1. Introduction

2. Research Background

3. Research Approach

3.2. Analysis of research results

The analysis indicates that there are valid spatial plans at all levels in the Republic of Serbia. The Spatial Plan of the Republic of Serbia is legally valid. However, the lack of urban plans is evident. All cities have adopted general urban plans, but not general and detailed regulation plans. General regulation plans, as a new type of planning documents, were introduced into planning practice in 2009, but were not adopted within the legally prescribed deadline.

In practice, when there is no adopted planning document, general rules for arrangement and construction are rarely applied. It happens that location conditions are issued on the basis of a plan of a wider area that contains regulation, in the case when a detailed regulation plan has not been adopted within the prescribed period. Considering this practice, the general regulation plan, as a planning document that should be the basic urban plan and that should be directly implemented, did not meet expectations in practice. Because of all the above, it is necessary to seriously reconsider the justification of the existence of different types of urban plans.

The main results of the surveyed representatives of local self-government units are that [14]:

• Most local self-governments always announce the start date of work on spatial and urban plans;
• 25% of local self-governments announce the start date of work on the general urban plan, while the rest did not prepare this type of plans;
• In the process of drafting planning documents with the delivery of conditions, holders of public authorities at the republic level are most often late, and this is less often the case at the local level;
• 50% of local self-governments organize a consultative process in the process of drafting planning documents;
• The consultative process is most often organized through the collection of proposals through the website of local governments, holding round tables or focus groups;
• The average number of comments per plan, during public inspection, is generally less than 10;
• Challenges for digitization are seen by most local governments in the insufficient number of personnel or in their inadequate training. Some of them state that they are aware that these shortcomings can be eliminated by educating the joint services of several local governments, while others suggest that it is necessary to find a way to hire additional quality staff;
• Commissions for plans of local self-governments generally meet once a month or as needed;
• Electronic sessions of the Commission for Local Self-Government Plans are rarely organized, although in most cases (63%) they are foreseen by the Rules of Procedure of the Commission, and the reason given is the insufficient equipment of local self-governments, which often do not have multimedia rooms, licensed software for online meetings or good internet;
• The most representatives of local self-governments enter data into the General regulation plan in CAD format (Figure 3).

The main results of the surveyed representatives of public authorities are that [14]:

• The largest number of holders of public authority derive their authority from the Law on Planning and Construction and the regulations adopted on the basis of that law, but also from sectoral laws such as the Law on Energy, the Law on Water, the Law on Communal Activities, etc., as well as from the acts of LGUs;
• 95% of holders of public authority participate in the process of drafting planning documents by giving conditions, although other ways are mentioned, such as providing information, giving consent or opinions;
• 79% of holders of public authority state that they always submit documentation within the deadline (most of them within 6 to 15 days) (Figure 4);

• The majority of holders of public authority do not cooperate with other authorities or holders in the process of drawing up conditions, which enables them to act within the deadlines because they do not depend on the promptness of others;
• The majority of holders of public authority submit conditions (substances, consents, information) from their jurisdiction in analog form, i.e., in paper form, and less than 5% in CAD format or GIS database (Figure 5);

Figure 5. % of holders of public authorizations according to the average deadline for submission of documentation (by type of documentation)

Figure 5. % of holders of public authorizations according to the average deadline for submission of documentation (by type of documentation)

• No representative of the holder of public authority stated that some regulation, which governs their operations and competences, is a potential problem for the digitization of the process of creating spatial and urban plans;
• 65% of holders of public authority believe that they have personal resources of adequate education (Figure 6);

Figure 6. % of representatives of public authority holders - assessment of the adequacy of the education of engaged employees

Figure 6. % of representatives of public authority holders - assessment of the adequacy of the education of engaged employees

• In 76% of cases, in the process of creating or reading documentation, representatives of public authority holders use Microsoft Office tools, but also other open and free software (Libre Office, Open Office Writer, etc.) (Figure 7);

