Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns

Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network:... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733" }, "headline": "Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns", "datePublished": "2025-07-25T15:09:30", "dateModified": "2026-03-11T05:24:50", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Bama Andika Putra" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": "The development of smart cities through the ASEAN Smart Cities Network (ASCN) has accelerated the growth of Southeast Asia’s capital and important cities. However, a growing concern has been how much the intentions of Southeast Asian cities to achieve ‘smart city status’ consider the basic elements of human rights and the provision of essential public services. The first policy recommendation is to acknowledge the vulnerability of the underprivileged, personal security, and social inclusion in governing smart cities to counter the possible derailment of democratic progress in the region. The second recommendation is to strengthen engagement with bottom-up and grassroots level initiatives to avoid a ‘development’ model imposed by external funding stakeholders. The policy brief uses secondary data from 2018 to 2024 on the ASEAN Smart Cities Network projects and identifies civic and social concerns that arose during this period." } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3", "name": "Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed..." } } ] } Home Browse Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Putra BA. Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167098.3 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Policy Brief Revised Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] Bama Andika Putra https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5952-136X 1,2 Bama Andika Putra https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5952-136X 1,2 PUBLISHED 11 Mar 2026 Author details Author details 1 School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK 2 Department of International Relations, Universitas Hasanuddin Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik, Makassar, South Sulawesi, Indonesia Bama Andika Putra Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Investigation, Project Administration, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS Abstract The development of smart cities through the ASEAN Smart Cities Network (ASCN) has accelerated the growth of Southeast Asia’s capital and important cities. However, a growing concern has been how much the intentions of Southeast Asian cities to achieve ‘smart city status’ consider the basic elements of human rights and the provision of essential public services. The first policy recommendation is to acknowledge the vulnerability of the underprivileged, personal security, and social inclusion in governing smart cities to counter the possible derailment of democratic progress in the region. The second recommendation is to strengthen engagement with bottom-up and grassroots level initiatives to avoid a ‘development’ model imposed by external funding stakeholders. The policy brief uses secondary data from 2018 to 2024 on the ASEAN Smart Cities Network projects and identifies civic and social concerns that arose during this period. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords Smart City, ASEAN2, ASEAN Smart Cities Network3, Human Rights4, Social Concerns5 Corresponding Author(s) Bama Andika Putra ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Bama Andika Putra Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Copyright: © 2026 Putra BA. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Putra BA. Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167098.3 ) First published: 25 Jul 2025, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167098.1 ) Latest published: 11 Mar 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167098.3 ) Revised Amendments from Version 2 In this second revision, the main focus is to replace the policy brief's second recommendation with the proposal to engage in bottom-up, grassroots smart initiatives. It acknowledges that the previous second recommendation would not be politically feasible to adopt, due to the significant structural constraints. Therefore, as elaborated in the second recommendation (with slight changes to the wording in the abstract and conclusion sections), the revised second recommendation acknowledges that civic society has increasingly used digital tools to accelerate participatory governance and human rights. Therefore, by acknowledging the significance of existing bottom-up initiatives, this recommendation would underscore the importance of the ASCN scaling bottom-up smart initiatives already operating, enhancing information and knowledge exchange among member states, and promoting small-scale funding. Nevertheless, it still incorporates the first revision’s second recommendation’s concerns on the disparity among ASEAN member states across several public service dimensions, which is now used as a potential negative consequence of the revised second proposal. In this second revision, the main focus is to replace the policy brief's second recommendation with the proposal to engage in bottom-up, grassroots smart initiatives. It acknowledges that the previous second recommendation would not be politically feasible to adopt, due to the significant structural constraints. Therefore, as elaborated in the second recommendation (with slight changes to the wording in the abstract and conclusion sections), the revised second recommendation acknowledges that civic society has increasingly used digital tools to accelerate participatory governance and human rights. Therefore, by acknowledging the significance of existing bottom-up initiatives, this recommendation would underscore the importance of the ASCN scaling bottom-up smart initiatives already operating, enhancing information and knowledge exchange among member states, and promoting small-scale funding. Nevertheless, it still incorporates the first revision’s second recommendation’s concerns on the disparity among ASEAN member states across several public service dimensions, which is now used as a potential negative consequence of the revised second proposal. See the author's detailed response to the review by Tran Xuan Hiep See the author's detailed response to the review by Teija Vainio See the author's detailed response to the review by Tooran Alizadeh READ REVIEWER RESPONSES Introduction: The challenges faced by Southeast Asia’s cities The ASCN is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) solution towards urbanization and city-based challenges. In 2018, Singapore led the initiative to establish the ASCN, believing that a ‘smart city’ conception of Southeast Asian states would help Southeast Asian nations address challenges arising from urbanization and the underdevelopment of larger ASEAN cities. 1 As Ludher argues, “Most of ASEAN’s growth has been and will continue to be driven by urban centers, with more people expected to urbanize by 2030”. 2 This policy brief perceives that throughout the process, the ASCN lacks proper consideration towards human rights and elements of sustainability (civic and social dimensions) in its plan to accelerate the growth of its member cities. The ASCN started with 26 pilot cities across the ten ASEAN member states. As shown in Figure 1 below, these cities differ significantly in terms of population, political systems, and current levels of development. Nevertheless, the ASCN has emphasized that, through the network, normative guidelines will serve as the foundation for member cities’ smart city development. 3 , 4 Perceiving the importance of city-level and scalable solutions, the ASCN was established at the 32nd ASEAN Summit 2018 and identified 26 Pilot cities, reflecting consistency with ASEAN’s regional institutionalism, which places heavy emphasis on stability and development. As of 2024, this list has increased to 31 cities, including Sihanoukville City, Sumedang, Rayong, Khon Kaen, and Chiang Mai. Figure 1. Member cities of the ASEAN Smart Cities Network. Source: Ludher (2018). 2 The ASCN’s smart city conceptions aim to achieve a high quality of life, a competitive economy, and a sustainable environment. 4 ASCN would thus assist in establishing digital infrastructure, fostering partnerships, and providing funding for several of the ASCN’s key development areas. Among the key development areas this policy brief concerns are the ‘civic and social,’ comprising social cohesion, culture and heritage, tourism, public and municipal services, and governance. 5 In recent years, city groups have been working to address the issues cities collectively face in their development. Notable examples include Local Governments for Sustainability, the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, United Cities and Local Governments, WeGo, and the Strong Cities Network. These cities’ networks have been used to facilitate dialogue and the sharing of best practices concerning achieving sustainable smart cities. Several ASCN members are part of those city groupings, indicating that the sources of development practices they are informed about are diverse. Nevertheless, can the ASCN truly address the prevalent issues local governments in Southeast Asia face? This policy brief identifies two issues arising from the ASCN, based on a normative and literature review of the initiative’s direction. They include the neglect of human rights and the imposition of a ‘developing’ model on financing stakeholders. The ASCN is geared to establish ‘smart cities’ in Southeast Asia. However, this region comprises states with significant disparities. The diverse social, economic, and political landscapes have already exacerbated human rights protection due to authoritarian and semi-authoritarian rule, which aim to maintain regime legitimacy by exerting greater power. Introducing information and communication technologies in the ASCN member cities risks increased surveillance and control in the region’s less democratic settings. As past studies have argued, smart cities do not directly correlate with sustainability, 6 , 7 and the ASCN and the developed city master plans of the member cities are ambiguous about how the most disadvantaged would benefit from greater inclusivity in smart cities. 8 – 11 Therefore, it could represent what a study mentioned as evolving social practices restricting rights. 12 This study acknowledges that there are cases of illiberal, yet effective, smart cities. However, given civic and social concerns, these practices should be carefully approached through the ASCN to ensure that developments in civic and social sustainability do not decline and to balance between liberal governance and the developmental state. A second concern identified in this policy brief is the imposition of development models by external actors. The ASCN collaborates with and links ASCN members’ projects to potential financing from various stakeholders. The problem with this is that the ASCN eventually aims to achieve accelerated profit-driven growth, which includes broader privatization processes along the way. Observing the case of Phnom Penh’s forced privatized land that disadvantaged low-income people, 11 a “top-down” (terminology introduced by de Jong in 2023) approach thus risks the livelihoods of ASEAN citizens. 8 Strengthening the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Two Possible Solutions This section argues that to complement the deficiencies of the ASCN’s smart city conception, two recommendations can be adopted. The first recommendation is to acknowledge the vulnerability of the underprivileged, provide personal security, and promote social inclusion for governing smart cities. As shown in Table 1 below, a prominent problem in Southeast Asian states is the lack of democracy in their social and political landscapes. Consequently, when the ASCN echoed the importance of smart cities, there were fears that this would further derail democratic progress in the region. Studies in the past have shown that smart-city developments risk more substantial violations of privacy rights, as high-tech companies have a stronger voice and role in the planning and financing of smart-city projects. 13 – 16 Half of the Southeast Asian states are authoritarian or semi-authoritarian states. Consequently, there is an intense fear of abuse of power and increased surveillance capacities, which are feared to be the consequences of smart city conceptions, albeit the presence of institutional designs that help counter their intensity. 7 , 17 Table 1. Southeast Asian states’ ranks in the 2023 Democracy Index. Country Global Rank Regime Type Malaysia 40 Flawed Democracy Indonesia 56 Flawed Democracy Thailand 63 Flawed Democracy Singapore 69 Flawed Democracy Philippines 53 Flawed Democracy Cambodia 121 Authoritarian Vietnam 136 Authoritarian Laos 159 Authoritarian Myanmar 166 Authoritarian Brunei Darussalam NA NA Given the vulnerability of the underprivileged in Southeast Asia’s larger cities, it is essential to examine how past studies have concluded that smart city developments can leave the poor and unemployed in isolation. 19 , 20 This policy brief acknowledges that smart city development is geared toward economic progress despite the civic and social elements emphasized in the ASCN. The problem with this is the strong possibility that social inclusion and people’s participation in governance will be further hampered, as shown in the conclusions of past studies on this subject. 21 – 25 Therefore, this destination toward ‘smart city’ status must be carefully pursued by the ASCN to ensure that, in the process, local governments do not impede upon the fundamental human rights of its citizens in the name of development. This policy recommendation has both positive and negative implications. The positive implication is that the ASCN can argue its consistency with ASEAN’s recent approach to respecting human rights in the region. The diversity of the political landscape of Southeast Asia is seen with military coups, decades-long rule, lack of political participation, and rigged elections all over the region. 26 , 27 Therefore, by acknowledging human rights elements in its smart city development plans, it is able to be consistent with the steps already taken to better human rights in the region. 28 – 30 The efforts include the 2012 ASEAN Declaration on Human Rights and the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). In recent years, ASEAN’s version of human rights and the AICHR have been protested for acknowledging human rights as dependent on regional and national contexts. However, these small steps are the most feasible for a region as diverse as Southeast Asia. Studies have shown how ‘smart city’ conceptions have been a dominant theme within states’ urban planning in recent years. 31 – 34 Therefore, the best course of action is to complement what is lacking within the existing smart city conceptions of the ASCN. Nevertheless, this recommendation also has negative implications. Among the most prominent is the possible violation of the ‘ASEAN Way.’ ASEAN was established on the importance of consensus-based decision-making, non-interference, non-intervention, and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. 35 , 36 Despite the vast human rights concerns across the region, ASEAN has never acted as an intervening body and acknowledges that all Southeast Asian states are unique in their respect. Emphasizing the importance of specific human rights elements in the smart city development process could provoke rejection by ASEAN member states that are sensitive to human rights discourse, such as Lao PDR, Myanmar, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Brunei Darussalam. 37 , 38 The second recommendation is to strengthen engagement with bottom-up and grassroots smart initiatives, including information sharing among ASEAN member states. As argued in prior relevant studies, there is a considerable increase in civic society actors using digital tools to accelerate community-based service delivery, human rights, and participatory governance. 39 – 41 This proposal, therefore, encourages development that enables a synchronous approach between the ASCN’s policies and the development model adopted by ASEAN member states, ensuring alignment with the conceptions of civic tech movements and local innovation labs. 42 By doing so, this proposal expands the definition of ‘smart city’ and places civic participation at the heart of the ASCN mandate. By engaging with grassroots smart initiatives, the ASCN counters a major issue in its development model: the strong influence of models catering to the financing stakeholder. In the past, many of ASEAN’s external partners have partnered with the ASCN pilot cities. 43 Japan has been an active nation, aiming to adopt Japanese models of sustainability and smart city infrastructure through its Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which has increased its presence in Siem Reap, Phnom Penh, and Yangon City. 10 , 11 China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has also financed many of Southeast Asia’s regional strategic infrastructures. 44 Some have been under the framework of the BRI, while others have been through partnerships with China’s private and public industries. Huawei, for example, was reported to contribute to Thailand’s digital economy and technological updates. 8 , 45 The problem with this model is that the intention to construct this smart city leads Southeast Asian states to be influenced by the national interests of foreign states, which aim to impose their development model on ASCN members. 46 , 47 Consequently, it will be difficult for recipient cities of the financing to cater to the needs of their vulnerable groups, as attention would be diverted to accelerating development in line with the interests of the financing stakeholders. The proposed model, therefore, benefits ASEAN member states in several ways. It allows ASCN members themselves to scale up bottom-up smart initiatives already undertaken in their respective cities. Besides that, rather than imposing external development models on the ASCN member cities, the focus is on promoting small-scale funding that clearly aligns with the set human rights and social inclusion goals. By also encouraging information sharing among ASEAN member states, this proposal further benefits from connecting grassroots initiatives to enhance best practices and exchange experiences. The focus on information sharing also ensures consistency with ASEAN’s mandates, making it politically viable. Nevertheless, assistance from fellow ASEAN members also raises concerns. Perhaps the most significant is the disparity among ASEAN member states across education, health, and standards of living, which would eventually show that grassroots-level initiatives across member states differ significantly. As the 2022 UN Human Development Index (HDI) in Table 2 below shows, for example, there is a significant disparity among ASEAN members across those elements. 48 In Southeast Asia, states like Singapore ranked among the best globally, at 9th, and Cambodia and Myanmar ranked 148th and 144th. Table 2. Southeast Asian states’ ranks in the 2022 Human Development Index. Country Global rank Total score (/1) Singapore 9 0.949 Brunei Darussalam 55 0.823 Malaysia 63 0.807 Thailand 66 0.803 Vietnam 107 0.713 Indonesia 112 0.710 Philippines 113 0.620 Lao PDR 139 0.608 Myanmar 144 0.600 Cambodia 148 0.726 Actionable recommendation: Moderate adoptions Based on two policy recommendations in the previous section, the actionable recommendation is a moderate application of both policies. In the ASEAN context, it is crucial to consider its member states’ sensitivity to any notions that may impede the ASEAN Way. Therefore, in the first recommendation that acknowledges the vulnerability of the underprivileged, the terms used must ensure that they refrain from the language of ‘enforcing’ or ‘must.’ An example of alternative terms that can be used is ‘encourage’ or ‘strongly consider,’ which avoids any notion of forcing ASEAN member states, represented by the ASCN members, to abide by human rights principles in their efforts to achieve smart city status. Taking, for example, the AICHR, despite the commission’s mandate to engage in the protection and promotion of human rights in Southeast Asia, it is observed that the AICHR has focused more on promotional mandates than on protection, to ensure continued support from all ten member states. 49 , 50 With the second recommendation to have fellow ASEAN member states engage in bottom-up and grassroots smart initiatives, this can be done by encouraging such adoption, with its development model dependent on the members' definitions. By doing so, it would not rely heavily on redistributive commitments towards certain states and would not challenge the ASEAN Way. Through developmental models deriving from within, this proposal ensures a more politically viable and institutionally compatible mechanism with ASEAN’s unique structure. Conclusion This policy brief examines several recent trends arising from ASEAN’s ASCN, aiming to establish smart city status among ASCN members. Smart city status does not automatically lead to sustainability. Therefore, additional measures need to be taken by the ASCN members to ensure that it enhances its respect for civil and social needs, which may be neglected throughout the improved development process. Based on secondary data from 2018 to 2024, this study concludes that two recommendations can be adopted to promote more sustainable city-based development across the Southeast Asian region. The recommendations include acknowledging the vulnerability of the underprivileged, ensuring personal security, promoting social inclusion in governing smart cities, and placing greater importance on grassroots-level initiatives. These recommendations address several disparities and diversities among ASEAN member states, as reflected in the 2024 Democracy Index and the 2022 Human Development Index. Furthermore, it considers several problems arising from existing ASCN models for developing cities, including the risk of violating privacy rights, a lack of social inclusivity in city development, and the imposition of development models by external funders. In conclusion, there is no clear linkage between the ASCN and sustainable measures while accelerating its member cities’ growth. Thus, this policy brief recommends that the ASCN take a step back and consider what is deficient within its development models to adopt more inclusive policies in its future development. Ethical considerations Ethical approval and consent were not required. Data availability statement The dataset used in this study is publicly available and sourced from reputable organizations. All data can be accessed through their official platforms, with the detailed data and links accessible below: • UN Development Index 2022: https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-index#/indicies/HDI ; • Democracy Index 2023: https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2023/ . All data required to replicate the findings of this study are available on those websites, on which users can filter based on the inquired variable and period. References 1. Martinus M: ASEAN Smart Cities Network: A Catalyst for Partnerships. Singapore: 2020. 