual ICT budget for the City of New Orleans, Louisiana, for the

fiscal years 2005 through 2015. The New Orleans Department of Public Works and the New

Orleans Aviation Board were the two most heavily funded areas for capital improvements for the

city for the 2015 fiscal year (City of New Orleans, 2015). The New Orleans 2030 vision plan,

adopted in August 2010 and amended in 2012, highlighted the feedback and planning for

transportation upgrades, the conservation of green and public lands, and environmental

protection from hazards (City of New Orleans, 2010). Municipal leaders of the City of New

135
Orleans also had a partnership with Smart Growth America to use the best-of-breed policies for

the master plan development for the city. The municipal leaders either did not track visitor

counts or did not provide them. The municipal leaders also did not maintain the budgets for

fiscal years 2005 through 2008 in an available format.

Table D13. City of New Orleans, Louisiana Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $0 Not captured

2006 $0 Not captured

2007 $0 Not captured

2008 $0 Not captured

2009 $16,225,448 Not captured

2010 $11,582,628 Not captured

2011 $15,796,316 Not captured

2012 $13,303,401 Not captured

2013 $13,004,883 Not captured

2014 $12,043,183 Not captured

2015 $13,054,278 Not captured

Table D14 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Jackson, Mississippi, for the

fiscal years 2005 through 2015. Municipal leaders of the City of Jackson did not maintain the

budgets for fiscal years 2005 through 2007 in an available format. The city leaders also did not

track visitor counts or maintain a strategic or visioning plan.

136
Table D14. City of Jackson, Mississippi Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $0 Not captured

2006 $0 Not captured

2007 $0 Not captured

2008 $1,165,000 Not captured

2009 $1,825,522 Not captured

2010 $1,798,273 Not captured

2011 $1,739,727 Not captured

2012 $1,766,675 Not captured

2013 $1,873,711 Not captured

2014 $1,931,399 Not captured

2015 $1,940,712 Not captured

Table D15 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Fayetteville, North Carolina, for

the fiscal years 2005 through 2015. During the 2013 and 2014 fiscal years, the municipal leaders

implemented a wireless network available at some city sites (City of Fayetteville, 2017). The

city leaders also did not maintain the budgets for fiscal years 2005 through 2007 in an available

format.

Table D15. City of Fayetteville, North Carolina Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $2,069,267 5,260,000

137
 2006 $2,069,267 5,460,000

2007 $1,404,363 5,790,000

2008 $2,124,446 6,040,000

2009 $2,096,142 6,310,000

2010 $2,651,639 6,880,000

2011 $3,215,286 7,770,000

2012 $3,003,080 9,000,000

2013 $4,202,706 9,130,000

2014 $5,573,827 9,310,000

2015 $5,043,635 9,660,000

Table D16 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Greensboro, North Carolina, for

the fiscal years 2005 through 2015. The municipal leaders did not track visitor counts. Spikes in

the budget reflected two significant events. In 2005 and 2006, the leaders acquired and

implemented the Lawson ERP solution.

138
Table D16. City of Greensboro, North Carolina Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $6,943,089 0

2006 $7,301,823 0

2007 $3,582,068 0

2008 $3,661,138 0

2009 $3,678,115 0

2010 $3,717,672 0

2011 $3,613,535 0

2012 $6,016,218 0

2013 $6,559,709 0

2014 $6,441,036 0

2015 $6,225,659 0

Table D17 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Amarillo, Texas, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. The municipal leaders only kept and provided the budgets for the

most recent six years which omitted fiscal years 2005 through 2010. The city leaders did not

track the visitor counts to the city and had no strategic or visioning plan outside of the one

documented in 2006 for a library survey.

139
Table D17. City of Amarillo, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Annual
Year Annual ICT Budget
Visitors
2005 $0 0

2006 $0 0

2007 $0 0

2008 $0 0

2009 $0 0

2010 $0 0

2011 $4,620,495 0

2012 $5,918,862 0

2013 $5,030,558 0

2014 $5,827,772 0

2015 $6,125,413 0

Table D18 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Arlington, Texas, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. Home to the United States National Football League team, the Dallas

Cowboys, the municipal leaders here referenced in every budget document that tourism was a

significant factor for the city. The visitor counts over ten years changed only once in the budget

documents. From 2001 through 2009, the city leaders used the same visitor count. The count

changed in the 2010 budget and was not referenced again in the subsequent budgets. The

researcher assumed that this number held true for the remaining budget documents. The

municipal leaders did not have any strategic or visioning plans and also planned to install

140
municipal fiber to provide better technology for the departments. None of the budgets

mentioned any other smart city plans.