Figure 7. % of tools used for the publishing of documentation prepared by the holders of public authority

Figure 7. % of tools used for the publishing of documentation prepared by the holders of public authority

• The majority of holders of public authority find the challenges of digitization of their actions in human and technical capacities (on average, each service has four engaged employees who work on the creation or reading of documentation related to spatial plans) (Figure 8);
• A large number of holders of public authorities point out that the age of their equipment is the main problem for the digitization of the procedure (on average, computers are 6 years old);
• 82% of public authority holders never engage external experts in the development of conditions for spatial and urban plans.

Figure 8. % of holders of public powers according to potential obstacles for digitalization of processes

Figure 8. % of holders of public powers according to potential obstacles for digitalization of processes

4. New model for the geospatial data

4.2. The flow chart of the process

Based on the three main business processes, a flowchart is formed. The first step is colaboration and cooperation between stakeholders. This confirms that everyone will collect data from their jurisdiction and ensure that the data is transparent and accessible to everyone.

Data collection implies that data is collected in an adequate format according to agreed standards. The collected data is entered in the register. Entry, change and deletion of data, entry of documents are registered in the register. We distinguish between two types of register: register of legal regimes and register of urban and spatial planning.

After entering the data into the Registers, the Data Distribution phase occurs, with the possible visualization of that data on a digital platform. In this way, a model for managing geospatial data is formed and additional value is created.

Based on the above, a new model is being formed that has its own benefits:

• All data is in one place,
• The data is digitized and easy access is enabled,
• Data is visible and transparent,
• All stakeholders communicate with each other and share their data.

The proposed flow chart of the process is shown in the following figure.

Figure 10. The flow chart of the process

Figure 10. The flow chart of the process

In this way, the authors point to the benefits of forming a new model of geospatial data because its formation indicates the possible electronic display of all data located in real space. Based on this, it is possible to report and a standardized visual display containing all the data found in the database.

The entire model process introduces the concept of collaboration and co-creation, based on the recognition of the importance of accessibility and the principle of universal design for all people, shifting the focus from urban and spatial planning to geospatial data useful for all users. This indicates the necessity of an integral and comprehensive approach to the described problem and building a digital platform of geospatial data with a unique database, i.e. eSpace.

4.3. Steps to form a new model for geospatial data

As the digital economy expands, digitalization has become a significant global trend [31,32,33]. A rising number of enterprises have been embracing digital transformation with edge-cutting technologies to respond to this trend [34]. The digital transformation, as a process of data collection, storage and analysis using advanced digital technologies, has become a strategic selection for many firms to improve productivity [35,36]. As a result of the deep adjustments in technology and the market environment brought about by the advent of the digital economy, more and more firms are turning to digital technologies to encourage organizational optimization and speed up the pace of innovation in products and services. About that, value co-creation denotes that occurs through interaction between an organization and citizens. Thus, the concept of social value seeks to maximize the additional benefits created by the commissioning of projects and services, above and beyond the benefits of the products and services themselves.

In relation to the goal, paper hypotheses and analysis of the current state of spatial and urban planning in the Republic of Serbia, the conclusion is that it is necessary to implement a system of production and distribution of a unique database of planning documents and all data related to land in Serbia, through digitization (Figure 11).

The paper started from the special goals adopted by the Government of the Republic of Serbia through the "Program for the Development of Electronic Government in the Republic of Serbia for the Period from 2020 to 2022 with the Action Plan for its Implementation", which represent the basis of the implementation of digitized planning documents [11].

The "Strategy of Sustainable Urban Development of the Republic of Serbia until 2030" [12] supports digitization and the introduction of electronic services in the management of urban development, which also represents the basis for the development of the described digitization. This confirms the general goal of the paper.

The main and special hypotheses were confirmed in terms of the necessary establishment of a system of production and distribution of a centralized database of planning documents. This activity develops and establishes an eSpace system related to the region of the Republic of Serbia.

