ABSTRACT
In broader terms, a Smart City improves the quality of life of its citizens through the effective use of innovative (digital) solutions. While innovative Smart City solutions keep growing, attention has been paid to resilience-making within Smart Cities, recognising that disasters are unavoidable. In light of the characteristics of a Smart City (smartness requirements) being inchoate and vague, different Smart Cities develop their own smartness criteria. Regardless of the Smart City type, smartness criteria need to adequately embed resilience. Integrating the resilience concept provides a strategic direction for Smart Cities and there is a significant positive relationship between the two concepts, Smart Cities, and urban resilience. Although Smart Cities are increasingly growing in popularity all around the world, there is a lack of research to guide a Smart City to define its smartness reflecting on disaster resilience. This paper intends to address this research gap by setting out a set of smartness criteria (with particular reference to urban (city) resilience) which should compulsorily feature in any type of Smart City that desires to be resilient. The study undertakes a systematic literature review to provide a new dimension, depth, and value to existing research discoveries. The findings are presented by structuring ten urban (city) resilience dimensions built upon six Smart City dimensions: smart economy, smart governance, smart people, smart mobility, smart living, and smart environment. Our findings make a niche contribution to knowledge by guiding Smart Cities that intend to build, enhance, and/or sustain resilience, to develop smartness criteria/smart characteristics reflecting on urban resilience. The research outcomes will be of large importance to Smart City policymakers, administrators, project managers, etc. to efficiently manage extreme events timely with optimal resource allocation and will be of specific interest to all the stakeholders (for instance, the innovators) in a Smart City ecosystem who may use the research outcomes as a decision-making tool.