Table D18. City of Arlington, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Annual
Year Annual ICT Budget
Visitors
2005 $4,207,791 6,793,000

2006 $4,144,678 6,793,000

2007 $4,742,050 6,793,000

2008 $4,950,284 6,793,000

2009 $4,526,487 6,793,000

2010 $4,305,190 7,000,000

2011 $4,197,739 7,000,000

2012 $4,232,857 7,000,000

2013 $4,398,314 7,000,000

2014 $4,289,341 7,000,000

2015 $4,344,586 7,000,000

Table D19 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Austin, Texas, for the fiscal years

2005 through 2015. The municipal leaders did not track visitor counts. Included in the Capital

Improvement Plan project was an initiative to upgrade technology to make roads more bicycle

friendly (City of Austin, 2015). A mobile application for bicycle riders allows traffic lights to

detect them upon approaching the configured intersections and adjust the traffic light patterns to

facilitate intersections.

141
Table D19. City of Austin, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $40,252,787 Not captured

2006 $47,522,525 Not captured

2007 $49,452,830 Not captured

2008 $53,167,827 Not captured

2009 $50,867,344 Not captured

2010 $49,889,640 Not captured

2011 $56,715,903 Not captured

2012 $57,415,018 Not captured

2013 $40,290,811 Not captured

2014 $44,783,649 Not captured

2015 $48,209,780 Not captured

Table D20 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Brownsville, Texas, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. The municipal leaders did not track the visitor counts. With

unemployment at 10% and a modest increase in sales tax revenues, the municipal leaders

focused on maintaining safe financial reserves (City of Brownsville, 2017). Although expansive

smart city technology was not anywhere in the infrastructure plans, the city leaders did expand

some Wi-Fi coverage in municipal parks.

Table D20. City of Brownsville, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $426,670 Not captured

142
 2006 $450,431 Not captured

2007 $605,913 Not captured

2008 $865,038 Not captured

2009 $1,063,176 Not captured

2010 $1,005,907 Not captured

2011 $941,070 Not captured

2012 $955,291 Not captured

2013 $1,041,103 Not captured

2014 $1,024,318 Not captured

2015 $1,106,849 Not captured

Table D21 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Corpus Christi, Texas, for the

fiscal years 2005 through 2015. The municipal leaders did not track visitor counts. In the fiscal

year 2015’s municipal budget, the leaders identified a set of strategic plan initiatives whereby the

quality of life through arts, entertainment, recreation, and public transportation modifications for

the community were to be increased (City of Corpus Christi, 2017).

143
Table D21. City of Corpus Christi, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $12,015,842 Not captured

2006 $13,054,313 Not captured

2007 $14,002,372 Not captured

2008 $16,268,272 Not captured

2009 $17,162,538 Not captured

2010 $17,153,385 Not captured

2011 $15,331,170 Not captured

2012 $14,261,916 Not captured

2013 $17,204,887 Not captured

2014 $16,770,006 Not captured

2015 $16,345,471 Not captured

Table D22 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Fort Worth, Texas, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. The municipal leaders did not track visitor counts. The city leaders

increased the budget for two fiscal years to make accommodations for a new ERP solution,

computer-aided dispatch, and a document management system (City of Fort Worth, 2017).

144
Table D22. City of Fort Worth, Texas Annual ICT Budget And Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $16,713,271 Not captured

2006 $21,628,944 Not captured

2007 $22,599,501 Not captured

2008 $23,279,909 Not captured

2009 $22,912,526 Not captured

2010 $23,179,951 Not captured

2011 $22,999,543 Not captured

2012 $27,163,739 Not captured

2013 $23,916,653 Not captured

2014 $25,327,781 Not captured

2015 $26,532,002 Not captured

Table D23 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Garland, Texas, for the fiscal

years 2006 through 2015. The municipal leaders did not track visitor counts. The researcher

received no budgetary information for the fiscal year 2005, as the Information Technology

department was previously a function of another department and it did not have its own budget.

The municipal leaders had no significant technology infrastructure upgrades listed.

145
Table D23. City of Garland, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $0 Not captured

2006 $10,449,979 Not captured

2007 $13,015,935 Not captured

2008 $12,170,632 Not captured

2009 $12,377,221 Not captured

2010 $13,607,567 Not captured

2011 $13,824,230 Not captured

2012 $13,573,508 Not captured

2013 $14,179,566 Not captured

2014 $13,780,057 Not captured

2015 $14,448,787 Not captured

Table D24 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Grand Prairie, Texas, for the

fiscal years 2007 through 2015. The municipal leaders did send the 2015 visitor count, which

represented the count of people who went to the Grand Prairie visitor center. As this number

may not be inclusive of all visitors to the city, the researcher did not use it in the research

calculations. No other travel-related information was available. The city leaders also did not

maintain the municipal budgets through the 2006 fiscal year in a retrievable form.

Table D24. City of Grand Prairie, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

146
 2005 $0 Not captured

2006 $0 Not captured

2007 $3,501,226 Not captured

2008 $3,721,161 Not captured

2009 $3,663,053 Not captured

2010 $3,597,864 Not captured

2011 $3,616,796 Not captured

2012 $3,901,917 Not captured

2013 $3,868,260 Not captured

2014 $4,087,837 Not captured

2015 $4,632,899 Not captured

Table D25 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Houston, Texas, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. The municipal leaders did not track visitor counts. In 2015, in

conjunction with the residents, the leaders created Plan Houston, a vision plan composed of 32

goals that outlined the desires of the residents regarding the future of the community. The

general plan included goals such as fostering sustainable living, creating a multimodal

transportation network, and promoting an innovative culture (City of Houston, 2017).