Based on the research of the paper of local self-government and holders of public powers, and the obtained analysis, it is concluded that it is necessary to improve legal acts and enable their digitization in order to directly implement planning documents. The adoption of social value and value co-creation concepts is an attempt to introduce multidisciplinary and systems views to sustainable management of geospatial data in spatial and urban planning.

The following table shows what needs to be done in the local self-government unit and with public authority holders in order to create a new model for geospatial data:

Table 3. What needs to be done for the new model in the local self-government unit and with public authority holders

Table 3. What needs to be done for the new model in the local self-government unit and with public authority holders

The following needs to be done	Local self-government units	Public authority holders
1.	Review and reduce the number of types of planning documents;	Digitize the process of obtaining conditions in the process of creating planning documentation
2.	Digitize the entire process of preparation, coordination and monitoring of the preparation of planning documents	Establish rules on the use of available formats for all participants in the procedure
3.	Centralize the procedure for adopting planning documents for local self-government units that have limited capacity	Implement a phased introduction of digitization, depending on the provided staff, equipment and financial resources
4.	Acquire the IT equipment necessary for the digitization of the procedure for adopting planning documents	Review and take into account the current situation for registration in the cadastre of underground lines
5.	Conduct regular employee training for the use of the information system	Make sure that copies of the plan and other documentation is sent in .dwg format, if the plot is georeferenced
6.	Network the participants in the process of preparation, coordination and monitoring of the planning documents.	Send documentation in editable digital form, and spatial data in .shp format, through geoweb service.
7.	Digitize the entire procedure, standardization and formatting of documentation (text and graphics) for the purposes of issuing conditions with up-to-date accompanying data from the real estate cadastre in digital format.	Work on the creation of a unified cadastre of underground utility installations to which all holders of public authority would have access.

The future steps to form a new model for geospatial data are [14]:

• Develop and implement a unique ePlan information system through which planning documents and other legal regulations governing the use of space will be produced;
• Establish an Internal Portal for professional users, as an entry point for all actors in the process of spatial and urban planning, as well as holders of public authority to regulate conditions for the use of space;
• Provide electronic communication between all participants in the system for complete interactivity;
• Standardize the content, methodology and format of planning documents;
• Provide a software application for the technical control of planning documents during their creation, as well as their entry into the central database of planning documents;
• Consolidate all legal acts in the same place with planning documentation;
• Improve the capacity of human resources of representatives of local self-government units to perform tasks in the field of urban planning, by establishing inter-municipal cooperation;
• Provide systemic and public support in the implementation of the concept;
• Establish the Central portal eSpace, which should ensure easy availability in one place of all relevant information related to the conditions of use of space in Serbia, including construction conditions;
• Establish an open data portal on land use conditions in Serbia (Cadastre of immovable property and utilities maintained by the Republic Geodetic Authority of the Republic of Serbia (RGA); Central records of the unified procedure for issuing building permits maintained by the Agency for Economic Registers; Register of immovable properties in public ownership maintained by the Republic property directorate of the Republic of Serbia, etc.).

The possible functioning of the eSpace system, the establishment of the ePlan system, the production and distribution of a centralized electronic database of planning documents and all data related to land in Serbia is shown in the following picture (Figure 12).

Based on that, and in order to achieve the goal, the first step is the implementation of activities within pilot municipalities and with holders of public authority. The aim of the pilot activities is to check the applicability, adequacy and completeness of the set standards and methodologies in practice, as well as their adaptation to the specifics and needs of the planning management of space and land in Serbia. In accordance with the results of the pilot activities, standards and methodologies would be approved, after which the existing legal framework should be amended and adapted to the needs of the eSpace system, as well as the preparation of technical specifications for the procurement of software, hardware and other resources necessary for the development of eSpace.