2. Ludher E: ASEAN Smart Cities Network. Singapore: Centre for Liveable Cities Singapore; 2018. 3. Yatim S: ASEAN Smart Cities: What About the Governance Issues? - Access Partnership. Access Partnership 2018. (accessed December 19, 2024). Reference Source 4. ASCN: ASEAN Smart Cities Network MONITORING & EVALUATION REPORT 2024. Jakarta: 2024. 5. ASEAN: ASEAN Smart Cities Network. Association of Southeast Asian Nations; 2024. (accessed December 18, 2024). Reference Source 6. Karvonen A, Cugurullo F, Caprotti F: The long and unsettled future of smart cities. New York: Taylor and Francis; 2018. Publisher Full Text 7. Crumpton CD, Wongthanavasu S, Kamnuansilpa P, et al. : Assessing the ASEAN Smart Cities Network (ASCN) via the Quintuple Helix Innovation Framework, with Special Regard to Smart City Discourse, Civil Participation, and Environmental Performance. Int. J. Urban Sustain. Dev. 2021; 13 : 97–116. Publisher Full Text 8. de Jonge A : Governance and human rights implications of ASEAN’s Smart Cities Network: a knowledge commons analysis. Int. J. Law Context. 2023; 19 : 13–31. Publisher Full Text 9. DEPA: Smart City Framework and Guidance for Thailand: Smart City Services for Phuket. Digital Economy Promotion Agency; 2019. (accessed December 25, 2024). Reference Source 10. JICA: Davao City Infrastructure Development Plan and Capacity Building Project. Japan International Cooperation Agency; 2024. (accessed December 25, 2024). Reference Source 11. GGGI: Phnom Penh Sustainable City Plan 2018–2030. Phnom Penh; 2018. 12. Morgan B: The Intersection of Rights and Regulation: New Directions in Sociolegal Scholarship. New York: Taylor and Francis; 2007. 13. Gottlieb C: Residential Short-Term Rentals: Should Local Governments Regulate the “Industry”? Plann. Environ. Law. 2013; 65 : 4–9. Publisher Full Text 14. Maria De Fuentes J, Gonzalez-Manzano L, Solanas A, et al. : Attribute-Based Credentials for Privacy-Aware Smart Health Services in IoT-Based Smart Cities. Computer (Long Beach Calif). 2018; 51 : 44–53. Publisher Full Text 15. Huang Q, Wang L, Yang Y: Secure and Privacy-Preserving Data Sharing and Collaboration in Mobile Healthcare Social Networks of Smart Cities. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2017; 2017 : 1–12. Publisher Full Text 16. Klass A, Wilson E: Remaking Energy: The Critical Role of Energy Consumption Data Remaking Energy: The Critical Role of Energy Consumption Data. Calif. Law Rev. 2016; 104 : 1095–1158. Publisher Full Text 17. Ho E: Smart subjects for a Smart Nation? Governing (smart) mentalities in Singapore. Urban Stud. 2016; 54 : 3101–3118. Publisher Full Text 18. EIU: Democracy Index 2023 download confirmation. Economist Intelligence Unit; 2024. (accessed December 19, 2024). Reference Source 19. Zuboff S: The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. London: Profile Books; 2019. 20. Rainie L, Anderson J: Experts on the Pros and Cons of Algorithms. Pew Research Center; 2017. (accessed December 25, 2024). Reference Source 21. Romzek BS, Leroux K, Blackmar JM: A Preliminary Theory of Informal Accountability among Network Organizational Actors. Public Adm. Rev. 2012; 72 : 442–453. Publisher Full Text 22. Renckens S: Private Governance and Public Authority: Regulating Sustainability in a Global Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2020. Publisher Full Text 23. Ansell C, Gash A: Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory. 2008; 18 : 543–571. Publisher Full Text 24. Simonofski A, Vallé T, Serral E, et al. : Investigating context factors in citizen participation strategies: A comparative analysis of Swedish and Belgian smart cities. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2021; 56 : 102011. Publisher Full Text 25. Malek JA, Lim SB, Yigitcanlar T: Social Inclusion Indicators for Building Citizen-Centric Smart Cities: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability. 2021; 13 : 376. Publisher Full Text 26. Emmerson DK: Region and recalcitrance: Rethinking democracy through Southeast Asia. Pac. Rev. 2007; 8 : 223–248. Publisher Full Text 27. Acharya A: ASEAN and Regional Order Revisiting Security Community in Southeast Asia. New York: Routledge; 2021. 28. Darwis, Putra BA, Cangara AR: Navigating Through Domestic Impediments: Suharto and Indonesia’s Leadership in ASEAN. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. 2020; 13 : 808–824. 29. Wahyuningrum Y: The ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights: Origins. Evolution and the Way Forward. 2014. 30. Pisanò A: Human Rights and Sovereignty in the ASEAN Path Towards a Human Rights Declaration. Hum. Rights Rev. 2014; 15 : 391–411. Publisher Full Text 31. Angelidou M: The Role of Smart City Characteristics in the Plans of Fifteen Cities. J. Urban Technol. 2017; 24 : 3–28. Publisher Full Text 32. Menkhoff T, Kan SN, Evers H-D, et al. : Living in Smart Cities. Singapore: World Scientific; 2018. Publisher Full Text 33. Meijer A, Thaens M: Urban Technological Innovation: Developing and Testing a Sociotechnical Framework for Studying Smart City Projects. Urban Aff. Rev. 2016; 54 : 363–387. Publisher Full Text 34. Valdez AM, Cook M, Potter S: Roadmaps to utopia: Tales of the smart city. Urban Stud. 2018; 55 : 3385–3403. Publisher Full Text 35. Tekunan S: The Asean Way: The Way To Regional Peace? J. Hub. Internasional. 2015; 3 : 142–147. Publisher Full Text 36. Beeson M: ASEAN’s ways: still fit for purpose? Camb. Rev. Int. Aff. 2009; 22 : 333–343. Publisher Full Text 37. Davies M: An Agreement to Disagree: The ASEAN Human Rights Declaration and the Absence of Regional Identity in Southeast Asia. J. Curr. Southeast Asian Aff. 2014; 33 : 107–129. Publisher Full Text 38. Ciorciari JD: Institutionalizing Human Rights in Southeast Asia. Hum. Rights Q. 2012; 34 : 695–725. Publisher Full Text 39. Vadiati N: Alternatives to smart cities: A call for consideration of grassroots digital urbanism. Digit. Geogr. Soc. 2022; 3 : 100030. Publisher Full Text 40. Alizadeh T, Prasad D: Alternative smart urbanism: An intersectional feminist take on learning from the margins. Digit. Geogr. Soc. 2025; 9 : 100140. Publisher Full Text 41. Alizadeh T, Prasad D: Women in, at the margins, and against the smart cities: lessons from India. Soc. Cult. Geogr. 2026; 27 (2): 215–233. Publisher Full Text 42. Odendaal N: Everyday urbanisms and the importance of place: Exploring the elements of the emancipatory smart city. Urban Studies. 2021; 58 (3): 639–654. Publisher Full Text 43. Martinus M: ASEAN Cities: The Rise of Paradiplomacy. ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute; 2020. (accessed December 18, 2024). Reference Source 44. Yu H: Understanding China’s Belt and Road Initiative. London: Springer; 2024. 45. Le TH: Cybersecurity and geopolitics: why Southeast Asia is wary of a Huawei ban. The Strategist. 2019. (accessed December 25, 2024). Reference Source 46. Hiebert M: Under Beijing’s Shadow: Southeast Asia’s China Challenge. Lanham: Rowman & Littleield; 2020. 47. Strangio S: In the dragon’s shadow: Southeast Asia in the Chinese century. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2020. 48. UNDP: Human Development Index. Human Development Reports.2024. Reference Source 49. Hara AE: The concerns and sustainability of ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). Sustainable Future for Human Security: Society, Cities and Governance. Singapore: Springer; 2017; 49–59. Publisher Full Text 50. Olivia Y: Will the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission of Human Rights (AICHR) Grow Its Teeth? J. Hub. Internasional. 2014; 3 : 149–158. Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 25 Jul 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK 2 Department of International Relations, Universitas Hasanuddin Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik, Makassar, South Sulawesi, Indonesia Bama Andika Putra Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Investigation, Project Administration, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Article Versions (3) version 3 Revised Published: 11 Mar 2026, 14:733 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167098.3 version 2 Revised Published: 10 Jan 2026, 14:733 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167098.2 version 1 Published: 25 Jul 2025, 14:733 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167098.1 Copyright © 2026 Putra BA. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Putra BA. Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.167098.3 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 11 Mar 2026 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Chandran R and Chandran MC S. Reviewer Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.197288.r467244 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3#referee-response-467244 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 27 Mar 2026 Renju Chandran , Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Ernakulam, Kerala, India Sarath Chandran MC , Amrita School of Arts, Humanities and Commerce, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham - Amritapuri Campus (Ringgold ID: 301814), Amrithapuri, Kerala, India Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.197288.r467244 The paper provides a timely and policy-relevant discussion on the intersection of smart cities, governance, and human rights in ASEAN. It makes a valuable contribution by shifting attention from technocratic smart city narratives to civic and social sustainability concerns. However, ... Continue reading READ ALL The paper provides a timely and policy-relevant discussion on the intersection of smart cities, governance, and human rights in ASEAN. It makes a valuable contribution by shifting attention from technocratic smart city narratives to civic and social sustainability concerns. However, the manuscript currently reads more as a normative policy essay rather than a rigorous academic policy analysis, and requires major revisions to enhance methodological depth, analytical balance, and scholarly contribution. The argument appears overly one-sided, as it assumes a direct relationship between smart city development and human rights risks without adequately considering potential positive outcomes such as improved governance, efficiency, and service delivery. The study relies entirely on secondary data, and the absence of case studies, primary evidence, or city-level analysis limits the robustness and practical relevance of the conclusions. The concept of “human rights” is not clearly defined, and the paper does not distinguish between civil–political rights and socio-economic rights, which is particularly important in the ASEAN context. The use of the Democracy Index and Human Development Index is descriptive, but the manuscript does not establish a clear analytical link between these indicators and the effectiveness of the ASEAN Smart Cities Network. The discussion treats the ASEAN Smart Cities Network as a homogeneous structure, without adequately accounting for variations across cities and the role of local governments in shaping smart city initiatives. The central argument presents a linear relationship between technology, surveillance, and democratic decline, but does not sufficiently consider the role of institutional safeguards or governance mechanisms that may mitigate such risks. The policy recommendations, while conceptually relevant, lack operational clarity, particularly regarding implementation mechanisms, responsible actors, and monitoring frameworks. The manuscript would benefit from stronger theoretical positioning, particularly by engaging with debates on developmental state models, institutional governance, and technology–society interactions. Does the paper provide a comprehensive overview of the policy and the context of its implementation in a way which is accessible to a general reader? Partly Is the discussion on the implications clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Are the recommendations made clear, balanced, and justified on the basis of the presented arguments? Partly References 1. Chandran M, Chandran R, Das D, Vinodkumar K: Examining the role of smart cities and sustainability research in achieving SDGs through bibliometric lens. Discover Sustainability . 2025; 6 (1). Publisher Full Text 2. Chandran R, Chandran MC S: Green finance and sustainability: mapping research development through bibliometric analysis. Discover Sustainability . 2024; 5 (1). Publisher Full Text Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Sustainable livelihood, Sustainability, Green Finance, Smart Cities. We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however we have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Chandran R and Chandran MC S. Reviewer Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.197288.r467244 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3#referee-response-467244 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Alizadeh T. Reviewer Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.197288.r466652 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3#referee-response-466652 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 13 Mar 2026 Tooran Alizadeh , The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.197288.r466652 Thanks for taking up ... Continue reading READ ALL Thanks for taking up my earlier review comments. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Urbanism, Southern Urbanism, Smart Urbanism, Digital Geographies, Infrastructure I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Alizadeh T. Reviewer Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.197288.r466652 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3#referee-response-466652 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 10 Jan 2026 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Alizadeh T. Reviewer Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194955.r461534 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v2#referee-response-461534 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 27 Feb 2026 Tooran Alizadeh , The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194955.r461534 This policy brief raises an important and timely intervention into the development trajectory of the ASEAN Smart Cities Network (ASCN), particularly by foregrounding human rights and social inclusion concerns that are often marginalised in technocratic smart city discourses. Its claim ... Continue reading READ ALL This policy brief raises an important and timely intervention into the development trajectory of the ASEAN Smart Cities Network (ASCN), particularly by foregrounding human rights and social inclusion concerns that are often marginalised in technocratic smart city discourses. Its claim - that ASCN initiatives risk neglecting civic and social sustainability by reinforcing authoritarian governance and surveillance capacities while privileging growth-oriented, infrastructure-driven development - is both normatively compelling and regionally relevant. The brief is persuasive in identifying two structural tensions: The potential marginalisation of vulnerable communities in technocratic smart city planning; and The influence of external financing actors in shaping development trajectories. However, while the recommendations are normatively sound, the second proposal - encouraging stronger ASEAN member states to assist others in delivering essential public services - raises feasibility concerns. ASEAN’s institutional design, shaped by the 'ASEAN Way' of non-interference and consensus, limits redistributive or interventionist mechanisms. Moreover, the political willingness of higher-ranked states to assume sustained developmental responsibility for others remains uncertain. As such, this recommendation, while principled, may face significant structural constraints. What the brief could strengthen is its engagement with bottom-up and grassroots smart initiatives. Globally, civic society actors have increasingly used digital tools to advance human rights, participatory governance, and community-based service provision - from the margins (Alizadeh & Prasad, 2025a, 2025b; Vadiati, 2022). These collective efforts demonstrate that ‘smart’ need not be synonymous with top-down, state-led, or corporate-driven infrastructure projects. In many contexts, civic tech movements, open-data communities, and local innovation labs have leveraged technology to enhance transparency, inclusion, and accountability (Nancy Odendaal, 2019; N. Odendaal, 2021). Incorporating this dimension could lead to a more actionable and politically feasible recommendation: Encourage ASCN members to identify, support, and scale bottom-up smart initiatives already operating within their cities; Create mechanisms within the ASCN framework to connect grassroots initiatives across member states for peer learning and knowledge exchange; Promote small-scale funding or recognition schemes that incentivise civic innovation aligned with human rights and social inclusion goals. Such a recommendation would not directly challenge the ASEAN Way, nor would it depend on heavy redistributive commitments among member states. Instead, it would expand the definition of ‘smart city’ beyond infrastructure and investment, embedding civic participation within the ASCN’s mandate. Compared to the proposal of inter-state assistance in public service provision, this approach may be more politically viable and institutionally compatible with ASEAN’s consensus-driven structure. Overall, the policy brief makes a valuable intervention by insisting that smart city development must be evaluated through a human rights lens. Strengthening the recommendations to include support for grassroots smart initiatives would further enhance its practical relevance and align its normative commitments with emerging global urban governance practices. Does the paper provide a comprehensive overview of the policy and the context of its implementation in a way which is accessible to a general reader? Yes Is the discussion on the implications clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Are the recommendations made clear, balanced, and justified on the basis of the presented arguments? Partly References 1. Alizadeh T, Prasad D: Alternative smart urbanism: An intersectional feminist take on learning from the margins. Digital Geography and Society . 2025; 9 . Publisher Full Text 2. Alizadeh T, Prasad D: Women in, at the margins, and against the smart cities: lessons from India. Social & Cultural Geography . 2026; 27 (2): 215-233 Publisher Full Text 3. Odendaal N: Everyday urbanisms and the importance of place: Exploring the elements of the emancipatory smart city. Urban Studies . 2021; 58 (3): 639-654 Publisher Full Text 4. Vadiati N: Alternatives to smart cities: A call for consideration of grassroots digital urbanism. Digital Geography and Society . 2022; 3 . Publisher Full Text Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Urbanism, Southern Urbanism, Smart Urbanism, Digital Geographies, Infrastructure I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Alizadeh T. Reviewer Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194955.r461534 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v2#referee-response-461534 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 04 Mar 2026 bama andika putra , School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK 04 Mar 2026 Author Response Thank you for the comments. After reviewing the second recommendation, I have decided to adopt your proposed recommendation to utilize bottom-up initiatives to replace the policy of ASEAN member states ... Continue reading Thank you for the comments. After reviewing the second recommendation, I have decided to adopt your proposed recommendation to utilize bottom-up initiatives to replace the policy of ASEAN member states being pushed to assist one another. It acknowledges that the previous second recommendation would not be politically feasible to adopt, due to the significant structural constraints. Therefore, as elaborated in the second recommendation (with slight changes to the wording in the abstract and conclusion sections), the revised second recommendation acknowledges that civic society has increasingly used digital tools to accelerate participatory governance and human rights. Therefore, by acknowledging the significance of existing bottom-up initiatives, this recommendation would underscore the importance of the ASCN scaling bottom-up smart initiatives already operating, enhancing information and knowledge exchange among member states, and promoting small-scale funding. Nevertheless, it still incorporates the first revision’s second recommendation’s concerns on the disparity among ASEAN member states across several public service dimensions, which is now used as a potential negative consequence of the revised second proposal. Thank you for the comments. After reviewing the second recommendation, I have decided to adopt your proposed recommendation to utilize bottom-up initiatives to replace the policy of ASEAN member states being pushed to assist one another. It acknowledges that the previous second recommendation would not be politically feasible to adopt, due to the significant structural constraints. Therefore, as elaborated in the second recommendation (with slight changes to the wording in the abstract and conclusion sections), the revised second recommendation acknowledges that civic society has increasingly used digital tools to accelerate participatory governance and human rights. Therefore, by acknowledging the significance of existing bottom-up initiatives, this recommendation would underscore the importance of the ASCN scaling bottom-up smart initiatives already operating, enhancing information and knowledge exchange among member states, and promoting small-scale funding. Nevertheless, it still incorporates the first revision’s second recommendation’s concerns on the disparity among ASEAN member states across several public service dimensions, which is now used as a potential negative consequence of the revised second proposal. Competing Interests: No competing interests. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 04 Mar 2026 bama andika putra , School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK 04 Mar 2026 Author Response Thank you for the comments. After reviewing the second recommendation, I have decided to adopt your proposed recommendation to utilize bottom-up initiatives to replace the policy of ASEAN member states ... Continue reading Thank you for the comments. After reviewing the second recommendation, I have decided to adopt your proposed recommendation to utilize bottom-up initiatives to replace the policy of ASEAN member states being pushed to assist one another. It acknowledges that the previous second recommendation would not be politically feasible to adopt, due to the significant structural constraints. Therefore, as elaborated in the second recommendation (with slight changes to the wording in the abstract and conclusion sections), the revised second recommendation acknowledges that civic society has increasingly used digital tools to accelerate participatory governance and human rights. Therefore, by acknowledging the significance of existing bottom-up initiatives, this recommendation would underscore the importance of the ASCN scaling bottom-up smart initiatives already operating, enhancing information and knowledge exchange among member states, and promoting small-scale funding. Nevertheless, it still incorporates the first revision’s second recommendation’s concerns on the disparity among ASEAN member states across several public service dimensions, which is now used as a potential negative consequence of the revised second proposal. Thank you for the comments. After reviewing the second recommendation, I have decided to adopt your proposed recommendation to utilize bottom-up initiatives to replace the policy of ASEAN member states being pushed to assist one another. It acknowledges that the previous second recommendation would not be politically feasible to adopt, due to the significant structural constraints. Therefore, as elaborated in the second recommendation (with slight changes to the wording in the abstract and conclusion sections), the revised second recommendation acknowledges that civic society has increasingly used digital tools to accelerate participatory governance and human rights. Therefore, by acknowledging the significance of existing bottom-up initiatives, this recommendation would underscore the importance of the ASCN scaling bottom-up smart initiatives already operating, enhancing information and knowledge exchange among member states, and promoting small-scale funding. Nevertheless, it still incorporates the first revision’s second recommendation’s concerns on the disparity among ASEAN member states across several public service dimensions, which is now used as a potential negative consequence of the revised second proposal. Competing Interests: No competing interests. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 25 Jul 2025 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Hiep TX. Reviewer Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184179.r434955 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v1#referee-response-434955 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 02 Jan 2026 Tran Xuan Hiep , The University of Danang, University of Science and Education, Da Nang, Vietnam Not Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184179.r434955 1. Strengths of the Paper First , the choice of topic has high academic and practical value. The paper approaches ASCN from a human rights perspective – a dimension that has been relatively underemphasized in smart city studies in ASEAN. ... Continue reading READ ALL 1. Strengths of the Paper First , the choice of topic has high academic and practical value. The paper approaches ASCN from a human rights perspective – a dimension that has been relatively underemphasized in smart city studies in ASEAN. The linkage between technology – surveillance – political institutions is appropriate to the Southeast Asian context. Second , the arguments are theoretically grounded and supported with rich evidence. The author draws on many reputable academic sources (Democracy Index, HDI, studies on smart cities and surveillance capitalism), showing an effort to situate ASCN within the broader picture of global governance and sustainable development. Third , the policy approach is pragmatic. The recommendation of “moderate adoption” reflects an understanding of ASEAN’s particularities, avoiding an idealized approach or rigid imposition of Western norms. 2. Limitations and Points for Debate 2.1. Evaluation of Theoretical Framework and Approach 2.1.1. Normative approach dominates, lacking balance with empirical analysis The paper mainly assesses ASCN from the perspective of human rights and liberal democracy, treating these as central standards for judging the success or failure of the smart city model. While this critical approach has value, it also creates a clear normative bias. The author almost assumes by default that: increased technology adoption + semi-authoritarian/authoritarian context = human rights violations. However, the paper does not: compare with cases of “illiberal but effective smart cities” (e.g., Singapore, some Chinese cities); consider the perspective of ASEAN’s regional institutionalism, where stability and development are often prioritized over rapid democratization. Academic limitation: The paper has not situated ASCN within the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state , which is highly characteristic of Southeast Asia. 2.1.2. Lack of clarity on the concept of “human rights” in the ASEAN context The author uses human rights as an almost universal category, without distinguishing between: civil–political rights economic–social–cultural rights In ASEAN, many governments view access to public services, infrastructure, and employment as forms of human rights implementation, sometimes more important than political rights. The lack of differentiation makes the argument overly generalized, blurring the line between: actual human rights violations and differences in development priorities. 2.2. Critique of Research Methodology 2.2.1. Complete reliance on secondary data The paper uses secondary data from 2018–2024, but: no policy interviews, no urban citizen surveys, no specific case studies of ASCN cities. This results in: assessments of surveillance and privacy violations that are structurally speculative; lack of direct evidence from specific ASCN projects. This is a serious limitation for a policy brief, which requires practical evidence to support recommendations. 2.2.2. Mechanical comparison of Democracy Index and HDI Placing Democracy Index and HDI side by side illustrates ASEAN’s diversity, but: the paper does not prove a direct relationship between these rankings and ASCN’s effectiveness; it does not analyze changes over time (before–after joining ASCN). The indices are used more as illustrations of viewpoints rather than causal analytical tools. 2.3. Critique of Central Argument 2.3.1. Linear argument “smart city → surveillance → democratic decline” The author constructs a linear chain of reasoning: Technology → surveillance → control → rights violations. However, this approach: ignores the role of institutional design; does not analyze the potential for technology to be used for transparency, good governance, or improved service access. This makes the paper lean more toward cautionary discourse than multidimensional analysis. 2.3.2. Incomplete assessment of local governments’ active role ASCN is described as a top-down imposed network, but in reality: many ASCN projects are proposed by city governments; the level of technology adoption varies greatly across cities. Treating ASCN as a homogeneous structure reduces the accuracy of the argument. 2.3.3. Critique of China and Japan’s role is overly politicized The paper warns of major powers (BRI, JICA, Huawei) imposing development models. However: it does not compare loan conditions or policy constraints among partners; it does not analyze ASEAN countries’ capacity to negotiate and choose strategies. This makes the argument appear more like geopolitical suspicion than evidence-based development assessment. 2.4. Critique of Two Policy Recommendations 2.4.1. Human rights recommendation: well-intentioned but impractical Calling for human rights integration into smart city governance is reasonable. However: the paper does not specify concrete institutional mechanisms; it does not clarify who monitors, who implements, and who is accountable. In ASEAN – where no enforcement mechanism exists – this recommendation is more symbolic than substantive. 2.4.2. ASEAN intra-regional support recommendation: idealized view of Singapore’s role The author suggests Singapore and high-HDI countries support others. However: ASEAN is not the EU, it has no common budget; Singapore has no legal obligation to support other countries; national interests may conflict with the role of “regional donor.” This recommendation lacks assessment of political and economic incentives. Request: Major Revisions Does the paper provide a comprehensive overview of the policy and the context of its implementation in a way which is accessible to a general reader? No Is the discussion on the implications clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? No Are the recommendations made clear, balanced, and justified on the basis of the presented arguments? No Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Political Sciences, International Relations, History I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Hiep TX. Reviewer Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184179.r434955 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v1#referee-response-434955 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 14 Jan 2026 bama andika putra , School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK 14 Jan 2026 Author Response Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.1 : Normative approach dominates, lacking balance with empirical analysis; the paper does not: compare with cases of “illiberal but effective smart cities” (e.g., Singapore, some Chinese cities), ... Continue reading Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.1 : Normative approach dominates, lacking balance with empirical analysis; the paper does not: compare with cases of “illiberal but effective smart cities” (e.g., Singapore, some Chinese cities), consider the perspective of ASEAN’s regional institutionalism, where stability and development are often prioritized over rapid democratization. Academic limitation: The paper has not situated ASCN within the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state , which is highly characteristic of Southeast Asia. Response : In the revised article, I aim to acknowledge the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state by directly acknowledging that the ASCN can pose a threat towards a balanced approach taken by these sub-unit variables. In Paragraph 2, Section 1, the revisions focused to acknowledge that the ASCN is a manifestation of ASEAN’s approach of prioritizing stability and development within its policies. The revised paragraph: “The ASCN started with 26 pilot cities across the ten ASEAN member states. As seen in Figure 1 below, these cities significantly differ based on the population, political systems, and current state of development. Nevertheless, the ASCN has emphasized that through the network, normative guidelines will act as the foundation for the member cities’ smart city development. 3, 4 Perceiving the importance of city-level and scalable solutions, the ASCN was established at the 32 nd ASEAN Summit 2018 and determined 26 Pilot cities, which reflects consistency towards ASEAN’s regional institutionalism that places a heavy emphasis on stability and development. As of 2024, this list has increased to 31 cities, including Sihanoukville City, Sumedang, Rayong, Khon Kaen, and Chiang Mai.” Meanwhile, in the another paragraph (Paragraph 5, section 1), the revisions focused to acknowledge two things: 1) acknowledge that there are cases of illiberal, yet effective smart cities, which should open the case that there are other issues that can be considered within the case presented in this policy brief; 2) to balance between liberal governance and developmental state, ASCN in this case is criticized to potentially declining civic and social concerns. The revised paragraph: “This policy brief identifies two issues that arise from the ASCN. They include the negligence of human rights and imposing a ‘developing’ model from financing stakeholders. The ASCN is geared to establish ‘smart cities’ in Southeast Asia. However, this is a region consisting of states with significant disparities. The diverse social, economic, and political landscapes have already exacerbated human rights protection due to authoritarian and semi-authoritarian rules aiming to maintain their regime legitimacy through greater exertion of power. Introducing information and communication technologies in the ASCN member cities risks increased surveillance and control in the region’s less democratic settings. As past studies have argued, smart cities do not correlate directly to sustainability, 6 , 7 and the ASCN and the developed city master plans of the member cities are ambiguous in showing how the most disadvantaged would benefit through greater inclusivity from smart cities. 8– 11 Therefore, it could represent what a study mentioned as evolving social practices restricting rights. 12 This study acknowledges that there are cases of illiberal, yet effective smart cities. However, looking at civic and social concerns, these practices should be carefully approached through the ASCN to ensure that developments in civic and social sustainability does not decline, and can balance between liberal governance and the developmental state.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.2 : Lack of clarity on the concept of “human rights” in the ASEAN context; The author uses human rights as an almost universal category, without distinguishing between: civil–political rights & economic–social–cultural rights; In ASEAN, many governments view access to public services, infrastructure, and employment as forms of human rights implementation, sometimes more important than political rights; The lack of differentiation makes the argument overly generalized. Response : In paragraph 5, section 1, I explain that the human rights concern here relates to the exertion of power by authoritiarian/ semi-authoritarian stakeholders in the Southeast Asian region. Fully acknowledging that the human rights conception differs between ASEAN and the other parts of the globe, I make it clear what the human rights concerns are for this policy brief: “Introducing information and communication technologies in the ASCN member cities risks increased surveillance and control in the region’s less democratic settings.” Furthermore, it is outsides the scope of this study to delve deep on the differences between ASEAN and the universal conception of human rights from a civil and economic perspective, as this opens up a whole different discussion on the suitability of ASEAN’s defined human rights conceptions to that of the West. Reviewer 2, Comment 2.2.1 . Complete reliance on secondary data; The paper uses secondary data from 2018–2024, but: no policy interviews, no urban citizen surveys, no specific case studies of ASCN cities. This results in: assessments of surveillance and privacy violations that are structurally speculative; lack of direct evidence from specific ASCN projects. This is a serious limitation for a policy brief, which requires practical evidence to support recommendations. Response : I disagree with this suggestion. First, there is no issue with relying on secondary data, whether it be original research articles or policy briefs. In the context of policy brief, the angle taken for this study is one that argues the points based on normative and literature assessment angels, which does help policymakers look at the issue from diverse angles. In the past, this method is also used in multiple published policy briefs (see: https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/aseans-climate-change-mitigation-and-adaptation-measures-abandoni/ ; https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/the-politics-of-environmental-policy-haze-pollution-asean-and-the/ ). To emphasize this, I have revised the first sentence of Paragraph 5, section 1: “This policy brief identifies two issues that arise from the ASCN, based on a normative and literature assessment of the direction of the initiative.” Secondly, I disagree that as a result of this approach, the arguments are speculative. The first example of this potential issue has been raised in the Paragraph 6, section 1 taking in the case of Cambodia’s Phnom Penh: “Observing the case of Phnom Penh’s forced privatized lands that disadvantaged people with low incomes, 11 a “top-down” approach thus risks the livelihood of ASEAN citizens 8 ”. In addition to this, the specific cases that uses the study case of ASCN is on the second recommendation, that recommends ASEAN member states to provide essential public services. In Paragraph 6, Section 2, it is argued the cities that reflect this: “The problem identified with the ASCN’s current model is the acceleration of development under the financing stakeholder’s model. In the past, many of ASEAN’s external partners have partnered with the ASCN pilot cities. 40 Japan has been an active nation, aiming to adopt Japanese models of sustainability and smart city infrastructure through its Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which has increased its presence in Siem Reap, Phnom Penh, and Yangon City. 10, 11 China’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI) has also financed many of Southeast Asia’s regional strategic infrastructures. 41 Some have been under the framework of the BRI, while others have been through partnerships with China’s private and public industries. Huawei, for example, was reported to contribute to Thailand’s digital economy and technological updates. 8, 42 The problem with this model is that the intention of constructing this smart city leads Southeast Asian states to be affected by the national interests of the foreign states, aiming to impose their development model on the ASCN members. 43, 44 Consequently, it will be difficult for recipient cities of the financing to cater to the needs of their vulnerable groups, as attention would be diverted to accelerating the progress of the development in alignment with the interests of the financing stakeholder.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.2.2: Mechanical comparison of Democracy Index and HDI Placing Democracy Index and HDI side by side illustrates ASEAN’s diversity, but: the paper does not prove a direct relationship between these rankings and ASCN’s effectiveness; it does not analyze changes over time (before–after joining ASCN). The indices are used more as illustrations of viewpoints rather than causal analytical tools. Response : The two tables used (Democracy Index and HDI) are utilized to support the arguments made that act as background context in understand the specifics of the recommendations. Table 1 focuses on Southeast Asia’s Democracy Index that solidifies the claim of the lack of democracy within the Southeast Asian state’s social and political landscapes. Table 2 shows the disparity of human development among Southeast Asian states. The keyword here is ‘DISPARITY,’ allowing readers to understand the unique challenges of the Southeast Asian region, and steer clear from making the assumption that all Southeast Asian states are the same. Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.1. Linear argument “smart city → surveillance → democratic decline” The author constructs a linear chain of reasoning: Technology → surveillance → control → rights violations. However, this approach: ignores the role of institutional design;, does not analyze the potential for technology to be used for transparency, good governance, or improved service access. This makes the paper lean more toward cautionary discourse than multidimensional analysis. Response : In the revised paragraph 1, section 2, I make it clear that there is the presence of institutional designs that have the capacity to counter the significance of the issue. Nevertheless, it is also important to acknowledge that the fears expressed with the arguments are based on the literature assessment, in which scholars in the past have pointed towards his possibility and fear scenarios. Furthermore, this policy brief is concerned with the human rights violations that could occur from the ASCN, rather than providing a general overview over the pros and cons of the initiative. Delving into the benefits, therefore, is outside the scope of this article. Neverthleless, I acknowledge this in the second paragraph of section 2: “This policy brief acknowledges that smart city development is geared toward economic progress despite the civic and social elements emphasized in the ASCN.” The revised paragraph: “This section argues that to complement the deficiencies of the ASCN’s smart city conception, two recommendations can be adopted. The first recommendation is to acknowledge the vulnerability of the underprivileged, provide personal security, and promote social inclusion for governing smart cities. As seen in Table 1 below, a prominent problem with Southeast Asian states is the lack of democracy within their social and political landscapes. Consequently, when the ASCN echoed the importance of smart cities, there were fears that this would further derail democratic progress in the region. Studies in the past have shown how smart-city developments risk more substantial possibilities of violating privacy rights as high-tech companies have a stronger voice and role in the planning and financing of smart-city-related projects. 13– 16 Half of the Southeast Asian states are authoritarian or semi-authoritarian states. Consequently, there is an intense fear of abuse of power and increased surveillance capacities that are feared would be the consequences of smart city conceptions, albeit, the presence of institutional designs that help to counter the intensity. 7, 17 ” Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.2 : Incomplete assessment of local governments’ active role ASCN is described as a top-down imposed network, but in reality: many ASCN projects are proposed by city governments; the level of technology adoption varies greatly across cities. Treating ASCN as a homogeneous structure reduces the accuracy of the argument. Response : I have revised the words used in paragraph 6, section 1. The ‘top-down’ terminology used in the article does not reflect the points used for this policy brief. Rather, it is a quotation of how de Jong in 2023 described the ASCN, which reflects a hierarchical system that does not allow ASEAN member states to adapt towards a regionalized system. The revised paragraph: “A second concern identified in this policy brief is the imposing development models by external actors. The ASCN collaborates and links ASCN members’ projects with possible financing from vast stakeholders. The problem with this is that the ASCN eventually aims to achieve accelerated growth for profit, which includes broader privatization processes along the way. Observing the case of Phnom Penh’s forced privatized lands that disadvantaged people with low incomes, 11 a “top-down” (terminology introduced by de Jong in 2023) approach thus risks the livelihood of ASEAN citizens. 