Fluctuations in the municipal budget resulted significantly from the ERP solution

implementations, network upgrades, and the required costs for pension contributions and merit

increases (City of Houston, 2017).

147
Table D25. City of Houston, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $12,393,936 Not captured

2006 $12,652,999 Not captured

2007 $14,126,173 Not captured

2008 $16,986,015 Not captured

2009 $17,646,827 Not captured

2010 $18,943,448 Not captured

2011 $19,980,539 Not captured

2012 $18,094,797 Not captured

2013 $19,269,066 Not captured

2014 $21,263,432 Not captured

2015 $24,040,382 Not captured

Table D26 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Laredo, Texas, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. The municipal leaders did not track visitor counts. The city leaders

were also responsible for the airport (Laredo International Airport) and the 911 call center

operations, and much of its capital expenditures went to the airport and fire station renovations

and equipment purchases (City of Laredo, 2017). Additional budgetary expenditures in the fiscal

years 2010 through 2011 were the result of consultant requirements for the 9-1-1 system. The

costs to operate the 911 function were incorporated into the ICT/IT budget.

148
Table D26. City of Laredo, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $758,436 Not captured

2006 $954,777 Not captured

2007 $1,912,587 Not captured

2008 $2,688,967 Not captured

2009 $4,446,632 Not captured

2010 $5,117,189 Not captured

2011 $8,173,364 Not captured

2012 $4,255,396 Not captured

2013 $4,751,803 Not captured

2014 $4,834,432 Not captured

2015 $4,933,592 Not captured

Table D27 details the annual ICT budget for the City of Plano, Texas, for the fiscal years

2011 through 2015. The municipal leaders did not track visitor counts. The city leaders did not

maintain any historical budgets prior to the 2011 fiscal year. The Capital Improvement Program

included public safety, park, sewer/water, and street improvements (City of Plano, 2015).

Table D27. City of Plano, Texas Annual ICT Budget And Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $0 Not captured

2006 $0 Not captured

149
 2007 $0 Not captured

2008 $0 Not captured

2009 $0 Not captured

2010 $0 Not captured

2011 $12,434,401 Not captured

2012 $14,020,555 Not captured

2013 $13,944,107 Not captured

2014 $13,622,355 Not captured

2015 $16,585,910 Not captured

Table D28 details the annual ICT budget for the City of San Antonio, Texas, for the fiscal

years 2005 through 2015. The municipal leaders did track visitor counts and provided a

comprehensive list of the counts. The ICT budget was substantial, with a support staff of over

200 individuals, and financial and operational responsibility for public safety, ERP solutions, and

security (City of San Antonio, 2016).

Table D28. City of San Antonio, Texas Annual ICT Budget and Visitors

Year Annual ICT Budget Annual Visitors

2005 $28,590,039 34,400,000

2006 $37,305,135 32,500,000

2007 $36,654,758 31,100,000

2008 $39,952,956 29,800,000

2009 $41,179,090 27,900,000

150
 2010 $45,102,993 26,100,000

2011 $44,221,630 25,000,000

2012 $43,807,845 25,000,000

2013 $44,664,656 25,000,000

2014 $44,779,566 26,000,000

2015 $54,122,054 25,300,000

Table D29 details the summary of the fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2015 ICT budgets,

visitors, and tourist revenue for the 27 sample cities. With the observations in this research,

nonresponses for the independent and dependent variables were treated as zeros. Observation

values listed as “Not on file”, “Not kept”, or “Not captured by city” were treated as zeros.

151
Table D29. Composite of Sample Cities Data (2005 and 2015 ICT Budgets, Visitors, Tourist

Revenue)

FY 2005 FY 2015 FY 2005 FY 2015

ICT ICT FY 2005 FY 2015 Tourist Tourist
City Budget Budget Visitors Visitors Revenue Revenue

Not Not Not

City of Huntsville, AL Not kept $6,200,452 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Cape Coral, FL $4,409,508 $5,846,141 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $4,549,962 $15,151,924 captured 13,000,000 captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Hialeah, FL $918,484 $1,879,742 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Hollywood, FL $6,589,819 $8,365,759 captured captured captured Not captured

Not
City of Jacksonville, FL $36,330,138 $45,199,874 Not on file 5,960,075 captured Not captured

Not
City of Miami, FL $13,256,339 $8,630,000 11,301,600 15,500,000 captured Not captured

Not
City of Orlando, FL $10,814,317 $15,018,420 49,300,000 66,000,000 captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Pembroke Pines, FL $2,415,629 $3,578,559 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Tampa, FL $11,578,591 $17,312,483 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Columbus, GA $2,477,938 $3,709,781 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of New Orleans, LA Not kept $13,054,278 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Jackson, MS Not kept $1,940,712 captured captured captured Not captured