In light of this, urban planning becomes an essential tool that can help local governments define land-use policies to enhance local sustainable development [37,38,39,40,41]. Many cities enabled “open data“ in order to enhance transparency and accountability to their citizens, but also to improve efficiency within the administration and promote local economic development (e.g., by facilitating new urban digital services using government data) [42]. Opening city data requires technical expertise, breaking silos and vested interested both within and outside the administration, getting buy-in from data users and providers, bold political action and continuous action to carve out change in cultural mindsets [43,44].

The suggestion of the analysis of this paper is that the area of planning is ideal for inter-municipal cooperation and assignment of tasks from this competence to local self-government units with more significant resources.

Through research, the authors came to three groups of recommendations that should be done in order to form a geospatial data management model, i.e. eSpace. Given that it has been observed that the data are both in paper and electronic format, it is necessary to confirm the exact formats and data standards in order to make them acceptable for use in digital form. It was also noted that it is necessary to work on the introduction of software that enables the transformation of data from one format to another. Another important segment is the modification of legal documents in order to ensure a secure legal aspect by implementing a digital platform.

By collecting data, creating a register of urban and spatial planning and legal regimes, the authors indicate the possibility of data production and distribution as well as its visualization. The described work flow as a result of work contributes to the creation of a new model of geospatial data management.

The practical application of the results of the research carried out in the paper can be widely used in the field of geospatial data as:

• The basis for understanding the principles of universal design in order to achieve co-creation in practice through an integral procedure from design to monitoring.
• Incentive to empower all users to respond to the geospatial environment by active participation through the platform.
• The basis for the possible automation of the data processing process of various databases and the complete automation of the decision-making process on the accessibility of a certain urban environment.

By shifting the focus from urban and spatial planning to other databases and their registers such as cultural heritage, the health sector, the tourist aspect of one region and others, the eSpace model for the complete management of geospatial data is formed. In this way, collaboration and co-creation is created as value creation for all users of the model, which further complements the importance of the model described in this way.

The main bearers of the described activities would be the institutions of the Republic of Serbia: the Ministry of Construction, Transport and Infrastructure (MCTI), the Republic Geodetic Authority (RGA), the Office of e-Government. It is also necessary to ensure the involvement of representatives of several institutions in the implementation of this reform, representatives of all ministries in whose jurisdiction the affairs of holders of public authority are, those obliged to introduce legal regimes, as well as representatives of other institutions. The entire process of communication would be based on the digital input of data for which institutions are responsible and their transparency between the participants (Figure 13).

By networking all data about each location, complete geolocation information is obtained. This creates the value of co-creation for public and private institutions and citizens of the country (Figure 14).

Having in mind human resources, internal and external, there is a connection of several actors in one place: citizens, investors, local self-government units, state and other institutions. Between them, electronic communication is realized, which includes several models of communication: G2B, G2C, B2B, B2C and B2E. The two most common models of communication are G2C and G2B [5] (Figure 15):

• The Government-to-Consumer (G2C) model is used by potential investors and citizens to obtain information about locations. The G2C model is primarily concerned with obtaining information about the location by local governments.
• The Governemnt-to-Business (G2B) model is represented in communication between local governments and other institutions. This communication includes information between individual legal entities. The basis of the G2B model concerns the provision of information, which aims to increase efficiency, reduce transaction costs and provide real-time information for all participants in the chain [33].