8 ” Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.3 : Critique of China and Japan’s role is overly politicized The paper warns of major powers (BRI, JICA, Huawei) imposing development models. However: it does not compare loan conditions or policy constraints among partners; it does not analyze ASEAN countries’ capacity to negotiate and choose strategies. This makes the argument appear more like geopolitical suspicion than evidence-based development assessment. Response : The reference towards China and Japan’s role here is to simply acknowledge that the systems imposed differs to that of ASEAN member states. Therefore, there is a risk of these imposed systems negatively affecting ASCN mechanisms, which has been the case with Japan and China’s development models argued in several studies in the past (see the citations). Nevertheless, I have revised the paragraph to explain that ASEAN member states do have the capacity to negotiate conditions, and therefore, has the ability to partially counter such concerns. The revised paragraph (Paragraph 6, section 1): “The problem identified with the ASCN’s current model is the acceleration of development under the financing stakeholder’s model. In the past, many of ASEAN’s external partners have partnered with the ASCN pilot cities. 40 Japan has been an active nation, aiming to adopt Japanese models of sustainability and smart city infrastructure through its Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which has increased its presence in Siem Reap, Phnom Penh, and Yangon City. 10, 11 China’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI) has also financed many of Southeast Asia’s regional strategic infrastructures. 41 Some have been under the framework of the BRI, while others have been through partnerships with China’s private and public industries. Huawei, for example, was reported to contribute to Thailand’s digital economy and technological updates. 8, 42 The problem with this model is that the intention of constructing this smart city leads Southeast Asian states to be affected by the national interests of the foreign states, aiming to impose their development model on the ASCN members. 43, 44 Consequently, it will be difficult for recipient cities of the financing to cater to the needs of their vulnerable groups, as attention would be diverted to accelerating the progress of the development in alignment with the interests of the financing stakeholder. Nevertheless, this problem is somewhat countered by the ASEAN member state’s capacity negotiate conditions, which could partially counter these concerns.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.4.1: Human rights recommendation: well-intentioned but impractical Calling for human rights integration into smart city governance is reasonable. However: the paper does not specify concrete institutional mechanisms; it does not clarify who monitors, who implements, and who is accountable. In ASEAN – where no enforcement mechanism exists – this recommendation is more symbolic than substantive. Response : I agree that ASEAN does not have any enforcement mechanisms. Therefore, rather than specifying the details on how this recommendation can be made, I opt to make a slight ‘vagueness’ and choose to simply reference the ASCN as the relevant mechanism that is able to clarify and acknowledge vulnerabilities related to human rights in the context of smart cities. This would allow enough room for ASEAN to determine the best way of mentioning this, without risking violating the ASEAN Way. The explanation in the manuscript is slightly revised in paragraph 2, section 2: “Considering the vulnerability of the underprivileged in larger cities of Southeast Asia, it is essential to consider how past studies have concluded the risks of smart city developments to leave the poor and unemployed in isolation. 19, 20 This policy brief acknowledges that smart city development is geared toward economic progress despite the civic and social elements emphasized in the ASCN. The problem with this is the strong possibility of social inclusion and participation of the people in governance being further hampered, as shown in the conclusions of past studies on this subject. 21– 25 Therefore, this destination to a ‘smart city’ status must be made carefully by the ASCN to ensure that, in the process, local governments do not impede upon the fundamental human rights of its citizens in the name of development.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.4.2 : ASEAN intra-regional support recommendation: idealized view of Singapore’s role The author suggests Singapore and high-HDI countries support others. However: ASEAN is not the EU, it has no common budget; Singapore has no legal obligation to support other countries; national interests may conflict with the role of “regional donor.” This recommendation lacks assessment of political and economic incentives. Response : I agree with this. Therefore, as the last paragraph of section 2 explains: “Therefore, the question would be whether Singapore would be openly willing to assist all of its ASEAN counterparts in establishing a balance between smart city status and sustainable development.” This shows that this policy brief acknowledges that Singapore has the strongest capacity to provide assistances, however, there is no mechanism within ASEAN that is able to enforce this to Singapore. Ultimately, the decision to provide the assistances would solely lie on the hands of the Singapore Government, and is outside the scope of this study to argue how best to approach this. Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.1 : Normative approach dominates, lacking balance with empirical analysis; the paper does not: compare with cases of “illiberal but effective smart cities” (e.g., Singapore, some Chinese cities), consider the perspective of ASEAN’s regional institutionalism, where stability and development are often prioritized over rapid democratization. Academic limitation: The paper has not situated ASCN within the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state , which is highly characteristic of Southeast Asia. Response : In the revised article, I aim to acknowledge the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state by directly acknowledging that the ASCN can pose a threat towards a balanced approach taken by these sub-unit variables. In Paragraph 2, Section 1, the revisions focused to acknowledge that the ASCN is a manifestation of ASEAN’s approach of prioritizing stability and development within its policies. The revised paragraph: “The ASCN started with 26 pilot cities across the ten ASEAN member states. As seen in Figure 1 below, these cities significantly differ based on the population, political systems, and current state of development. Nevertheless, the ASCN has emphasized that through the network, normative guidelines will act as the foundation for the member cities’ smart city development. 3, 4 Perceiving the importance of city-level and scalable solutions, the ASCN was established at the 32 nd ASEAN Summit 2018 and determined 26 Pilot cities, which reflects consistency towards ASEAN’s regional institutionalism that places a heavy emphasis on stability and development. As of 2024, this list has increased to 31 cities, including Sihanoukville City, Sumedang, Rayong, Khon Kaen, and Chiang Mai.” Meanwhile, in the another paragraph (Paragraph 5, section 1), the revisions focused to acknowledge two things: 1) acknowledge that there are cases of illiberal, yet effective smart cities, which should open the case that there are other issues that can be considered within the case presented in this policy brief; 2) to balance between liberal governance and developmental state, ASCN in this case is criticized to potentially declining civic and social concerns. The revised paragraph: “This policy brief identifies two issues that arise from the ASCN. They include the negligence of human rights and imposing a ‘developing’ model from financing stakeholders. The ASCN is geared to establish ‘smart cities’ in Southeast Asia. However, this is a region consisting of states with significant disparities. The diverse social, economic, and political landscapes have already exacerbated human rights protection due to authoritarian and semi-authoritarian rules aiming to maintain their regime legitimacy through greater exertion of power. Introducing information and communication technologies in the ASCN member cities risks increased surveillance and control in the region’s less democratic settings. As past studies have argued, smart cities do not correlate directly to sustainability, 6 , 7 and the ASCN and the developed city master plans of the member cities are ambiguous in showing how the most disadvantaged would benefit through greater inclusivity from smart cities. 8– 11 Therefore, it could represent what a study mentioned as evolving social practices restricting rights. 12 This study acknowledges that there are cases of illiberal, yet effective smart cities. However, looking at civic and social concerns, these practices should be carefully approached through the ASCN to ensure that developments in civic and social sustainability does not decline, and can balance between liberal governance and the developmental state.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.2 : Lack of clarity on the concept of “human rights” in the ASEAN context; The author uses human rights as an almost universal category, without distinguishing between: civil–political rights & economic–social–cultural rights; In ASEAN, many governments view access to public services, infrastructure, and employment as forms of human rights implementation, sometimes more important than political rights; The lack of differentiation makes the argument overly generalized. Response : In paragraph 5, section 1, I explain that the human rights concern here relates to the exertion of power by authoritiarian/ semi-authoritarian stakeholders in the Southeast Asian region. Fully acknowledging that the human rights conception differs between ASEAN and the other parts of the globe, I make it clear what the human rights concerns are for this policy brief: “Introducing information and communication technologies in the ASCN member cities risks increased surveillance and control in the region’s less democratic settings.” Furthermore, it is outsides the scope of this study to delve deep on the differences between ASEAN and the universal conception of human rights from a civil and economic perspective, as this opens up a whole different discussion on the suitability of ASEAN’s defined human rights conceptions to that of the West. Reviewer 2, Comment 2.2.1 . Complete reliance on secondary data; The paper uses secondary data from 2018–2024, but: no policy interviews, no urban citizen surveys, no specific case studies of ASCN cities. This results in: assessments of surveillance and privacy violations that are structurally speculative; lack of direct evidence from specific ASCN projects. This is a serious limitation for a policy brief, which requires practical evidence to support recommendations. Response : I disagree with this suggestion. First, there is no issue with relying on secondary data, whether it be original research articles or policy briefs. In the context of policy brief, the angle taken for this study is one that argues the points based on normative and literature assessment angels, which does help policymakers look at the issue from diverse angles. In the past, this method is also used in multiple published policy briefs (see: https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/aseans-climate-change-mitigation-and-adaptation-measures-abandoni/ ; https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/the-politics-of-environmental-policy-haze-pollution-asean-and-the/ ). To emphasize this, I have revised the first sentence of Paragraph 5, section 1: “This policy brief identifies two issues that arise from the ASCN, based on a normative and literature assessment of the direction of the initiative.” Secondly, I disagree that as a result of this approach, the arguments are speculative. The first example of this potential issue has been raised in the Paragraph 6, section 1 taking in the case of Cambodia’s Phnom Penh: “Observing the case of Phnom Penh’s forced privatized lands that disadvantaged people with low incomes, 11 a “top-down” approach thus risks the livelihood of ASEAN citizens 8 ”. In addition to this, the specific cases that uses the study case of ASCN is on the second recommendation, that recommends ASEAN member states to provide essential public services. In Paragraph 6, Section 2, it is argued the cities that reflect this: “The problem identified with the ASCN’s current model is the acceleration of development under the financing stakeholder’s model. In the past, many of ASEAN’s external partners have partnered with the ASCN pilot cities. 40 Japan has been an active nation, aiming to adopt Japanese models of sustainability and smart city infrastructure through its Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which has increased its presence in Siem Reap, Phnom Penh, and Yangon City. 10, 11 China’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI) has also financed many of Southeast Asia’s regional strategic infrastructures. 41 Some have been under the framework of the BRI, while others have been through partnerships with China’s private and public industries. Huawei, for example, was reported to contribute to Thailand’s digital economy and technological updates. 8, 42 The problem with this model is that the intention of constructing this smart city leads Southeast Asian states to be affected by the national interests of the foreign states, aiming to impose their development model on the ASCN members. 43, 44 Consequently, it will be difficult for recipient cities of the financing to cater to the needs of their vulnerable groups, as attention would be diverted to accelerating the progress of the development in alignment with the interests of the financing stakeholder.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.2.2: Mechanical comparison of Democracy Index and HDI Placing Democracy Index and HDI side by side illustrates ASEAN’s diversity, but: the paper does not prove a direct relationship between these rankings and ASCN’s effectiveness; it does not analyze changes over time (before–after joining ASCN). The indices are used more as illustrations of viewpoints rather than causal analytical tools. Response : The two tables used (Democracy Index and HDI) are utilized to support the arguments made that act as background context in understand the specifics of the recommendations. Table 1 focuses on Southeast Asia’s Democracy Index that solidifies the claim of the lack of democracy within the Southeast Asian state’s social and political landscapes. Table 2 shows the disparity of human development among Southeast Asian states. The keyword here is ‘DISPARITY,’ allowing readers to understand the unique challenges of the Southeast Asian region, and steer clear from making the assumption that all Southeast Asian states are the same. Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.1. Linear argument “smart city → surveillance → democratic decline” The author constructs a linear chain of reasoning: Technology → surveillance → control → rights violations. However, this approach: ignores the role of institutional design;, does not analyze the potential for technology to be used for transparency, good governance, or improved service access. This makes the paper lean more toward cautionary discourse than multidimensional analysis. Response : In the revised paragraph 1, section 2, I make it clear that there is the presence of institutional designs that have the capacity to counter the significance of the issue. Nevertheless, it is also important to acknowledge that the fears expressed with the arguments are based on the literature assessment, in which scholars in the past have pointed towards his possibility and fear scenarios. Furthermore, this policy brief is concerned with the human rights violations that could occur from the ASCN, rather than providing a general overview over the pros and cons of the initiative. Delving into the benefits, therefore, is outside the scope of this article. Neverthleless, I acknowledge this in the second paragraph of section 2: “This policy brief acknowledges that smart city development is geared toward economic progress despite the civic and social elements emphasized in the ASCN.” The revised paragraph: “This section argues that to complement the deficiencies of the ASCN’s smart city conception, two recommendations can be adopted. The first recommendation is to acknowledge the vulnerability of the underprivileged, provide personal security, and promote social inclusion for governing smart cities. As seen in Table 1 below, a prominent problem with Southeast Asian states is the lack of democracy within their social and political landscapes. Consequently, when the ASCN echoed the importance of smart cities, there were fears that this would further derail democratic progress in the region. Studies in the past have shown how smart-city developments risk more substantial possibilities of violating privacy rights as high-tech companies have a stronger voice and role in the planning and financing of smart-city-related projects. 13– 16 Half of the Southeast Asian states are authoritarian or semi-authoritarian states. Consequently, there is an intense fear of abuse of power and increased surveillance capacities that are feared would be the consequences of smart city conceptions, albeit, the presence of institutional designs that help to counter the intensity. 7, 17 ” Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.2 : Incomplete assessment of local governments’ active role ASCN is described as a top-down imposed network, but in reality: many ASCN projects are proposed by city governments; the level of technology adoption varies greatly across cities. Treating ASCN as a homogeneous structure reduces the accuracy of the argument. Response : I have revised the words used in paragraph 6, section 1. The ‘top-down’ terminology used in the article does not reflect the points used for this policy brief. Rather, it is a quotation of how de Jong in 2023 described the ASCN, which reflects a hierarchical system that does not allow ASEAN member states to adapt towards a regionalized system. The revised paragraph: “A second concern identified in this policy brief is the imposing development models by external actors. The ASCN collaborates and links ASCN members’ projects with possible financing from vast stakeholders. The problem with this is that the ASCN eventually aims to achieve accelerated growth for profit, which includes broader privatization processes along the way. Observing the case of Phnom Penh’s forced privatized lands that disadvantaged people with low incomes, 11 a “top-down” (terminology introduced by de Jong in 2023) approach thus risks the livelihood of ASEAN citizens. 8 ” Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.3 : Critique of China and Japan’s role is overly politicized The paper warns of major powers (BRI, JICA, Huawei) imposing development models. However: it does not compare loan conditions or policy constraints among partners; it does not analyze ASEAN countries’ capacity to negotiate and choose strategies. This makes the argument appear more like geopolitical suspicion than evidence-based development assessment. Response : The reference towards China and Japan’s role here is to simply acknowledge that the systems imposed differs to that of ASEAN member states. Therefore, there is a risk of these imposed systems negatively affecting ASCN mechanisms, which has been the case with Japan and China’s development models argued in several studies in the past (see the citations). Nevertheless, I have revised the paragraph to explain that ASEAN member states do have the capacity to negotiate conditions, and therefore, has the ability to partially counter such concerns. The revised paragraph (Paragraph 6, section 1): “The problem identified with the ASCN’s current model is the acceleration of development under the financing stakeholder’s model. In the past, many of ASEAN’s external partners have partnered with the ASCN pilot cities. 40 Japan has been an active nation, aiming to adopt Japanese models of sustainability and smart city infrastructure through its Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which has increased its presence in Siem Reap, Phnom Penh, and Yangon City. 10, 11 China’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI) has also financed many of Southeast Asia’s regional strategic infrastructures. 41 Some have been under the framework of the BRI, while others have been through partnerships with China’s private and public industries. Huawei, for example, was reported to contribute to Thailand’s digital economy and technological updates. 8, 42 The problem with this model is that the intention of constructing this smart city leads Southeast Asian states to be affected by the national interests of the foreign states, aiming to impose their development model on the ASCN members. 43, 44 Consequently, it will be difficult for recipient cities of the financing to cater to the needs of their vulnerable groups, as attention would be diverted to accelerating the progress of the development in alignment with the interests of the financing stakeholder. Nevertheless, this problem is somewhat countered by the ASEAN member state’s capacity negotiate conditions, which could partially counter these concerns.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.4.1: Human rights recommendation: well-intentioned but impractical Calling for human rights integration into smart city governance is reasonable. However: the paper does not specify concrete institutional mechanisms; it does not clarify who monitors, who implements, and who is accountable. In ASEAN – where no enforcement mechanism exists – this recommendation is more symbolic than substantive. Response : I agree that ASEAN does not have any enforcement mechanisms. Therefore, rather than specifying the details on how this recommendation can be made, I opt to make a slight ‘vagueness’ and choose to simply reference the ASCN as the relevant mechanism that is able to clarify and acknowledge vulnerabilities related to human rights in the context of smart cities. This would allow enough room for ASEAN to determine the best way of mentioning this, without risking violating the ASEAN Way. The explanation in the manuscript is slightly revised in paragraph 2, section 2: “Considering the vulnerability of the underprivileged in larger cities of Southeast Asia, it is essential to consider how past studies have concluded the risks of smart city developments to leave the poor and unemployed in isolation. 19, 20 This policy brief acknowledges that smart city development is geared toward economic progress despite the civic and social elements emphasized in the ASCN. The problem with this is the strong possibility of social inclusion and participation of the people in governance being further hampered, as shown in the conclusions of past studies on this subject. 21– 25 Therefore, this destination to a ‘smart city’ status must be made carefully by the ASCN to ensure that, in the process, local governments do not impede upon the fundamental human rights of its citizens in the name of development.