152
 Not
City of Fayetteville, NC $2,069,267 $5,043,635 5,260,000 9,660,000 captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Greensboro, NC $6,943,089 $6,225,659 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Amarillo, TX Not kept $6,125,413 captured captured captured Not captured

Not
City or Arlington, TX $4,207,791 $4,344,586 6,793,000 7,000,000 captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Austin, TX $40,252,787 $48,209,780 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Brownsville, TX $426,670 $1,106,849 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Corpus Christi, TX $12,015,842 $16,345,471 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Ft. Worth, TX $16,713,271 $26,532,002 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Garland, TX Not kept $14,448,787 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Grand Prairie, TX Not kept $4,632,899 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Houston, TX $12,393,936 $24,040,382 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Laredo, TX $758,436 $4,933,592 captured captured captured Not captured

Not Not Not

City of Plano, TX $0 $16,585,910 captured captured captured Not captured

Not
City of San Antonio, TX $28,590,039 $54,122,054 34,400,000 25,300,000 captured Not captured

Table D30 details, by fiscal year and municipality, each observation’s ICT budget, city

visitors, state visitors, and city tourism income. None of the state tourism boards could

accurately determine how much city tourism income was received. Municipal managers were
153
also unable to identify city tourism income through internal means. With the observations in this

research, nonresponses for the independent and dependent variables were treated as zeros.

Observation values listed as “Not on file”, “Not kept”, or “Not captured by city” were treated as

zeros.

Table D30. All City Data (2005 – 2015 ICT Budgets, Visitors), State Visitors And Tourism

Income

ICT State
FY City City Visitors Tourism Income
Budget Visitors
FY $0
2005 City of Huntsville, AL Not kept Not captured by city Not on file
City of Cape Coral, FL $4,409,508 Not captured by city 83,600,000 $0
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $4,549,962 Not captured by city 83,600,000 $0
City of Hialeah, FL $918,484 Not captured by city 83,600,000 $0
City of Hollywood, FL $6,589,819 Not captured by city 83,600,000 $0
City of Jacksonville, FL $36,330,138 Not on file 83,600,000 $0
City of Miami, FL $13,256,339 11,301,600 83,600,000 $0
City of Orlando, FL $10,814,317 49,300,000 83,600,000 $0
City of Pembroke Pines, $0
FL $2,415,629 Not captured by city 83,600,000
City of Tampa, FL $11,578,591 Not captured by city 83,600,000 $0
City of Columbus, GA $2,477,938 Not captured by city 0 $0
City of New Orleans, LA $0 Not captured by city 19,600,000 $0
City of Jackson, MS $0 Not captured by city 0 $0
City of Fayetteville, NC $2,069,267 5,260,000 49,000,000 $0
City of Greensboro, NC $6,943,089 0 49,000,000 $0
City of Amarillo, TX $0 0 168,437,253 $0
City of Arlington, TX $4,207,791 6,793,000 168,437,253 $0
City of Austin, TX $40,252,787 Not captured by city 168,437,253 $0
City of Brownsville, TX $426,670 Not captured by city 168,437,253 $0
City of Corpus Christi, TX $12,015,842 Not captured by city 168,437,253 $0
City of Ft. Worth, TX $16,713,271 Not captured by city 168,437,253 $0
City of Garland, TX $0 Not captured by city 168,437,253 $0
City of Grand Prairie, TX $0 Not captured by city 168,437,253 $0
City of Houston, TX $12,393,936 Not captured by city 168,437,253 $0
City of Laredo, TX $758,436 Not captured by city 168,437,253 $0
City of Plano, TX $0 Not captured by city 168,437,253 $0