5. Conclusions

References

1. Wang, S.; Chen, S; Gao, W.; Information Services as a Method to Evaluate the Sustainability of Intangible Dimensions of a Historic Urban Landscape: A Case Study in Guangzhou, China, Sustainability. 2023; 15(1):8. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010008. [CrossRef]
2. Jovanovic Milenkovic, M.; Brajovic, B.; Milenkovic, D.; Vukmirovic, D.; Jeremic, V.; Beyond the equal-weight framework of the Networked Readiness Index: A multilevel I-distance methodology, Information Development, 2016, 32(4):1120-1136 https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666915593136. [CrossRef]
3. Vukmirovic, A.; Rajnai, Z.; Radojicic, M.; Vukmirović, J.; Jovanovic-Milenkovic, M.; Infrastructural Model for the Healthcare System based on Emerging Technologies. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 2018, 15:33-48. https://doi.org/10.12700/APH.15.1.2018.2.2. [CrossRef]
4. Simonofski, A.; Asensio, E.S.; De Smedt, J.; Snoeck, M. Citizen participation in smart cities: Evaluation framework proposal. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 19th Conference on Business Informatics, Thessaloniki, Greece, 24–27 May 2017; IEEE: Danvers, MA, USA, 2017; Volume 1, pp. 227–236.
5. Jovanovic-Milenkovic, M.;, Rikanovic, S.; (2022), Smart city concept: digital platform of investment locations, In Proceedings of the 10th IPMA Research Conference “Value co-creation in the project society”, Belgrade, Serbia, 19-21 June 2022. https://doi.org/10.56889/gqlp8602. [CrossRef]
6. Stupar, A; Mihajlov, V; Lalovic, K; Colic, R; Petrovic, F; Participative Placemaking in Serbia: The Use of the Limitless GIS Application in Increasing the Sustainability of Universal Urban Design. Sustainability. 2019; 11(19):5459. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195459. [CrossRef]
7. Kyunghun, M.; Moonyoung, Y.; Katsunori, F; A Comparison of a Smart City’s Trends in Urban Planning before and after 2016 through Keyword Network Analysis, Sustainability, 2019, 11, 3155;. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113155. [CrossRef]
8. White, S. S.; Ellis, C.; Sustainability, the environment, and new urbanism: an assessment and agenda for research. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 2007, 24(2): 125–142.
9. Petersen, S. A.; Pourzolfaghar, Z.; Alloush, I.; Ahlers, D.; Krogstie, J.; Helfert, M.; Value-added services, virtual enterprises and data spaces inspired Enterprise architecture for smart cities, 20th Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises (PRO-VE), Sep 2019, Turin, Italy. pp.393- 402, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28464-0_34. [CrossRef]
10. Ministry of Construction, Transport and Infrastructure of the Republic of Serbia, Proposal for a policy concept on the reform of e-space - a policy concept on the reform of spatial and urban planning in the Republic of Serbia, 2022, Belgrade, Serbia.
11. Official Gazette, Electronic administration development program in the Republic of Serbia for the period from 2020 to 2022, Number 85/2020, Serbia.
12. Official Gazette, Strategy of sustainable urban development of the Republic of Serbia until 2030, Number 47/19, Serbia.
13. Steiner F.; Butler, K.; Planning and Urban Design Standards, American Planning Association, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2007.
14. Working group led by representatives of the Ministry of Construction, Transport and Infrastructure of the Republic of Serbia, The Republic Geodetic Authority, National alliance for local economic development, Together to digital spatial and urban plans, 2021, Belgrade, Serbia.
15. Coman, C; Netedu, A; Damean, SL;, Toderici, OF; Briciu, VA; Pascu, ML; Bularca, MC;. Improving the Quality of Community Public Services-Case Study: General Directorate of Personal Records, Brașov. Sustainability. 2023; 15(1):816. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010816. [CrossRef]