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.4.2 : ASEAN intra-regional support recommendation: idealized view of Singapore’s role The author suggests Singapore and high-HDI countries support others. However: ASEAN is not the EU, it has no common budget; Singapore has no legal obligation to support other countries; national interests may conflict with the role of “regional donor.” This recommendation lacks assessment of political and economic incentives. Response : I agree with this. Therefore, as the last paragraph of section 2 explains: “Therefore, the question would be whether Singapore would be openly willing to assist all of its ASEAN counterparts in establishing a balance between smart city status and sustainable development.” This shows that this policy brief acknowledges that Singapore has the strongest capacity to provide assistances, however, there is no mechanism within ASEAN that is able to enforce this to Singapore. Ultimately, the decision to provide the assistances would solely lie on the hands of the Singapore Government, and is outside the scope of this study to argue how best to approach this. Competing Interests: No competing interests. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 14 Jan 2026 bama andika putra , School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK 14 Jan 2026 Author Response Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.1 : Normative approach dominates, lacking balance with empirical analysis; the paper does not: compare with cases of “illiberal but effective smart cities” (e.g., Singapore, some Chinese cities), ... Continue reading Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.1 : Normative approach dominates, lacking balance with empirical analysis; the paper does not: compare with cases of “illiberal but effective smart cities” (e.g., Singapore, some Chinese cities), consider the perspective of ASEAN’s regional institutionalism, where stability and development are often prioritized over rapid democratization. Academic limitation: The paper has not situated ASCN within the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state , which is highly characteristic of Southeast Asia. Response : In the revised article, I aim to acknowledge the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state by directly acknowledging that the ASCN can pose a threat towards a balanced approach taken by these sub-unit variables. In Paragraph 2, Section 1, the revisions focused to acknowledge that the ASCN is a manifestation of ASEAN’s approach of prioritizing stability and development within its policies. The revised paragraph: “The ASCN started with 26 pilot cities across the ten ASEAN member states. As seen in Figure 1 below, these cities significantly differ based on the population, political systems, and current state of development. Nevertheless, the ASCN has emphasized that through the network, normative guidelines will act as the foundation for the member cities’ smart city development. 3, 4 Perceiving the importance of city-level and scalable solutions, the ASCN was established at the 32 nd ASEAN Summit 2018 and determined 26 Pilot cities, which reflects consistency towards ASEAN’s regional institutionalism that places a heavy emphasis on stability and development. As of 2024, this list has increased to 31 cities, including Sihanoukville City, Sumedang, Rayong, Khon Kaen, and Chiang Mai.” Meanwhile, in the another paragraph (Paragraph 5, section 1), the revisions focused to acknowledge two things: 1) acknowledge that there are cases of illiberal, yet effective smart cities, which should open the case that there are other issues that can be considered within the case presented in this policy brief; 2) to balance between liberal governance and developmental state, ASCN in this case is criticized to potentially declining civic and social concerns. The revised paragraph: “This policy brief identifies two issues that arise from the ASCN. They include the negligence of human rights and imposing a ‘developing’ model from financing stakeholders. The ASCN is geared to establish ‘smart cities’ in Southeast Asia. However, this is a region consisting of states with significant disparities. The diverse social, economic, and political landscapes have already exacerbated human rights protection due to authoritarian and semi-authoritarian rules aiming to maintain their regime legitimacy through greater exertion of power. Introducing information and communication technologies in the ASCN member cities risks increased surveillance and control in the region’s less democratic settings. As past studies have argued, smart cities do not correlate directly to sustainability, 6 , 7 and the ASCN and the developed city master plans of the member cities are ambiguous in showing how the most disadvantaged would benefit through greater inclusivity from smart cities. 8– 11 Therefore, it could represent what a study mentioned as evolving social practices restricting rights. 12 This study acknowledges that there are cases of illiberal, yet effective smart cities. However, looking at civic and social concerns, these practices should be carefully approached through the ASCN to ensure that developments in civic and social sustainability does not decline, and can balance between liberal governance and the developmental state.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.2 : Lack of clarity on the concept of “human rights” in the ASEAN context; The author uses human rights as an almost universal category, without distinguishing between: civil–political rights & economic–social–cultural rights; In ASEAN, many governments view access to public services, infrastructure, and employment as forms of human rights implementation, sometimes more important than political rights; The lack of differentiation makes the argument overly generalized. Response : In paragraph 5, section 1, I explain that the human rights concern here relates to the exertion of power by authoritiarian/ semi-authoritarian stakeholders in the Southeast Asian region. Fully acknowledging that the human rights conception differs between ASEAN and the other parts of the globe, I make it clear what the human rights concerns are for this policy brief: “Introducing information and communication technologies in the ASCN member cities risks increased surveillance and control in the region’s less democratic settings.” Furthermore, it is outsides the scope of this study to delve deep on the differences between ASEAN and the universal conception of human rights from a civil and economic perspective, as this opens up a whole different discussion on the suitability of ASEAN’s defined human rights conceptions to that of the West. Reviewer 2, Comment 2.2.1 . Complete reliance on secondary data; The paper uses secondary data from 2018–2024, but: no policy interviews, no urban citizen surveys, no specific case studies of ASCN cities. This results in: assessments of surveillance and privacy violations that are structurally speculative; lack of direct evidence from specific ASCN projects. This is a serious limitation for a policy brief, which requires practical evidence to support recommendations. Response : I disagree with this suggestion. First, there is no issue with relying on secondary data, whether it be original research articles or policy briefs. In the context of policy brief, the angle taken for this study is one that argues the points based on normative and literature assessment angels, which does help policymakers look at the issue from diverse angles. In the past, this method is also used in multiple published policy briefs (see: https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/aseans-climate-change-mitigation-and-adaptation-measures-abandoni/ ; https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/the-politics-of-environmental-policy-haze-pollution-asean-and-the/ ). To emphasize this, I have revised the first sentence of Paragraph 5, section 1: “This policy brief identifies two issues that arise from the ASCN, based on a normative and literature assessment of the direction of the initiative.” Secondly, I disagree that as a result of this approach, the arguments are speculative. The first example of this potential issue has been raised in the Paragraph 6, section 1 taking in the case of Cambodia’s Phnom Penh: “Observing the case of Phnom Penh’s forced privatized lands that disadvantaged people with low incomes, 11 a “top-down” approach thus risks the livelihood of ASEAN citizens 8 ”. In addition to this, the specific cases that uses the study case of ASCN is on the second recommendation, that recommends ASEAN member states to provide essential public services. In Paragraph 6, Section 2, it is argued the cities that reflect this: “The problem identified with the ASCN’s current model is the acceleration of development under the financing stakeholder’s model. In the past, many of ASEAN’s external partners have partnered with the ASCN pilot cities. 40 Japan has been an active nation, aiming to adopt Japanese models of sustainability and smart city infrastructure through its Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which has increased its presence in Siem Reap, Phnom Penh, and Yangon City. 10, 11 China’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI) has also financed many of Southeast Asia’s regional strategic infrastructures. 41 Some have been under the framework of the BRI, while others have been through partnerships with China’s private and public industries. Huawei, for example, was reported to contribute to Thailand’s digital economy and technological updates. 8, 42 The problem with this model is that the intention of constructing this smart city leads Southeast Asian states to be affected by the national interests of the foreign states, aiming to impose their development model on the ASCN members. 43, 44 Consequently, it will be difficult for recipient cities of the financing to cater to the needs of their vulnerable groups, as attention would be diverted to accelerating the progress of the development in alignment with the interests of the financing stakeholder.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.2.2: Mechanical comparison of Democracy Index and HDI Placing Democracy Index and HDI side by side illustrates ASEAN’s diversity, but: the paper does not prove a direct relationship between these rankings and ASCN’s effectiveness; it does not analyze changes over time (before–after joining ASCN). The indices are used more as illustrations of viewpoints rather than causal analytical tools. Response : The two tables used (Democracy Index and HDI) are utilized to support the arguments made that act as background context in understand the specifics of the recommendations. Table 1 focuses on Southeast Asia’s Democracy Index that solidifies the claim of the lack of democracy within the Southeast Asian state’s social and political landscapes. Table 2 shows the disparity of human development among Southeast Asian states. The keyword here is ‘DISPARITY,’ allowing readers to understand the unique challenges of the Southeast Asian region, and steer clear from making the assumption that all Southeast Asian states are the same. Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.1. Linear argument “smart city → surveillance → democratic decline” The author constructs a linear chain of reasoning: Technology → surveillance → control → rights violations. However, this approach: ignores the role of institutional design;, does not analyze the potential for technology to be used for transparency, good governance, or improved service access. This makes the paper lean more toward cautionary discourse than multidimensional analysis. Response : In the revised paragraph 1, section 2, I make it clear that there is the presence of institutional designs that have the capacity to counter the significance of the issue. Nevertheless, it is also important to acknowledge that the fears expressed with the arguments are based on the literature assessment, in which scholars in the past have pointed towards his possibility and fear scenarios. Furthermore, this policy brief is concerned with the human rights violations that could occur from the ASCN, rather than providing a general overview over the pros and cons of the initiative. Delving into the benefits, therefore, is outside the scope of this article. Neverthleless, I acknowledge this in the second paragraph of section 2: “This policy brief acknowledges that smart city development is geared toward economic progress despite the civic and social elements emphasized in the ASCN.” The revised paragraph: “This section argues that to complement the deficiencies of the ASCN’s smart city conception, two recommendations can be adopted. The first recommendation is to acknowledge the vulnerability of the underprivileged, provide personal security, and promote social inclusion for governing smart cities. As seen in Table 1 below, a prominent problem with Southeast Asian states is the lack of democracy within their social and political landscapes. Consequently, when the ASCN echoed the importance of smart cities, there were fears that this would further derail democratic progress in the region. Studies in the past have shown how smart-city developments risk more substantial possibilities of violating privacy rights as high-tech companies have a stronger voice and role in the planning and financing of smart-city-related projects. 13– 16 Half of the Southeast Asian states are authoritarian or semi-authoritarian states. Consequently, there is an intense fear of abuse of power and increased surveillance capacities that are feared would be the consequences of smart city conceptions, albeit, the presence of institutional designs that help to counter the intensity. 7, 17 ” Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.2 : Incomplete assessment of local governments’ active role ASCN is described as a top-down imposed network, but in reality: many ASCN projects are proposed by city governments; the level of technology adoption varies greatly across cities. Treating ASCN as a homogeneous structure reduces the accuracy of the argument. Response : I have revised the words used in paragraph 6, section 1. The ‘top-down’ terminology used in the article does not reflect the points used for this policy brief. Rather, it is a quotation of how de Jong in 2023 described the ASCN, which reflects a hierarchical system that does not allow ASEAN member states to adapt towards a regionalized system. The revised paragraph: “A second concern identified in this policy brief is the imposing development models by external actors. The ASCN collaborates and links ASCN members’ projects with possible financing from vast stakeholders. The problem with this is that the ASCN eventually aims to achieve accelerated growth for profit, which includes broader privatization processes along the way. Observing the case of Phnom Penh’s forced privatized lands that disadvantaged people with low incomes, 11 a “top-down” (terminology introduced by de Jong in 2023) approach thus risks the livelihood of ASEAN citizens. 8 ” Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.3 : Critique of China and Japan’s role is overly politicized The paper warns of major powers (BRI, JICA, Huawei) imposing development models. However: it does not compare loan conditions or policy constraints among partners; it does not analyze ASEAN countries’ capacity to negotiate and choose strategies. This makes the argument appear more like geopolitical suspicion than evidence-based development assessment. Response : The reference towards China and Japan’s role here is to simply acknowledge that the systems imposed differs to that of ASEAN member states. Therefore, there is a risk of these imposed systems negatively affecting ASCN mechanisms, which has been the case with Japan and China’s development models argued in several studies in the past (see the citations). Nevertheless, I have revised the paragraph to explain that ASEAN member states do have the capacity to negotiate conditions, and therefore, has the ability to partially counter such concerns. The revised paragraph (Paragraph 6, section 1): “The problem identified with the ASCN’s current model is the acceleration of development under the financing stakeholder’s model. In the past, many of ASEAN’s external partners have partnered with the ASCN pilot cities. 40 Japan has been an active nation, aiming to adopt Japanese models of sustainability and smart city infrastructure through its Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which has increased its presence in Siem Reap, Phnom Penh, and Yangon City. 10, 11 China’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI) has also financed many of Southeast Asia’s regional strategic infrastructures. 41 Some have been under the framework of the BRI, while others have been through partnerships with China’s private and public industries. Huawei, for example, was reported to contribute to Thailand’s digital economy and technological updates. 8, 42 The problem with this model is that the intention of constructing this smart city leads Southeast Asian states to be affected by the national interests of the foreign states, aiming to impose their development model on the ASCN members. 43, 44 Consequently, it will be difficult for recipient cities of the financing to cater to the needs of their vulnerable groups, as attention would be diverted to accelerating the progress of the development in alignment with the interests of the financing stakeholder. Nevertheless, this problem is somewhat countered by the ASEAN member state’s capacity negotiate conditions, which could partially counter these concerns.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.4.1: Human rights recommendation: well-intentioned but impractical Calling for human rights integration into smart city governance is reasonable. However: the paper does not specify concrete institutional mechanisms; it does not clarify who monitors, who implements, and who is accountable. In ASEAN – where no enforcement mechanism exists – this recommendation is more symbolic than substantive. Response : I agree that ASEAN does not have any enforcement mechanisms. Therefore, rather than specifying the details on how this recommendation can be made, I opt to make a slight ‘vagueness’ and choose to simply reference the ASCN as the relevant mechanism that is able to clarify and acknowledge vulnerabilities related to human rights in the context of smart cities. This would allow enough room for ASEAN to determine the best way of mentioning this, without risking violating the ASEAN Way. The explanation in the manuscript is slightly revised in paragraph 2, section 2: “Considering the vulnerability of the underprivileged in larger cities of Southeast Asia, it is essential to consider how past studies have concluded the risks of smart city developments to leave the poor and unemployed in isolation. 19, 20 This policy brief acknowledges that smart city development is geared toward economic progress despite the civic and social elements emphasized in the ASCN. The problem with this is the strong possibility of social inclusion and participation of the people in governance being further hampered, as shown in the conclusions of past studies on this subject. 21– 25 Therefore, this destination to a ‘smart city’ status must be made carefully by the ASCN to ensure that, in the process, local governments do not impede upon the fundamental human rights of its citizens in the name of development.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.4.2 : ASEAN intra-regional support recommendation: idealized view of Singapore’s role The author suggests Singapore and high-HDI countries support others. However: ASEAN is not the EU, it has no common budget; Singapore has no legal obligation to support other countries; national interests may conflict with the role of “regional donor.” This recommendation lacks assessment of political and economic incentives. Response : I agree with this. Therefore, as the last paragraph of section 2 explains: “Therefore, the question would be whether Singapore would be openly willing to assist all of its ASEAN counterparts in establishing a balance between smart city status and sustainable development.” This shows that this policy brief acknowledges that Singapore has the strongest capacity to provide assistances, however, there is no mechanism within ASEAN that is able to enforce this to Singapore. Ultimately, the decision to provide the assistances would solely lie on the hands of the Singapore Government, and is outside the scope of this study to argue how best to approach this. Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.1 : Normative approach dominates, lacking balance with empirical analysis; the paper does not: compare with cases of “illiberal but effective smart cities” (e.g., Singapore, some Chinese cities), consider the perspective of ASEAN’s regional institutionalism, where stability and development are often prioritized over rapid democratization. Academic limitation: The paper has not situated ASCN within the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state , which is highly characteristic of Southeast Asia. Response : In the revised article, I aim to acknowledge the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state by directly acknowledging that the ASCN can pose a threat towards a balanced approach taken by these sub-unit variables. In Paragraph 2, Section 1, the revisions focused to acknowledge that the ASCN is a manifestation of ASEAN’s approach of prioritizing stability and development within its policies. The revised paragraph: “The ASCN started with 26 pilot cities across the ten ASEAN member states. As seen in Figure 1 below, these cities significantly differ based on the population, political systems, and current state of development. Nevertheless, the ASCN has emphasized that through the network, normative guidelines will act as the foundation for the member cities’ smart city development. 3, 4 Perceiving the importance of city-level and scalable solutions, the ASCN was established at the 32 nd ASEAN Summit 2018 and determined 26 Pilot cities, which reflects consistency towards ASEAN’s regional institutionalism that places a heavy emphasis on stability and development. As of 2024, this list has increased to 31 cities, including Sihanoukville City, Sumedang, Rayong, Khon Kaen, and Chiang Mai.” Meanwhile, in the another paragraph (Paragraph 5, section 1), the revisions focused to acknowledge two things: 1) acknowledge that there are cases of illiberal, yet effective smart cities, which should open the case that there are other issues that can be considered within the case presented in this policy brief; 2) to balance between liberal governance and developmental state, ASCN in this case is criticized to potentially declining civic and social concerns. The revised paragraph: “This policy brief identifies two issues that arise from the ASCN. They include the negligence of human rights and imposing a ‘developing’ model from financing stakeholders. The ASCN is geared to establish ‘smart cities’ in Southeast Asia. However, this is a region consisting of states with significant disparities. The diverse social, economic, and political landscapes have already exacerbated human rights protection due to authoritarian and semi-authoritarian rules aiming to maintain their regime legitimacy through greater exertion of power. Introducing information and communication technologies in the ASCN member cities risks increased surveillance and control in the region’s less democratic settings. As past studies have argued, smart cities do not correlate directly to sustainability, 6 , 7 and the ASCN and the developed city master plans of the member cities are ambiguous in showing how the most disadvantaged would benefit through greater inclusivity from smart cities. 