154
 City of San Antonio, TX $28,590,039 34,400,000 168,437,253 $0
FY $0
2006 City of Huntsville, AL $3,812,505 Not captured by city Not on file
City of Cape Coral, FL $6,249,446 Not captured by city 83,900,000 $0
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $4,439,960 Not captured by city 83,900,000 $0
City of Hialeah, FL $1,067,117 Not captured by city 83,900,000 $0
City of Hollywood, FL $7,182,388 Not captured by city 83,900,000 $0
City of Jacksonville, FL $37,809,241 Not on file 83,900,000 $0
City of Miami, FL $14,978,369 11,585,000 83,900,000 $0
City of Orlando, FL $10,910,928 45,100,000 83,900,000 $0
City of Pembroke Pines, $0
FL $2,757,843 Not captured by city 83,900,000
City of Tampa, FL $11,810,163 Not captured by city 83,900,000 $0
City of Columbus, GA $2,957,809 Not captured by city 48,000,000 $0
City of New Orleans, LA $0 Not captured by city 18,200,000 $0
City of Jackson, MS $0 Not captured by city 0 $0
City of Fayetteville, NC $2,069,267 5,460,000 64,500,000 $0
City of Greensboro, NC $7,301,823 0 64,500,000 $0
City of Amarillo, TX $0 0 175,455,472 $0
City of Arlington, TX $4,144,678 6,793,000 175,455,472 $0
City of Austin, TX $47,522,525 Not captured by city 175,455,472 $0
City of Brownsville, TX $450,431 Not captured by city 175,455,472 $0
City of Corpus Christi, TX $13,054,313 Not captured by city 175,455,472 $0
City of Ft. Worth, TX $21,628,944 Not captured by city 175,455,472 $0
City of Garland, TX $10,449,979 Not captured by city 175,455,472 $0
City of Grand Prairie, TX $0 Not captured by city 175,455,472 $0
City of Houston, TX $12,652,999 Not captured by city 175,455,472 $0
City of Laredo, TX $954,777 Not captured by city 175,455,472 $0
City of Plano, TX $0 Not captured by city 175,455,472 $0
City of San Antonio, TX $37,305,135 32,500,000 175,455,472 $0
FY $0
2007 City of Huntsville, AL $4,053,286 Not captured by city Not on file
City of Cape Coral, FL $9,900,250 Not captured by city 84,500,000 $0
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $4,278,275 10,700,000 84,500,000 $0
City of Hialeah, FL $3,442,719 Not captured by city 84,500,000 $0
City of Hollywood, FL $7,303,301 Not captured by city 84,500,000 $0
City of Jacksonville, FL $43,140,154 Not on file 84,500,000 $0
City of Miami, FL $14,611,813 12,000,000 84,500,000 $0
City of Orlando, FL $11,233,033 48,700,000 84,500,000 $0
City of Pembroke Pines,
FL $2,498,630 Not captured by city 84,500,000 $0
City of Tampa, FL $12,046,367 Not captured by city 84,500,000 $0

155
 City of Columbus, GA $3,229,751 Not captured by city 0 $0
City of New Orleans, LA $0 Not captured by city 23,800,000 $0
City of Jackson, MS $0 Not captured by city 22,000,000 $0
City of Fayetteville, NC $1,404,363 5,790,000 0 $0
City of Greensboro, NC $3,582,068 0 0 $0
City of Amarillo, TX $0 0 182,766,116 $0
City of Arlington, TX $4,742,050 6,793,000 182,766,116 $0
City of Austin, TX $49,452,830 Not captured by city 182,766,116 $0
City of Brownsville, TX $605,913 Not captured by city 182,766,116 $0
City of Corpus Christi, TX $14,002,372 Not captured by city 182,766,116 $0
City of Ft. Worth, TX $22,599,501 Not captured by city 182,766,116 $0
City of Garland, TX $13,015,935 Not captured by city 182,766,166 $0
City of Grand Prairie, TX $3,501,226 Not captured by city 182,766,116 $0
City of Houston, TX $14,126,173 Not captured by city 182,766,116 $0
City of Laredo, TX $1,912,587 Not captured by city 182,766,116 $0
City of Plano, TX $0 Not captured by city 182,766,116 $0
City of San Antonio, TX $36,654,758 31,100,000 182,766,116 $0
FY
2008 City of Huntsville, AL $5,475,206 Not captured by city Not on file $0
City of Cape Coral, FL $6,402,084 Not captured by city 84,200,000 $0
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $4,403,604 10,000,000 84,200,000 $0
City of Hialeah, FL $1,676,304 Not captured by city 84,200,000 $0
City of Hollywood, FL $8,981,242 Not captured by city 84,200,000 $0
City of Jacksonville, FL $49,444,770 2,821,880 84,200,000 $0
City of Miami, FL $13,071,500 13,022,000 84,200,000 $0
City of Orlando, FL $11,481,761 48,900,000 84,200,000 $0
City of Pembroke Pines,
FL $2,634,399 Not captured by city 84,200,000 $0
City of Tampa, FL $11,993,637 Not captured by city 84,200,000 $0
City of Columbus, GA $3,464,203 Not captured by city 0 $0
City of New Orleans, LA $0 Not captured by city 24,400,000 $0
City of Jackson, MS $1,165,000 Not captured by city 20,200,000 $0
City of Fayetteville, NC $2,124,446 6,040,000 0 $0
City of Greensboro, NC $3,661,138 0 0 $0
City of Amarillo, TX $0 0 190,381,371 $0
City of Arlington, TX $4,950,284 6,793,000 190,381,371 $0
City of Austin, TX $53,167,827 Not captured by city 190,381,371 $0
City of Brownsville, TX $865,038 Not captured by city 190,381,371 $0
City of Corpus Christi, TX $16,268,272 Not captured by city 190,381,371 $0
City of Ft. Worth, TX $23,279,909 Not captured by city 190,381,371 $0
City of Garland, TX $12,170,632 Not captured by city 190,381,371 $0