16. Berkel, A. R.; Singh, P. M.; van Sinderen, M. J.; An information security architecture for smart cities. In 8th International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design, 2018, Vienna, Austria, July 2-4, pp.167-184.
17. Bokolo, A.; Petersen, S.A.; Helfert, M.; Improving Digitization of Urban Mobility Services with Enterprise Architecture. In: Mikalef, P., Parmiggiani, E. (eds) Digital Transformation in Norwegian Enterprises. Publisher: Springer, Cham., 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05276-7_8. [CrossRef]
18. Surveying and Planning through Electronic Applications and Referrals, Available online: https://www.spear.land.vic.gov.au/spear/pages/eplan/about/about-the-eplan-process.shtml, (accessed on 18 November 2022).
19. Nummi P.; Staffans A.; Helenius, O., Digitalizing planning culture: A change towards information model-based planning in Finland, Journal of Urban Management, In Press, Available online 16 December 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2022.12.001. [CrossRef]
20. Prostorski informacijski sistem, Available online: http://www.pis.gov.si/, (accessed on 25 September 2022).
21. Čok, G.;Mrak G.; Breznik, J.;Foški, M.; Zavodnik, Lamovšek, A.; Spatial Regulation Instruments of Work at Home: The Case of Slovenia as a Post-Transition Country, Sustainability, 2022, 14(7): 4254; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074254. [CrossRef]
22. Agencija za katastar na nedviznosti, Available online: https://www.katastar.gov.mk/en/registers/graphical-register-of-construction-land/, (accessed on 18 December 2022).
23. Li, G.; Wang, L.; Wu, C.; Xu, Z.; Zhuo, Y.; Shen, X. Spatial Planning Implementation Effectiveness, Review and Research Prospects, Land 2022, 11: 1279. https://doi.org/10.3390/ land11081279. [CrossRef]
24. Coman, C; Netedu, A; Damean, SL; Toderici, OF; Briciu, VA; Pascu, ML; Bularca, MC; Improving the Quality of Community Public Services-Case Study: General Directorate of Personal Records, Brașov. Sustainability. 2023; 15(1): 816. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010816. [CrossRef]
25. Jashari, M.; Pepaj, I.; The Role of the Principle of Transparency and Accountability in Public Administration, Acta Universitatis Danubius, 2018, 10, 1/2018.
26. Marin, C.; Ruxanda, M.; Cetateanul, Factor de Decizie in Administratia Publica Locala., Res. Sci. Today, 2011, 2:141.
27. Jugović, A.; Public Administration: Main Factor in Successful Management of Coastal Area Development in Republic of Croatia. Interdiscip. Descr. Complex Syst. INDECS 2012, 10, 16–27.
28. Huxley, M.; Inch, A.; Urban Planning, Editor(s): Audrey Kobayashi, International Encyclopedia of Human Geography (Second Edition), Publisher: Elsevier, 2020, pp. 87-92, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102295-5.10228-8. [CrossRef]
29. Hersperger, M.; Thurnheer-Wittenwiler, C.;Tobias S.; Folvig, S.; Fertner, C.; Digitalization in land-use planning: Effects of digital plan data on efficiently, transparency and innovation, European Planning Studies, 2021, pp. 1-17, https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2021.2016640. [CrossRef]
30. Official Gazette, Law on Planning and Construction (No. 72/2009, 81/2009 - amended, 64/2010 - decision of the Constitutional Court, 24/2011, 121/2012, 42/2013 - decision of the Constitutional Court, 50/2013 - decision of the Constitutional Court, 98/2013 - decision of the Constitutional Court, 132/2014, 145/2014, 83/2018, 31/2019, 37/2019 - other laws, 9/2020 and 52/2021).
31. Ren, Y; Li, B; Digital Transformation, Green Technology Innovation and Enterprise Financial Performance: Empirical Evidence from the Textual Analysis of the Annual Reports of Listed Renewable Energy Enterprises in China, Sustainability. 2023; 15(1):712. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010712]. [CrossRef]
32. Zhai, H.Y.; Yang, M.; Chan, K.C. Does digital transformation enhance a firm’s performance? Evidence from China. Technol. Soc. 2022, 68, 101841. [CrossRef]