8– 11 Therefore, it could represent what a study mentioned as evolving social practices restricting rights. 12 This study acknowledges that there are cases of illiberal, yet effective smart cities. However, looking at civic and social concerns, these practices should be carefully approached through the ASCN to ensure that developments in civic and social sustainability does not decline, and can balance between liberal governance and the developmental state.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.2 : Lack of clarity on the concept of “human rights” in the ASEAN context; The author uses human rights as an almost universal category, without distinguishing between: civil–political rights & economic–social–cultural rights; In ASEAN, many governments view access to public services, infrastructure, and employment as forms of human rights implementation, sometimes more important than political rights; The lack of differentiation makes the argument overly generalized. Response : In paragraph 5, section 1, I explain that the human rights concern here relates to the exertion of power by authoritiarian/ semi-authoritarian stakeholders in the Southeast Asian region. Fully acknowledging that the human rights conception differs between ASEAN and the other parts of the globe, I make it clear what the human rights concerns are for this policy brief: “Introducing information and communication technologies in the ASCN member cities risks increased surveillance and control in the region’s less democratic settings.” Furthermore, it is outsides the scope of this study to delve deep on the differences between ASEAN and the universal conception of human rights from a civil and economic perspective, as this opens up a whole different discussion on the suitability of ASEAN’s defined human rights conceptions to that of the West. Reviewer 2, Comment 2.2.1 . Complete reliance on secondary data; The paper uses secondary data from 2018–2024, but: no policy interviews, no urban citizen surveys, no specific case studies of ASCN cities. This results in: assessments of surveillance and privacy violations that are structurally speculative; lack of direct evidence from specific ASCN projects. This is a serious limitation for a policy brief, which requires practical evidence to support recommendations. Response : I disagree with this suggestion. First, there is no issue with relying on secondary data, whether it be original research articles or policy briefs. In the context of policy brief, the angle taken for this study is one that argues the points based on normative and literature assessment angels, which does help policymakers look at the issue from diverse angles. In the past, this method is also used in multiple published policy briefs (see: https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/aseans-climate-change-mitigation-and-adaptation-measures-abandoni/ ; https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/the-politics-of-environmental-policy-haze-pollution-asean-and-the/ ). To emphasize this, I have revised the first sentence of Paragraph 5, section 1: “This policy brief identifies two issues that arise from the ASCN, based on a normative and literature assessment of the direction of the initiative.” Secondly, I disagree that as a result of this approach, the arguments are speculative. The first example of this potential issue has been raised in the Paragraph 6, section 1 taking in the case of Cambodia’s Phnom Penh: “Observing the case of Phnom Penh’s forced privatized lands that disadvantaged people with low incomes, 11 a “top-down” approach thus risks the livelihood of ASEAN citizens 8 ”. In addition to this, the specific cases that uses the study case of ASCN is on the second recommendation, that recommends ASEAN member states to provide essential public services. In Paragraph 6, Section 2, it is argued the cities that reflect this: “The problem identified with the ASCN’s current model is the acceleration of development under the financing stakeholder’s model. In the past, many of ASEAN’s external partners have partnered with the ASCN pilot cities. 40 Japan has been an active nation, aiming to adopt Japanese models of sustainability and smart city infrastructure through its Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which has increased its presence in Siem Reap, Phnom Penh, and Yangon City. 10, 11 China’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI) has also financed many of Southeast Asia’s regional strategic infrastructures. 41 Some have been under the framework of the BRI, while others have been through partnerships with China’s private and public industries. Huawei, for example, was reported to contribute to Thailand’s digital economy and technological updates. 8, 42 The problem with this model is that the intention of constructing this smart city leads Southeast Asian states to be affected by the national interests of the foreign states, aiming to impose their development model on the ASCN members. 43, 44 Consequently, it will be difficult for recipient cities of the financing to cater to the needs of their vulnerable groups, as attention would be diverted to accelerating the progress of the development in alignment with the interests of the financing stakeholder.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.2.2: Mechanical comparison of Democracy Index and HDI Placing Democracy Index and HDI side by side illustrates ASEAN’s diversity, but: the paper does not prove a direct relationship between these rankings and ASCN’s effectiveness; it does not analyze changes over time (before–after joining ASCN). The indices are used more as illustrations of viewpoints rather than causal analytical tools. Response : The two tables used (Democracy Index and HDI) are utilized to support the arguments made that act as background context in understand the specifics of the recommendations. Table 1 focuses on Southeast Asia’s Democracy Index that solidifies the claim of the lack of democracy within the Southeast Asian state’s social and political landscapes. Table 2 shows the disparity of human development among Southeast Asian states. The keyword here is ‘DISPARITY,’ allowing readers to understand the unique challenges of the Southeast Asian region, and steer clear from making the assumption that all Southeast Asian states are the same. Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.1. Linear argument “smart city → surveillance → democratic decline” The author constructs a linear chain of reasoning: Technology → surveillance → control → rights violations. However, this approach: ignores the role of institutional design;, does not analyze the potential for technology to be used for transparency, good governance, or improved service access. This makes the paper lean more toward cautionary discourse than multidimensional analysis. Response : In the revised paragraph 1, section 2, I make it clear that there is the presence of institutional designs that have the capacity to counter the significance of the issue. Nevertheless, it is also important to acknowledge that the fears expressed with the arguments are based on the literature assessment, in which scholars in the past have pointed towards his possibility and fear scenarios. Furthermore, this policy brief is concerned with the human rights violations that could occur from the ASCN, rather than providing a general overview over the pros and cons of the initiative. Delving into the benefits, therefore, is outside the scope of this article. Neverthleless, I acknowledge this in the second paragraph of section 2: “This policy brief acknowledges that smart city development is geared toward economic progress despite the civic and social elements emphasized in the ASCN.” The revised paragraph: “This section argues that to complement the deficiencies of the ASCN’s smart city conception, two recommendations can be adopted. The first recommendation is to acknowledge the vulnerability of the underprivileged, provide personal security, and promote social inclusion for governing smart cities. As seen in Table 1 below, a prominent problem with Southeast Asian states is the lack of democracy within their social and political landscapes. Consequently, when the ASCN echoed the importance of smart cities, there were fears that this would further derail democratic progress in the region. Studies in the past have shown how smart-city developments risk more substantial possibilities of violating privacy rights as high-tech companies have a stronger voice and role in the planning and financing of smart-city-related projects. 13– 16 Half of the Southeast Asian states are authoritarian or semi-authoritarian states. Consequently, there is an intense fear of abuse of power and increased surveillance capacities that are feared would be the consequences of smart city conceptions, albeit, the presence of institutional designs that help to counter the intensity. 7, 17 ” Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.2 : Incomplete assessment of local governments’ active role ASCN is described as a top-down imposed network, but in reality: many ASCN projects are proposed by city governments; the level of technology adoption varies greatly across cities. Treating ASCN as a homogeneous structure reduces the accuracy of the argument. Response : I have revised the words used in paragraph 6, section 1. The ‘top-down’ terminology used in the article does not reflect the points used for this policy brief. Rather, it is a quotation of how de Jong in 2023 described the ASCN, which reflects a hierarchical system that does not allow ASEAN member states to adapt towards a regionalized system. The revised paragraph: “A second concern identified in this policy brief is the imposing development models by external actors. The ASCN collaborates and links ASCN members’ projects with possible financing from vast stakeholders. The problem with this is that the ASCN eventually aims to achieve accelerated growth for profit, which includes broader privatization processes along the way. Observing the case of Phnom Penh’s forced privatized lands that disadvantaged people with low incomes, 11 a “top-down” (terminology introduced by de Jong in 2023) approach thus risks the livelihood of ASEAN citizens. 8 ” Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.3 : Critique of China and Japan’s role is overly politicized The paper warns of major powers (BRI, JICA, Huawei) imposing development models. However: it does not compare loan conditions or policy constraints among partners; it does not analyze ASEAN countries’ capacity to negotiate and choose strategies. This makes the argument appear more like geopolitical suspicion than evidence-based development assessment. Response : The reference towards China and Japan’s role here is to simply acknowledge that the systems imposed differs to that of ASEAN member states. Therefore, there is a risk of these imposed systems negatively affecting ASCN mechanisms, which has been the case with Japan and China’s development models argued in several studies in the past (see the citations). Nevertheless, I have revised the paragraph to explain that ASEAN member states do have the capacity to negotiate conditions, and therefore, has the ability to partially counter such concerns. The revised paragraph (Paragraph 6, section 1): “The problem identified with the ASCN’s current model is the acceleration of development under the financing stakeholder’s model. In the past, many of ASEAN’s external partners have partnered with the ASCN pilot cities. 40 Japan has been an active nation, aiming to adopt Japanese models of sustainability and smart city infrastructure through its Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which has increased its presence in Siem Reap, Phnom Penh, and Yangon City. 10, 11 China’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI) has also financed many of Southeast Asia’s regional strategic infrastructures. 41 Some have been under the framework of the BRI, while others have been through partnerships with China’s private and public industries. Huawei, for example, was reported to contribute to Thailand’s digital economy and technological updates. 8, 42 The problem with this model is that the intention of constructing this smart city leads Southeast Asian states to be affected by the national interests of the foreign states, aiming to impose their development model on the ASCN members. 43, 44 Consequently, it will be difficult for recipient cities of the financing to cater to the needs of their vulnerable groups, as attention would be diverted to accelerating the progress of the development in alignment with the interests of the financing stakeholder. Nevertheless, this problem is somewhat countered by the ASEAN member state’s capacity negotiate conditions, which could partially counter these concerns.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.4.1: Human rights recommendation: well-intentioned but impractical Calling for human rights integration into smart city governance is reasonable. However: the paper does not specify concrete institutional mechanisms; it does not clarify who monitors, who implements, and who is accountable. In ASEAN – where no enforcement mechanism exists – this recommendation is more symbolic than substantive. Response : I agree that ASEAN does not have any enforcement mechanisms. Therefore, rather than specifying the details on how this recommendation can be made, I opt to make a slight ‘vagueness’ and choose to simply reference the ASCN as the relevant mechanism that is able to clarify and acknowledge vulnerabilities related to human rights in the context of smart cities. This would allow enough room for ASEAN to determine the best way of mentioning this, without risking violating the ASEAN Way. The explanation in the manuscript is slightly revised in paragraph 2, section 2: “Considering the vulnerability of the underprivileged in larger cities of Southeast Asia, it is essential to consider how past studies have concluded the risks of smart city developments to leave the poor and unemployed in isolation. 19, 20 This policy brief acknowledges that smart city development is geared toward economic progress despite the civic and social elements emphasized in the ASCN. The problem with this is the strong possibility of social inclusion and participation of the people in governance being further hampered, as shown in the conclusions of past studies on this subject. 21– 25 Therefore, this destination to a ‘smart city’ status must be made carefully by the ASCN to ensure that, in the process, local governments do not impede upon the fundamental human rights of its citizens in the name of development.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.4.2 : ASEAN intra-regional support recommendation: idealized view of Singapore’s role The author suggests Singapore and high-HDI countries support others. However: ASEAN is not the EU, it has no common budget; Singapore has no legal obligation to support other countries; national interests may conflict with the role of “regional donor.” This recommendation lacks assessment of political and economic incentives. Response : I agree with this. Therefore, as the last paragraph of section 2 explains: “Therefore, the question would be whether Singapore would be openly willing to assist all of its ASEAN counterparts in establishing a balance between smart city status and sustainable development.” This shows that this policy brief acknowledges that Singapore has the strongest capacity to provide assistances, however, there is no mechanism within ASEAN that is able to enforce this to Singapore. Ultimately, the decision to provide the assistances would solely lie on the hands of the Singapore Government, and is outside the scope of this study to argue how best to approach this. Competing Interests: No competing interests. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Vainio T. Reviewer Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184179.r432949 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v1#referee-response-432949 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 29 Dec 2025 Teija Vainio , Tampere University, Kanslerinrinne, Tampere, Finland Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184179.r432949 The policy brief analyses smart city development in Southeast Asian cities and proposes three policy recommendations based on secondary data from the ASEAN Smart Cities Network. Overall, the submission demonstrates a clear structure, meets the criteria for a ... Continue reading READ ALL The policy brief analyses smart city development in Southeast Asian cities and proposes three policy recommendations based on secondary data from the ASEAN Smart Cities Network. Overall, the submission demonstrates a clear structure, meets the criteria for a Policy Brief for F1000Research, and contributes to the discourse on smart city development in Southeast Asian cities. The primary recommendation concerns how sustainability is described. While the abstract emphasises human rights and public service delivery, subsequent sections address sustainability objectives and models at a general level. The author should clarify and consistently define the main focus throughout the submission, specifying whether it centres on sustainability aspects such as environmental or economic sustainability, or on human rights and public service delivery within smart city development. If social sustainability is the intended focus, it should be explicitly defined. Does the paper provide a comprehensive overview of the policy and the context of its implementation in a way which is accessible to a general reader? Yes Is the discussion on the implications clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Are the recommendations made clear, balanced, and justified on the basis of the presented arguments? Partly Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: smart city development I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Vainio T. Reviewer Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184179.r432949 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v1#referee-response-432949 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 14 Jan 2026 bama andika putra , School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK 14 Jan 2026 Author Response Reviewer 1: The primary recommendation concerns how sustainability is described. While the abstract emphasises human rights and public service delivery, subsequent sections address sustainability objectives and models at a general ... Continue reading Reviewer 1: The primary recommendation concerns how sustainability is described. While the abstract emphasises human rights and public service delivery, subsequent sections address sustainability objectives and models at a general level. The author should clarify and consistently define the main focus throughout the submission, specifying whether it centres on sustainability aspects such as environmental or economic sustainability, or on human rights and public service delivery within smart city development. If social sustainability is the intended focus, it should be explicitly defined Response: I agree that the terminology of sustainability needed to be clarified in the introduction section. In the revised paragraph (paragraph 1, section 1), I clarified that elements of sustainability in this case is civic and social. Meanwhile, the third paragraph in section 1 clarifies that civic and social in this case includes “…social cohesion, culture and heritage, tourism, public and municipal services, and governance.” The revised paragraph: “The ASCN is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) solution towards urbanization and city-based challenges. In 2018, Singapore led the initiative to establish the ASCN, perceiving that a ‘smart city’ conception of Southeast Asian states would assist Southeast Asian nations in countering urbanization-perpetuated challenges and the lack of development in larger ASEAN-located cities. 1 As Ludher argues, “Most of ASEAN’s growth has been and will continue to be driven by urban centers, with more people expected to urbanize by 2030”. 2 This policy brief perceives that throughout the process, the ASCN lacks proper consideration towards human rights and elements of sustainability (civic and social dimensions) in its plan to accelerate the growth of its member cities.” Reviewer 1: The primary recommendation concerns how sustainability is described. While the abstract emphasises human rights and public service delivery, subsequent sections address sustainability objectives and models at a general level. The author should clarify and consistently define the main focus throughout the submission, specifying whether it centres on sustainability aspects such as environmental or economic sustainability, or on human rights and public service delivery within smart city development. If social sustainability is the intended focus, it should be explicitly defined Response: I agree that the terminology of sustainability needed to be clarified in the introduction section. In the revised paragraph (paragraph 1, section 1), I clarified that elements of sustainability in this case is civic and social. Meanwhile, the third paragraph in section 1 clarifies that civic and social in this case includes “…social cohesion, culture and heritage, tourism, public and municipal services, and governance.” The revised paragraph: “The ASCN is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) solution towards urbanization and city-based challenges. In 2018, Singapore led the initiative to establish the ASCN, perceiving that a ‘smart city’ conception of Southeast Asian states would assist Southeast Asian nations in countering urbanization-perpetuated challenges and the lack of development in larger ASEAN-located cities. 1 As Ludher argues, “Most of ASEAN’s growth has been and will continue to be driven by urban centers, with more people expected to urbanize by 2030”. 2 This policy brief perceives that throughout the process, the ASCN lacks proper consideration towards human rights and elements of sustainability (civic and social dimensions) in its plan to accelerate the growth of its member cities.” Competing Interests: No competing interests. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 14 Jan 2026 bama andika putra , School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK 14 Jan 2026 Author Response Reviewer 1: The primary recommendation concerns how sustainability is described. While the abstract emphasises human rights and public service delivery, subsequent sections address sustainability objectives and models at a general ... Continue reading Reviewer 1: The primary recommendation concerns how sustainability is described. While the abstract emphasises human rights and public service delivery, subsequent sections address sustainability objectives and models at a general level. The author should clarify and consistently define the main focus throughout the submission, specifying whether it centres on sustainability aspects such as environmental or economic sustainability, or on human rights and public service delivery within smart city development. If social sustainability is the intended focus, it should be explicitly defined Response: I agree that the terminology of sustainability needed to be clarified in the introduction section. In the revised paragraph (paragraph 1, section 1), I clarified that elements of sustainability in this case is civic and social. Meanwhile, the third paragraph in section 1 clarifies that civic and social in this case includes “…social cohesion, culture and heritage, tourism, public and municipal services, and governance.” The revised paragraph: “The ASCN is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) solution towards urbanization and city-based challenges. In 2018, Singapore led the initiative to establish the ASCN, perceiving that a ‘smart city’ conception of Southeast Asian states would assist Southeast Asian nations in countering urbanization-perpetuated challenges and the lack of development in larger ASEAN-located cities. 1 As Ludher argues, “Most of ASEAN’s growth has been and will continue to be driven by urban centers, with more people expected to urbanize by 2030”. 2 This policy brief perceives that throughout the process, the ASCN lacks proper consideration towards human rights and elements of sustainability (civic and social dimensions) in its plan to accelerate the growth of its member cities.” Reviewer 1: The primary recommendation concerns how sustainability is described. While the abstract emphasises human rights and public service delivery, subsequent sections address sustainability objectives and models at a general level. The author should clarify and consistently define the main focus throughout the submission, specifying whether it centres on sustainability aspects such as environmental or economic sustainability, or on human rights and public service delivery within smart city development. If social sustainability is the intended focus, it should be explicitly defined Response: I agree that the terminology of sustainability needed to be clarified in the introduction section. In the revised paragraph (paragraph 1, section 1), I clarified that elements of sustainability in this case is civic and social. Meanwhile, the third paragraph in section 1 clarifies that civic and social in this case includes “…social cohesion, culture and heritage, tourism, public and municipal services, and governance.” The revised paragraph: “The ASCN is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) solution towards urbanization and city-based challenges. In 2018, Singapore led the initiative to establish the ASCN, perceiving that a ‘smart city’ conception of Southeast Asian states would assist Southeast Asian nations in countering urbanization-perpetuated challenges and the lack of development in larger ASEAN-located cities. 1 As Ludher argues, “Most of ASEAN’s growth has been and will continue to be driven by urban centers, with more people expected to urbanize by 2030”. 2 This policy brief perceives that throughout the process, the ASCN lacks proper consideration towards human rights and elements of sustainability (civic and social dimensions) in its plan to accelerate the growth of its member cities.” Competing Interests: No competing interests. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 25 Jul 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 3 4 Version 3 (revision) 11 Mar 26 read read Version 2 (revision) 10 Jan 26 read Version 1 25 Jul 25 read read Teija Vainio , Tampere University, Kanslerinrinne, Finland Tran Xuan Hiep , The University of Danang, University of Science and Education, Da Nang, Vietnam Tooran Alizadeh , The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia Renju Chandran , Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Ernakulam, India Sarath Chandran MC , Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham - Amritapuri Campus (Ringgold ID: 301814), Amrithapuri, India Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Chandran R et al. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 27 Mar 2026 | for Version 3 Renju Chandran , Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Ernakulam, Kerala, India Sarath Chandran MC , Amrita School of Arts, Humanities and Commerce, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham - Amritapuri Campus (Ringgold ID: 301814), Amrithapuri, Kerala, India 0 Views copyright © 2026 Chandran R et al. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The paper provides a timely and policy-relevant discussion on the intersection of smart cities, governance, and human rights in ASEAN. It makes a valuable contribution by shifting attention from technocratic smart city narratives to civic and social sustainability concerns. However, the manuscript currently reads more as a normative policy essay rather than a rigorous academic policy analysis, and requires major revisions to enhance methodological depth, analytical balance, and scholarly contribution. The argument appears overly one-sided, as it assumes a direct relationship between smart city development and human rights risks without adequately considering potential positive outcomes such as improved governance, efficiency, and service delivery. The study relies entirely on secondary data, and the absence of case studies, primary evidence, or city-level analysis limits the robustness and practical relevance of the conclusions. The concept of “human rights” is not clearly defined, and the paper does not distinguish between civil–political rights and socio-economic rights, which is particularly important in the ASEAN context. The use of the Democracy Index and Human Development Index is descriptive, but the manuscript does not establish a clear analytical link between these indicators and the effectiveness of the ASEAN Smart Cities Network. The discussion treats the ASEAN Smart Cities Network as a homogeneous structure, without adequately accounting for variations across cities and the role of local governments in shaping smart city initiatives. The central argument presents a linear relationship between technology, surveillance, and democratic decline, but does not sufficiently consider the role of institutional safeguards or governance mechanisms that may mitigate such risks. The policy recommendations, while conceptually relevant, lack operational clarity, particularly regarding implementation mechanisms, responsible actors, and monitoring frameworks. The manuscript would benefit from stronger theoretical positioning, particularly by engaging with debates on developmental state models, institutional governance, and technology–society interactions. Does the paper provide a comprehensive overview of the policy and the context of its implementation in a way which is accessible to a general reader? Partly Is the discussion on the implications clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Are the recommendations made clear, balanced, and justified on the basis of the presented arguments? Partly References 1. Chandran M, Chandran R, Das D, Vinodkumar K: Examining the role of smart cities and sustainability research in achieving SDGs through bibliometric lens. Discover Sustainability . 2025; 6 (1). Publisher Full Text 2. Chandran R, Chandran MC S: Green finance and sustainability: mapping research development through bibliometric analysis. Discover Sustainability . 2024; 5 (1). Publisher Full Text Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Sustainable livelihood, Sustainability, Green Finance, Smart Cities. We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however we have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Chandran R and Chandran MC S. Peer Review Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.197288.r467244) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3#referee-response-467244 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Alizadeh T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 13 Mar 2026 | for Version 3 Tooran Alizadeh , The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia 0 Views copyright © 2026 Alizadeh T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Thanks for taking up my earlier review comments. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Urbanism, Southern Urbanism, Smart Urbanism, Digital Geographies, Infrastructure I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Alizadeh T. Peer Review Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.197288.r466652) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3#referee-response-466652 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Alizadeh T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 27 Feb 2026 | for Version 2 Tooran Alizadeh , The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia 0 Views copyright © 2026 Alizadeh T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions This policy brief raises an important and timely intervention into the development trajectory of the ASEAN Smart Cities Network (ASCN), particularly by foregrounding human rights and social inclusion concerns that are often marginalised in technocratic smart city discourses. Its claim - that ASCN initiatives risk neglecting civic and social sustainability by reinforcing authoritarian governance and surveillance capacities while privileging growth-oriented, infrastructure-driven development - is both normatively compelling and regionally relevant. The brief is persuasive in identifying two structural tensions: The potential marginalisation of vulnerable communities in technocratic smart city planning; and The influence of external financing actors in shaping development trajectories. However, while the recommendations are normatively sound, the second proposal - encouraging stronger ASEAN member states to assist others in delivering essential public services - raises feasibility concerns. ASEAN’s institutional design, shaped by the 'ASEAN Way' of non-interference and consensus, limits redistributive or interventionist mechanisms. Moreover, the political willingness of higher-ranked states to assume sustained developmental responsibility for others remains uncertain. As such, this recommendation, while principled, may face significant structural constraints. What the brief could strengthen is its engagement with bottom-up and grassroots smart initiatives. Globally, civic society actors have increasingly used digital tools to advance human rights, participatory governance, and community-based service provision - from the margins (Alizadeh & Prasad, 2025a, 2025b; Vadiati, 2022). These collective efforts demonstrate that ‘smart’ need not be synonymous with top-down, state-led, or corporate-driven infrastructure projects. In many contexts, civic tech movements, open-data communities, and local innovation labs have leveraged technology to enhance transparency, inclusion, and accountability (Nancy Odendaal, 2019; N. Odendaal, 2021). Incorporating this dimension could lead to a more actionable and politically feasible recommendation: Encourage ASCN members to identify, support, and scale bottom-up smart initiatives already operating within their cities; Create mechanisms within the ASCN framework to connect grassroots initiatives across member states for peer learning and knowledge exchange; Promote small-scale funding or recognition schemes that incentivise civic innovation aligned with human rights and social inclusion goals. Such a recommendation would not directly challenge the ASEAN Way, nor would it depend on heavy redistributive commitments among member states. Instead, it would expand the definition of ‘smart city’ beyond infrastructure and investment, embedding civic participation within the ASCN’s mandate. Compared to the proposal of inter-state assistance in public service provision, this approach may be more politically viable and institutionally compatible with ASEAN’s consensus-driven structure. Overall, the policy brief makes a valuable intervention by insisting that smart city development must be evaluated through a human rights lens. Strengthening the recommendations to include support for grassroots smart initiatives would further enhance its practical relevance and align its normative commitments with emerging global urban governance practices. Does the paper provide a comprehensive overview of the policy and the context of its implementation in a way which is accessible to a general reader? Yes Is the discussion on the implications clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Are the recommendations made clear, balanced, and justified on the basis of the presented arguments? Partly References 1. Alizadeh T, Prasad D: Alternative smart urbanism: An intersectional feminist take on learning from the margins. Digital Geography and Society . 2025; 9 . Publisher Full Text 2. Alizadeh T, Prasad D: Women in, at the margins, and against the smart cities: lessons from India. Social & Cultural Geography . 2026; 27 (2): 215-233 Publisher Full Text 3. Odendaal N: Everyday urbanisms and the importance of place: Exploring the elements of the emancipatory smart city. Urban Studies . 2021; 58 (3): 639-654 Publisher Full Text 4. Vadiati N: Alternatives to smart cities: A call for consideration of grassroots digital urbanism. Digital Geography and Society . 2022; 3 . Publisher Full Text Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Urbanism, Southern Urbanism, Smart Urbanism, Digital Geographies, Infrastructure I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 04 Mar 2026 bama andika putra, School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK Thank you for the comments. After reviewing the second recommendation, I have decided to adopt your proposed recommendation to utilize bottom-up initiatives to replace the policy of ASEAN member states being pushed to assist one another. It acknowledges that the previous second recommendation would not be politically feasible to adopt, due to the significant structural constraints. Therefore, as elaborated in the second recommendation (with slight changes to the wording in the abstract and conclusion sections), the revised second recommendation acknowledges that civic society has increasingly used digital tools to accelerate participatory governance and human rights. Therefore, by acknowledging the significance of existing bottom-up initiatives, this recommendation would underscore the importance of the ASCN scaling bottom-up smart initiatives already operating, enhancing information and knowledge exchange among member states, and promoting small-scale funding. Nevertheless, it still incorporates the first revision’s second recommendation’s concerns on the disparity among ASEAN member states across several public service dimensions, which is now used as a potential negative consequence of the revised second proposal. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests. reply Respond Report a concern Alizadeh T. Peer Review Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194955.r461534) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v2#referee-response-461534 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Hiep T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 02 Jan 2026 | for Version 1 Tran Xuan Hiep , The University of Danang, University of Science and Education, Da Nang, Vietnam 0 Views copyright © 2026 Hiep T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Not Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions 1. Strengths of the Paper First , the choice of topic has high academic and practical value. The paper approaches ASCN from a human rights perspective – a dimension that has been relatively underemphasized in smart city studies in ASEAN. The linkage between technology – surveillance – political institutions is appropriate to the Southeast Asian context. Second , the arguments are theoretically grounded and supported with rich evidence. The author draws on many reputable academic sources (Democracy Index, HDI, studies on smart cities and surveillance capitalism), showing an effort to situate ASCN within the broader picture of global governance and sustainable development. Third , the policy approach is pragmatic. The recommendation of “moderate adoption” reflects an understanding of ASEAN’s particularities, avoiding an idealized approach or rigid imposition of Western norms. 2. Limitations and Points for Debate 2.1. Evaluation of Theoretical Framework and Approach 2.1.1. Normative approach dominates, lacking balance with empirical analysis The paper mainly assesses ASCN from the perspective of human rights and liberal democracy, treating these as central standards for judging the success or failure of the smart city model. While this critical approach has value, it also creates a clear normative bias. The author almost assumes by default that: increased technology adoption + semi-authoritarian/authoritarian context = human rights violations. However, the paper does not: compare with cases of “illiberal but effective smart cities” (e.g., Singapore, some Chinese cities); consider the perspective of ASEAN’s regional institutionalism, where stability and development are often prioritized over rapid democratization. Academic limitation: The paper has not situated ASCN within the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state , which is highly characteristic of Southeast Asia. 2.1.2. Lack of clarity on the concept of “human rights” in the ASEAN context The author uses human rights as an almost universal category, without distinguishing between: civil–political rights economic–social–cultural rights In ASEAN, many governments view access to public services, infrastructure, and employment as forms of human rights implementation, sometimes more important than political rights. The lack of differentiation makes the argument overly generalized, blurring the line between: actual human rights violations and differences in development priorities. 2.2. Critique of Research Methodology 2.2.1. Complete reliance on secondary data The paper uses secondary data from 2018–2024, but: no policy interviews, no urban citizen surveys, no specific case studies of ASCN cities. This results in: assessments of surveillance and privacy violations that are structurally speculative; lack of direct evidence from specific ASCN projects. This is a serious limitation for a policy brief, which requires practical evidence to support recommendations. 2.2.2. Mechanical comparison of Democracy Index and HDI Placing Democracy Index and HDI side by side illustrates ASEAN’s diversity, but: the paper does not prove a direct relationship between these rankings and ASCN’s effectiveness; it does not analyze changes over time (before–after joining ASCN). The indices are used more as illustrations of viewpoints rather than causal analytical tools. 2.3. Critique of Central Argument 2.3.1. Linear argument “smart city → surveillance → democratic decline” The author constructs a linear chain of reasoning: Technology → surveillance → control → rights violations. However, this approach: ignores the role of institutional design; does not analyze the potential for technology to be used for transparency, good governance, or improved service access. This makes the paper lean more toward cautionary discourse than multidimensional analysis. 2.3.2. Incomplete assessment of local governments’ active role ASCN is described as a top-down imposed network, but in reality: many ASCN projects are proposed by city governments; the level of technology adoption varies greatly across cities. Treating ASCN as a homogeneous structure reduces the accuracy of the argument. 2.3.3. Critique of China and Japan’s role is overly politicized The paper warns of major powers (BRI, JICA, Huawei) imposing development models. However: it does not compare loan conditions or policy constraints among partners; it does not analyze ASEAN countries’ capacity to negotiate and choose strategies. This makes the argument appear more like geopolitical suspicion than evidence-based development assessment. 2.4. Critique of Two Policy Recommendations 2.4.1. Human rights recommendation: well-intentioned but impractical Calling for human rights integration into smart city governance is reasonable. However: the paper does not specify concrete institutional mechanisms; it does not clarify who monitors, who implements, and who is accountable. In ASEAN – where no enforcement mechanism exists – this recommendation is more symbolic than substantive. 2.4.2. ASEAN intra-regional support recommendation: idealized view of Singapore’s role The author suggests Singapore and high-HDI countries support others. However: ASEAN is not the EU, it has no common budget; Singapore has no legal obligation to support other countries; national interests may conflict with the role of “regional donor.” This recommendation lacks assessment of political and economic incentives. Request: Major Revisions Does the paper provide a comprehensive overview of the policy and the context of its implementation in a way which is accessible to a general reader? No Is the discussion on the implications clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? No Are the recommendations made clear, balanced, and justified on the basis of the presented arguments? No Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Political Sciences, International Relations, History I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 14 Jan 2026 bama andika putra, School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.1 : Normative approach dominates, lacking balance with empirical analysis; the paper does not: compare with cases of “illiberal but effective smart cities” (e.g., Singapore, some Chinese cities), consider the perspective of ASEAN’s regional institutionalism, where stability and development are often prioritized over rapid democratization. Academic limitation: The paper has not situated ASCN within the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state , which is highly characteristic of Southeast Asia. Response : In the revised article, I aim to acknowledge the broader debate between liberal governance and the developmental state by directly acknowledging that the ASCN can pose a threat towards a balanced approach taken by these sub-unit variables. In Paragraph 2, Section 1, the revisions focused to acknowledge that the ASCN is a manifestation of ASEAN’s approach of prioritizing stability and development within its policies. The revised paragraph: “The ASCN started with 26 pilot cities across the ten ASEAN member states. As seen in Figure 1 below, these cities significantly differ based on the population, political systems, and current state of development. Nevertheless, the ASCN has emphasized that through the network, normative guidelines will act as the foundation for the member cities’ smart city development. 