156
 City of Grand Prairie, TX $3,721,161 Not captured by city 190,381,371 $0
City of Houston, TX $16,986,015 Not captured by city 190,381,371 $0
City of Laredo, TX $2,688,967 Not captured by city 190,381,371 $0
City of Plano, TX $0 Not captured by city 190,381,371 $0
City of San Antonio, TX $39,952,956 29,800,000 190,381,371 $0
FY $0
2009 City of Huntsville, AL $6,574,313 Not captured by city 21,000,000
City of Cape Coral, FL $4,685,291 Not captured by city 80,900,000 $0
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $4,737,393 10,700,000 80,900,000 $0
City of Hialeah, FL $1,827,293 Not captured by city 80,900,000 $0
City of Hollywood, FL $8,807,633 Not captured by city 80,900,000 $0
City of Jacksonville, FL $35,793,183 2,649,280 80,900,000 $0
City of Miami, FL $14,245,750 11,900,000 80,900,000 $0
City of Orlando, FL $11,299,513 46,600,000 80,900,000 $0
City of Pembroke Pines, $0
FL $2,750,407 Not captured by city 80,900,000
City of Tampa, FL $13,155,634 Not captured by city 80,900,000 $0
City of Columbus, GA $3,561,127 Not captured by city 0 $0
City of New Orleans, LA $16,225,448 Not captured by city 24,000,000 $0
City of Jackson, MS $1,825,522 Not captured by city 19,000,000 $0
City of Fayetteville, NC $2,096,142 6,310,000 35,900,000 $0
City of Greensboro, NC $3,678,115 0 35,900,000 $0
City of Amarillo, TX $0 0 198,313,928 $0
City of Arlington, TX $4,526,487 6,793,000 198,313,928 $0
City of Austin, TX $50,867,344 Not captured by city 198,313,928 $0
City of Brownsville, TX $1,063,176 Not captured by city 198,313,928 $0
City of Corpus Christi, TX $17,162,538 Not captured by city 198,313,928 $0
City of Ft. Worth, TX $22,912,526 Not captured by city 198,313,928 $0
City of Garland, TX $12,377,221 Not captured by city 198,313,928 $0
City of Grand Prairie, TX $3,663,053 Not captured by city 198,313,928 $0
City of Houston, TX $17,646,827 Not captured by city 198,313,928 $0
City of Laredo, TX $4,446,632 Not captured by city 198,313,928 $0
City of Plano, TX $0 Not captured by city 198,313,928 $0
City of San Antonio, TX $41,179,090 27,900,000 198,313,928 $0
FY $0
2010 City of Huntsville, AL $5,457,569 Not captured by city 23,000,000
City of Cape Coral, FL $3,816,897 Not captured by city 82,300,000 $0
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $4,526,468 10,800,000 82,300,000 $0
City of Hialeah, FL $1,628,107 Not captured by city 82,300,000 $0
City of Hollywood, FL $9,559,050 Not captured by city 82,300,000 $0
City of Jacksonville, FL $47,756,256 Not on file 82,300,000 $0
City of Miami, FL $10,890,204 12,600,000 82,300,000 $0

157
 City of Orlando, FL $10,498,848 51,460,000 82,300,000 $0
City of Pembroke Pines, $0
FL $2,580,528 Not captured by city 82,300,000
City of Tampa, FL $17,095,574 Not captured by city 82,300,000 $0
City of Columbus, GA $3,564,141 Not captured by city 0 $0
City of New Orleans, LA $11,582,628 Not captured by city 25,100,000 $0
City of Jackson, MS $1,798,273 Not captured by city 19,500,000 $0
City of Fayetteville, NC $2,651,639 6,880,000 0 $0
City of Greensboro, NC $3,717,672 0 0 $0
City of Amarillo, TX $0 0 206,577,009 $0
City of Arlington, TX $4,305,190 7,000,000 206,577,009 $0
City of Austin, TX $49,889,640 Not captured by city 206,577,009 $0
City of Brownsville, TX $1,005,907 Not captured by city 206,577,009 $0
City of Corpus Christi, TX $17,153,385 Not captured by city 206,577,009 $0
City of Ft. Worth, TX $23,179,951 Not captured by city 206,577,009 $0
City of Garland, TX $13,607,567 Not captured by city 206,577,009 $0
City of Grand Prairie, TX $3,597,864 Not captured by city 206,577,009 $0
City of Houston, TX $18,943,448 Not captured by city 206,577,009 $0
City of Laredo, TX $5,117,189 Not captured by city 206,577,009 $0
City of Plano, TX $0 Not captured by city 206,577,009 $0
City of San Antonio, TX $45,102,993 26,100,000 206,577,009 $0
FY $0
2011 City of Huntsville, AL $6,347,501 Not captured by city 23,600,000
City of Cape Coral, FL $3,710,797 Not captured by city 87,300,000 $0
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $10,209,987 10,600,000 87,300,000 $0
City of Hialeah, FL $1,534,535 Not captured by city 87,300,000 $0
City of Hollywood, FL $8,656,660 Not captured by city 87,300,000 $0
City of Jacksonville, FL $43,155,129 Not on file 87,300,000 $0
City of Miami, FL $8,904,400 13,400,000 87,300,000 $0
City of Orlando, FL $10,458,157 55,100,000 87,300,000 $0
City of Pembroke Pines, $0
FL $2,791,300 Not captured by city 87,300,000
City of Tampa, FL $21,423,842 Not captured by city 87,300,000 $0
City of Columbus, GA $3,595,690 Not captured by city 0 $0
City of New Orleans, LA $15,796,316 Not captured by city 25,500,000 $0
City of Jackson, MS $1,739,727 Not captured by city 20,500,000 $0
City of Fayetteville, NC $3,215,286 7,770,000 0 $0
City of Greensboro, NC $3,613,535 0 0 $0
City of Amarillo, TX $4,620,495 0 215,184,384 $0
City of Arlington, TX $4,197,739 7,000,000 215,184,384 $0
City of Austin, TX $56,715,903 Not captured by city 215,184,384 $0
City of Brownsville, TX $941,070 Not captured by city 215,184,384 $0