33. Jovanović Milenković, M.; Radojičić, Z.; Milenković, D.; Vukmirović, D.; (2009), Applying electronic documents in development of the healthcare information system in the Republic of Serbia, Computer Science and Information Systems, 2009, 6(2): 111-126. https://doi.org/10.2298/CSIS0902111J. [CrossRef]
34. Ma, D.; Zhu, Q. Innovation in emerging economics: Research on the digital economy driving high-quality green development, J. Bus. Res.2022, 145: 801–813. [CrossRef]
35. Dey, K.; Saha, S. Influence of procurement decisions in two-period green supply chain. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 90:388–402. [CrossRef]
36. Adner, R.; Puranam, P.; Zhu, F. What is different about digital strategy? From quantitative to qualitative change. Strat. Sci, 2019, 4: 253–261. [CrossRef]
37. Eraydın, A.,Tasan-Kok, T.; Resilience Thinking in Urban Planning, 2013, 10.1007/978-94-007-5476-8. [CrossRef]
38. Etingoff, K.; Sustainable cities: Urban planning challenges and policy, 2016.
39. Cajot,S.; Peter, M.; Bahu, J.-M.; Guignet, F.; Koch, A.; Maréchal, F.; Obstacles in energy planning at the urban scale, Sustainable Cities and Society, 2017, 30:223-236, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.02.003. [CrossRef]
40. Della Spina, L.; Lorè, I.; Scrivo, R.; Viglianisi, A. An Integrated Assessment Approach as a Decision Support System for Urban Planning and Urban Regeneration Policies. Buildings 2017, 7: 85. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings7040085. [CrossRef]
41. Pedro, J.; Silva, C.;Duarte Pinheiro, M.; Integrating GIS spatial dimension into BREEAM communities sustainability assessment to support urban planning policies, Lisbon case study, Land Use Policy, 2019, 83: 424-434, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.02.003. [CrossRef]
42. Winden, W.; De, L.; Carvalho, L.; How digitalization changes cities: innovation for the urban economy of tomorrow, 2017: 1-24., https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.27447.83362. [CrossRef]
43. PwC (2014), Innovative city strategies for delivering sustainable competitiveness, report prepared for the iUrban international conference of PwC Public Sector Practice, Rotterdam: Euricur, PwC and IHS.
44. Carvalho, L.; van Tuijl, E.; Manchester: Digital Strategy. In Carvalho, L., Berg, L. van den, Galal, H. and Teunisse, P. (Eds). Delivering Sustainable Competitiveness: Revisiting the Organising Capacity of Cities, Routledge, Abingdon, 2017.
45. 45. e-Governance Project Lifecycle Reading Supplement Handbook, Printed & Published by National Institute for Smart Government, Available online: https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/e-Governance_Project_Lifecycle_Participant_Handbook-5Day_CourseV1_20412.pdf, (accessed on 10 December 2022).
46. Rehman, M. A.; Ishak, M. S. B.; Role of Governmental Regulatory Controlling Procedures between Political Hazards and Risk Management. European Project Management Journal, 2022, 12(2): 34-49. https://doi.org/10.56889/owua8196. [CrossRef]
47. The Republic Geodetic Authority, NSDI Strategic Actions Plan, Belgrade, Serbia, 2021, Available online: https://en.rgz.gov.rs/content/pages/english/Structure/NSDI%20Strategic%20Actions%20Plan-4.pdf, (accessed on 10 December 2022).
48. International Smart Cities Network (ISCN), Data Strategies for a Common Good-oriented Urban Development International, 2022, Available online: https://www.smart-city-dialog.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Publication-Data-Strategies-for-Common-Good-oriented-Urban-Development-Int.pdf, (accessed on 14 December 2022).
49. Official Gazette, Action plan for the implementation of the strategy of sustainable urban development of the Republic of Serbia until 2030 for the period from 2021 to 2022, Number 28/2021, 2021.
50. Obradović, V.; Contemporary Trends in the Public Sector Project Management. European Project Management Journal. 2018; 8. 52-56. https://doi.org/10.18485/epmj.2018.8.2.7. [CrossRef]