158
 City of Corpus Christi, TX $15,331,170 Not captured by city 215,184,384 $0
City of Ft. Worth, TX $22,999,543 Not captured by city 215,184,384 $0
City of Garland, TX $13,824,230 Not captured by city 215,184,384 $0
City of Grand Prairie, TX $3,616,796 Not captured by city 215,184,384 $0
City of Houston, TX $19,980,539 Not captured by city 215,184,384 $0
City of Laredo, TX $8,173,364 Not captured by city 215,184,384 $0
City of Plano, TX $12,434,401 Not captured by city 215,184,384 $0
City of San Antonio, TX $44,221,630 25,000,000 215,184,384 $0
FY $0
2012 City of Huntsville, AL $6,119,454 Not captured by city 23,000,000
City of Cape Coral, FL $3,782,567 Not captured by city 91,000,000 $0
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $11,382,615 10,900,000 91,000,000 $0
City of Hialeah, FL $1,398,139 Not captured by city 91,000,000 $0
City of Hollywood, FL $8,303,031 Not captured by city 91,000,000 $0
City of Jacksonville, FL $36,059,784 Not on file 91,000,000 $0
City of Miami, FL $11,034,100 13,900,000 91,000,000 $0
City of Orlando, FL $10,190,930 57,000,000 91,000,000 $0
City of Pembroke Pines,
FL $2,550,046 Not captured by city 91,000,000 $0
City of Tampa, FL $32,661,999 Not captured by city 91,000,000 $0
City of Columbus, GA $3,753,327 Not captured by city 0 $0
City of New Orleans, LA $13,303,401 Not captured by city 26,300,000 $0
City of Jackson, MS $1,766,675 Not captured by city 21,300,000 $0
City of Fayetteville, NC $3,003,080 9,000,000 0 $0
City of Greensboro, NC $6,016,218 0 0 $0
City of Amarillo, TX $5,918,862 0 224,150,400 $0
City of Arlington, TX $4,232,857 7,000,000 224,150,400 $0
City of Austin, TX $57,415,018 Not captured by city 224,150,400 $0
City of Brownsville, TX $955,291 Not captured by city 224,150,400 $0
City of Corpus Christi, TX $14,261,916 Not captured by city 224,150,400 $0
City of Ft. Worth, TX $27,163,739 Not captured by city 224,150,400 $0
City of Garland, TX $13,573,508 Not captured by city 224,150,400 $0
City of Grand Prairie, TX $3,901,917 Not captured by city 224,150,400 $0
City of Houston, TX $18,094,797 Not captured by city 224,150,400 $0
City of Laredo, TX $4,255,396 Not captured by city 224,150,400 $0
City of Plano, TX $14,020,555 Not captured by city 224,150,400 $0
City of San Antonio, TX $43,807,845 25,000,000 224,150,400 $0
FY
2013 City of Huntsville, AL $5,946,972 Not captured by city 23,500,000 $0
City of Cape Coral, FL $4,017,673 Not captured by city 94,700,000 $0
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $13,830,832 11,000,000 94,700,000 $0
City of Hialeah, FL $1,424,209 Not captured by city 94,700,000 $0
159
 City of Hollywood, FL $8,402,048 Not captured by city 94,700,000 $0
City of Jacksonville, FL $29,864,822 Not on file 94,700,000 $0
City of Miami, FL $11,034,100 14,200,000 94,700,000 $0
City of Orlando, FL $10,486,050 59,000,000 94,700,000 $0
City of Pembroke Pines,
FL $3,158,013 Not captured by city 94,700,000 $0
City of Tampa, FL $26,150,044 Not captured by city 94,700,000 $0
City of Columbus, GA $3,883,327 Not captured by city 0 $0
City of New Orleans, LA $13,004,883 Not captured by city 27,400,000 $0
City of Jackson, MS $1,873,711 Not captured by city 21,600,000 $0
City of Fayetteville, NC $4,202,706 9,130,000 0 $0
City of Greensboro, NC $6,559,709 0 0 $0
City of Amarillo, TX $5,030,558 0 233,490,000 $0
City of Arlington, TX $4,398,314 7,000,000 233,490,000 $0
City of Austin, TX $40,290,811 Not captured by city 233,490,000 $0
City of Brownsville, TX $1,041,103 Not captured by city 233,490,000 $0
City of Corpus Christi, TX $17,204,887 Not captured by city 233,490,000 $0
City of Ft. Worth, TX $23,916,653 Not captured by city 233,490,000 $0
City of Garland, TX $14,179,566 Not captured by city 233,490,000 $0
City of Grand Prairie, TX $3,868,260 Not captured by city 233,490,000 $0
City of Houston, TX $19,269,066 Not captured by city 233,490,000 $0
City of Laredo, TX $4,751,803 Not captured by city 233,490,000 $0
City of Plano, TX $13,944,107 Not captured by city 233,490,000 $0
City of San Antonio, TX $44,664,656 25,000,000 233,490,000 $0
FY
2014 City of Huntsville, AL $6,447,512 Not captured by city 24,300,000 $0
City of Cape Coral, FL $3,813,709 Not captured by city 98,500,000 $0
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $13,923,024 12,000,000 98,500,000 $0
City of Hialeah, FL $1,835,286 Not captured by city 98,500,000 $0
City of Hollywood, FL $8,753,051 Not captured by city 98,500,000 $0
City of Jacksonville, FL $35,386,784 Not on file 98,500,000 $0
City of Miami, FL $8,540,000 14,622,000 98,500,000 $0
City of Orlando, FL $13,968,396 62,000,000 98,500,000 $0
City of Pembroke Pines,
FL $4,768,871 Not captured by city 98,500,000 $0
City of Tampa, FL $18,730,044 Not captured by city 98,500,000 $0
City of Columbus, GA $3,768,234 Not captured by city 0 $0
City of New Orleans, LA $12,043,183 Not captured by city 28,700,000 $0
City of Jackson, MS $1,931,399 Not captured by city 22,000,000 $0
City of Fayetteville, NC $5,573,827 9,310,000 0 $0
City of Greensboro, NC $6,441,036 0 0 $0
City of Amarillo, TX $5,827,772 0 243,220,000 $0
160
 City of Arlington, TX $4,289,341 7,000,000 243,220,000 $0
City of Austin, TX $44,783,649 Not captured by city 243,220,000 $0
City of Brownsville, TX $1,024,318 Not captured by city 243,220,000 $0
City of Corpus Christi, TX $16,770,006 Not captured by city 243,220,000 $0
City of Ft. Worth, TX $25,327,781 Not captured by city 243,220,000 $0
City of Garland, TX $13,780,057 Not captured by city 243,220,000 $0
City of Grand Prairie, TX $4,087,837 Not captured by city 243,220,000 $0
City of Houston, TX $21,263,432 Not captured by city 243,220,000 $0
City of Laredo, TX $4,834,432 Not captured by city 243,220,000 $0
City of Plano, TX $13,622,355 Not captured by city 243,220,000 $0
City of San Antonio, TX $44,779,566 26,000,000 243,220,000 $0
FY
2015 City of Huntsville, AL $6,200,452 Not captured by city 25,000,000 $0
City of Cape Coral, FL $5,846,141 Not captured by city 105,000,000 $0
City of Ft. Lauderdale, FL $15,151,924 13,000,000 105,000,000 $0
City of Hialeah, FL $1,879,742 Not captured by city 105,000,000 $0
City of Hollywood, FL $8,365,759 Not captured by city 105,000,000 $0
City of Jacksonville, FL $45,199,874 5,960,075 105,000,000 $0
City of Miami, FL $8,630,000 15,500,000 105,000,000 $0
City of Orlando, FL $15,018,420 66,000,000 105,000,000 $0
City of Pembroke Pines,
FL $3,578,559 Not captured by city 105,000,000 $0
City of Tampa, FL $17,312,483 Not captured by city 105,000,000 $0
City of Columbus, GA $3,709,781 Not captured by city 103,400,000 $0
City of New Orleans, LA $13,054,278 Not captured by city 29,200,000 $0
City of Jackson, MS $1,940,712 Not captured by city 22,330,000 $0
City of Fayetteville, NC $5,043,635 9,660,000 54,600,000 $0
City of Greensboro, NC $6,225,659 0 54,600,000 $0
City of Amarillo, TX $6,125,413 0 255,980,000 $0
City of Arlington, TX $4,344,586 7,000,000 255,980,000 $0
City of Austin, TX $48,209,780 Not captured by city 255,980,000 $0
City of Brownsville, TX $1,106,849 Not captured by city 255,980,000 $0
City of Corpus Christi, TX $16,345,471 Not captured by city 255,980,000 $0
City of Ft. Worth, TX $26,532,002 Not captured by city 255,980,000 $0
City of Garland, TX $14,448,787 Not captured by city 255,980,000 $0
City of Grand Prairie, TX $4,632,899 Not captured by city 255,980,000 $0
City of Houston, TX $24,040,382 Not captured by city 255,980,000 $0
City of Laredo, TX $4,933,592 Not captured by city 255,980,000 $0
City of Plano, TX $16,585,910 Not captured by city 255,980,000 $0
City of San Antonio, TX $54,122,054 25,300,000 255,980,000 $0

161