3, 4 Perceiving the importance of city-level and scalable solutions, the ASCN was established at the 32 nd ASEAN Summit 2018 and determined 26 Pilot cities, which reflects consistency towards ASEAN’s regional institutionalism that places a heavy emphasis on stability and development. As of 2024, this list has increased to 31 cities, including Sihanoukville City, Sumedang, Rayong, Khon Kaen, and Chiang Mai.” Meanwhile, in the another paragraph (Paragraph 5, section 1), the revisions focused to acknowledge two things: 1) acknowledge that there are cases of illiberal, yet effective smart cities, which should open the case that there are other issues that can be considered within the case presented in this policy brief; 2) to balance between liberal governance and developmental state, ASCN in this case is criticized to potentially declining civic and social concerns. The revised paragraph: “This policy brief identifies two issues that arise from the ASCN. They include the negligence of human rights and imposing a ‘developing’ model from financing stakeholders. The ASCN is geared to establish ‘smart cities’ in Southeast Asia. However, this is a region consisting of states with significant disparities. The diverse social, economic, and political landscapes have already exacerbated human rights protection due to authoritarian and semi-authoritarian rules aiming to maintain their regime legitimacy through greater exertion of power. Introducing information and communication technologies in the ASCN member cities risks increased surveillance and control in the region’s less democratic settings. As past studies have argued, smart cities do not correlate directly to sustainability, 6 , 7 and the ASCN and the developed city master plans of the member cities are ambiguous in showing how the most disadvantaged would benefit through greater inclusivity from smart cities. 8– 11 Therefore, it could represent what a study mentioned as evolving social practices restricting rights. 12 This study acknowledges that there are cases of illiberal, yet effective smart cities. However, looking at civic and social concerns, these practices should be carefully approached through the ASCN to ensure that developments in civic and social sustainability does not decline, and can balance between liberal governance and the developmental state.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.1.2 : Lack of clarity on the concept of “human rights” in the ASEAN context; The author uses human rights as an almost universal category, without distinguishing between: civil–political rights & economic–social–cultural rights; In ASEAN, many governments view access to public services, infrastructure, and employment as forms of human rights implementation, sometimes more important than political rights; The lack of differentiation makes the argument overly generalized. Response : In paragraph 5, section 1, I explain that the human rights concern here relates to the exertion of power by authoritiarian/ semi-authoritarian stakeholders in the Southeast Asian region. Fully acknowledging that the human rights conception differs between ASEAN and the other parts of the globe, I make it clear what the human rights concerns are for this policy brief: “Introducing information and communication technologies in the ASCN member cities risks increased surveillance and control in the region’s less democratic settings.” Furthermore, it is outsides the scope of this study to delve deep on the differences between ASEAN and the universal conception of human rights from a civil and economic perspective, as this opens up a whole different discussion on the suitability of ASEAN’s defined human rights conceptions to that of the West. Reviewer 2, Comment 2.2.1 . Complete reliance on secondary data; The paper uses secondary data from 2018–2024, but: no policy interviews, no urban citizen surveys, no specific case studies of ASCN cities. This results in: assessments of surveillance and privacy violations that are structurally speculative; lack of direct evidence from specific ASCN projects. This is a serious limitation for a policy brief, which requires practical evidence to support recommendations. Response : I disagree with this suggestion. First, there is no issue with relying on secondary data, whether it be original research articles or policy briefs. In the context of policy brief, the angle taken for this study is one that argues the points based on normative and literature assessment angels, which does help policymakers look at the issue from diverse angles. In the past, this method is also used in multiple published policy briefs (see: https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/aseans-climate-change-mitigation-and-adaptation-measures-abandoni/ ; https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/the-politics-of-environmental-policy-haze-pollution-asean-and-the/ ). To emphasize this, I have revised the first sentence of Paragraph 5, section 1: “This policy brief identifies two issues that arise from the ASCN, based on a normative and literature assessment of the direction of the initiative.” Secondly, I disagree that as a result of this approach, the arguments are speculative. The first example of this potential issue has been raised in the Paragraph 6, section 1 taking in the case of Cambodia’s Phnom Penh: “Observing the case of Phnom Penh’s forced privatized lands that disadvantaged people with low incomes, 11 a “top-down” approach thus risks the livelihood of ASEAN citizens 8 ”. In addition to this, the specific cases that uses the study case of ASCN is on the second recommendation, that recommends ASEAN member states to provide essential public services. In Paragraph 6, Section 2, it is argued the cities that reflect this: “The problem identified with the ASCN’s current model is the acceleration of development under the financing stakeholder’s model. In the past, many of ASEAN’s external partners have partnered with the ASCN pilot cities. 40 Japan has been an active nation, aiming to adopt Japanese models of sustainability and smart city infrastructure through its Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which has increased its presence in Siem Reap, Phnom Penh, and Yangon City. 10, 11 China’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI) has also financed many of Southeast Asia’s regional strategic infrastructures. 41 Some have been under the framework of the BRI, while others have been through partnerships with China’s private and public industries. Huawei, for example, was reported to contribute to Thailand’s digital economy and technological updates. 8, 42 The problem with this model is that the intention of constructing this smart city leads Southeast Asian states to be affected by the national interests of the foreign states, aiming to impose their development model on the ASCN members. 43, 44 Consequently, it will be difficult for recipient cities of the financing to cater to the needs of their vulnerable groups, as attention would be diverted to accelerating the progress of the development in alignment with the interests of the financing stakeholder.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.2.2: Mechanical comparison of Democracy Index and HDI Placing Democracy Index and HDI side by side illustrates ASEAN’s diversity, but: the paper does not prove a direct relationship between these rankings and ASCN’s effectiveness; it does not analyze changes over time (before–after joining ASCN). The indices are used more as illustrations of viewpoints rather than causal analytical tools. Response : The two tables used (Democracy Index and HDI) are utilized to support the arguments made that act as background context in understand the specifics of the recommendations. Table 1 focuses on Southeast Asia’s Democracy Index that solidifies the claim of the lack of democracy within the Southeast Asian state’s social and political landscapes. Table 2 shows the disparity of human development among Southeast Asian states. The keyword here is ‘DISPARITY,’ allowing readers to understand the unique challenges of the Southeast Asian region, and steer clear from making the assumption that all Southeast Asian states are the same. Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.1. Linear argument “smart city → surveillance → democratic decline” The author constructs a linear chain of reasoning: Technology → surveillance → control → rights violations. However, this approach: ignores the role of institutional design;, does not analyze the potential for technology to be used for transparency, good governance, or improved service access. This makes the paper lean more toward cautionary discourse than multidimensional analysis. Response : In the revised paragraph 1, section 2, I make it clear that there is the presence of institutional designs that have the capacity to counter the significance of the issue. Nevertheless, it is also important to acknowledge that the fears expressed with the arguments are based on the literature assessment, in which scholars in the past have pointed towards his possibility and fear scenarios. Furthermore, this policy brief is concerned with the human rights violations that could occur from the ASCN, rather than providing a general overview over the pros and cons of the initiative. Delving into the benefits, therefore, is outside the scope of this article. Neverthleless, I acknowledge this in the second paragraph of section 2: “This policy brief acknowledges that smart city development is geared toward economic progress despite the civic and social elements emphasized in the ASCN.” The revised paragraph: “This section argues that to complement the deficiencies of the ASCN’s smart city conception, two recommendations can be adopted. The first recommendation is to acknowledge the vulnerability of the underprivileged, provide personal security, and promote social inclusion for governing smart cities. As seen in Table 1 below, a prominent problem with Southeast Asian states is the lack of democracy within their social and political landscapes. Consequently, when the ASCN echoed the importance of smart cities, there were fears that this would further derail democratic progress in the region. Studies in the past have shown how smart-city developments risk more substantial possibilities of violating privacy rights as high-tech companies have a stronger voice and role in the planning and financing of smart-city-related projects. 13– 16 Half of the Southeast Asian states are authoritarian or semi-authoritarian states. Consequently, there is an intense fear of abuse of power and increased surveillance capacities that are feared would be the consequences of smart city conceptions, albeit, the presence of institutional designs that help to counter the intensity. 7, 17 ” Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.2 : Incomplete assessment of local governments’ active role ASCN is described as a top-down imposed network, but in reality: many ASCN projects are proposed by city governments; the level of technology adoption varies greatly across cities. Treating ASCN as a homogeneous structure reduces the accuracy of the argument. Response : I have revised the words used in paragraph 6, section 1. The ‘top-down’ terminology used in the article does not reflect the points used for this policy brief. Rather, it is a quotation of how de Jong in 2023 described the ASCN, which reflects a hierarchical system that does not allow ASEAN member states to adapt towards a regionalized system. The revised paragraph: “A second concern identified in this policy brief is the imposing development models by external actors. The ASCN collaborates and links ASCN members’ projects with possible financing from vast stakeholders. The problem with this is that the ASCN eventually aims to achieve accelerated growth for profit, which includes broader privatization processes along the way. Observing the case of Phnom Penh’s forced privatized lands that disadvantaged people with low incomes, 11 a “top-down” (terminology introduced by de Jong in 2023) approach thus risks the livelihood of ASEAN citizens. 8 ” Reviewer 2, comment 2.3.3 : Critique of China and Japan’s role is overly politicized The paper warns of major powers (BRI, JICA, Huawei) imposing development models. However: it does not compare loan conditions or policy constraints among partners; it does not analyze ASEAN countries’ capacity to negotiate and choose strategies. This makes the argument appear more like geopolitical suspicion than evidence-based development assessment. Response : The reference towards China and Japan’s role here is to simply acknowledge that the systems imposed differs to that of ASEAN member states. Therefore, there is a risk of these imposed systems negatively affecting ASCN mechanisms, which has been the case with Japan and China’s development models argued in several studies in the past (see the citations). Nevertheless, I have revised the paragraph to explain that ASEAN member states do have the capacity to negotiate conditions, and therefore, has the ability to partially counter such concerns. The revised paragraph (Paragraph 6, section 1): “The problem identified with the ASCN’s current model is the acceleration of development under the financing stakeholder’s model. In the past, many of ASEAN’s external partners have partnered with the ASCN pilot cities. 40 Japan has been an active nation, aiming to adopt Japanese models of sustainability and smart city infrastructure through its Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), which has increased its presence in Siem Reap, Phnom Penh, and Yangon City. 10, 11 China’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI) has also financed many of Southeast Asia’s regional strategic infrastructures. 41 Some have been under the framework of the BRI, while others have been through partnerships with China’s private and public industries. Huawei, for example, was reported to contribute to Thailand’s digital economy and technological updates. 8, 42 The problem with this model is that the intention of constructing this smart city leads Southeast Asian states to be affected by the national interests of the foreign states, aiming to impose their development model on the ASCN members. 43, 44 Consequently, it will be difficult for recipient cities of the financing to cater to the needs of their vulnerable groups, as attention would be diverted to accelerating the progress of the development in alignment with the interests of the financing stakeholder. Nevertheless, this problem is somewhat countered by the ASEAN member state’s capacity negotiate conditions, which could partially counter these concerns.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.4.1: Human rights recommendation: well-intentioned but impractical Calling for human rights integration into smart city governance is reasonable. However: the paper does not specify concrete institutional mechanisms; it does not clarify who monitors, who implements, and who is accountable. In ASEAN – where no enforcement mechanism exists – this recommendation is more symbolic than substantive. Response : I agree that ASEAN does not have any enforcement mechanisms. Therefore, rather than specifying the details on how this recommendation can be made, I opt to make a slight ‘vagueness’ and choose to simply reference the ASCN as the relevant mechanism that is able to clarify and acknowledge vulnerabilities related to human rights in the context of smart cities. This would allow enough room for ASEAN to determine the best way of mentioning this, without risking violating the ASEAN Way. The explanation in the manuscript is slightly revised in paragraph 2, section 2: “Considering the vulnerability of the underprivileged in larger cities of Southeast Asia, it is essential to consider how past studies have concluded the risks of smart city developments to leave the poor and unemployed in isolation. 19, 20 This policy brief acknowledges that smart city development is geared toward economic progress despite the civic and social elements emphasized in the ASCN. The problem with this is the strong possibility of social inclusion and participation of the people in governance being further hampered, as shown in the conclusions of past studies on this subject. 21– 25 Therefore, this destination to a ‘smart city’ status must be made carefully by the ASCN to ensure that, in the process, local governments do not impede upon the fundamental human rights of its citizens in the name of development.” Reviewer 2, comment 2.4.2 : ASEAN intra-regional support recommendation: idealized view of Singapore’s role The author suggests Singapore and high-HDI countries support others. However: ASEAN is not the EU, it has no common budget; Singapore has no legal obligation to support other countries; national interests may conflict with the role of “regional donor.” This recommendation lacks assessment of political and economic incentives. Response : I agree with this. Therefore, as the last paragraph of section 2 explains: “Therefore, the question would be whether Singapore would be openly willing to assist all of its ASEAN counterparts in establishing a balance between smart city status and sustainable development.” This shows that this policy brief acknowledges that Singapore has the strongest capacity to provide assistances, however, there is no mechanism within ASEAN that is able to enforce this to Singapore. Ultimately, the decision to provide the assistances would solely lie on the hands of the Singapore Government, and is outside the scope of this study to argue how best to approach this. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests. reply Respond Report a concern Hiep TX. Peer Review Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184179.r434955) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v1#referee-response-434955 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Vainio T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 29 Dec 2025 | for Version 1 Teija Vainio , Tampere University, Kanslerinrinne, Tampere, Finland 0 Views copyright © 2026 Vainio T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The policy brief analyses smart city development in Southeast Asian cities and proposes three policy recommendations based on secondary data from the ASEAN Smart Cities Network. Overall, the submission demonstrates a clear structure, meets the criteria for a Policy Brief for F1000Research, and contributes to the discourse on smart city development in Southeast Asian cities. The primary recommendation concerns how sustainability is described. While the abstract emphasises human rights and public service delivery, subsequent sections address sustainability objectives and models at a general level. The author should clarify and consistently define the main focus throughout the submission, specifying whether it centres on sustainability aspects such as environmental or economic sustainability, or on human rights and public service delivery within smart city development. If social sustainability is the intended focus, it should be explicitly defined. Does the paper provide a comprehensive overview of the policy and the context of its implementation in a way which is accessible to a general reader? Yes Is the discussion on the implications clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Are the recommendations made clear, balanced, and justified on the basis of the presented arguments? Partly Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise smart city development I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 14 Jan 2026 bama andika putra, School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK Reviewer 1: The primary recommendation concerns how sustainability is described. While the abstract emphasises human rights and public service delivery, subsequent sections address sustainability objectives and models at a general level. The author should clarify and consistently define the main focus throughout the submission, specifying whether it centres on sustainability aspects such as environmental or economic sustainability, or on human rights and public service delivery within smart city development. If social sustainability is the intended focus, it should be explicitly defined Response: I agree that the terminology of sustainability needed to be clarified in the introduction section. In the revised paragraph (paragraph 1, section 1), I clarified that elements of sustainability in this case is civic and social. Meanwhile, the third paragraph in section 1 clarifies that civic and social in this case includes “…social cohesion, culture and heritage, tourism, public and municipal services, and governance.” The revised paragraph: “The ASCN is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) solution towards urbanization and city-based challenges. In 2018, Singapore led the initiative to establish the ASCN, perceiving that a ‘smart city’ conception of Southeast Asian states would assist Southeast Asian nations in countering urbanization-perpetuated challenges and the lack of development in larger ASEAN-located cities. 1 As Ludher argues, “Most of ASEAN’s growth has been and will continue to be driven by urban centers, with more people expected to urbanize by 2030”. 2 This policy brief perceives that throughout the process, the ASCN lacks proper consideration towards human rights and elements of sustainability (civic and social dimensions) in its plan to accelerate the growth of its member cities.” View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests. reply Respond Report a concern Vainio T. Peer Review Report For: Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed Civic and Social Concerns [version 3; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations, 1 not approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :733 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.184179.r432949) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v1#referee-response-432949 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network:...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Putra BA'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733", templates : { twitter : "Human Rights and the ASEAN Smart Cities Network: Covering Unaddressed.... Putra BA, published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/14-733/v3" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/167098/197288") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "197288"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "434958": 0, "434959": 0, "434956": 0, "434954": 0, "434955": 15, "434952": 0, "434953": 0, "434965": 0, "434963": 0, "434961": 0, "467239": 0, "467238": 0, "467237": 0, "467236": 0, "467245": 0, "467244": 5, "467243": 0, "467242": 0, "467241": 0, "467240": 0, "432950": 0, "432951": 0, "432948": 0, "432949": 10, "432947": 0, "432956": 0, "432954": 0, "432955": 0, "432952": 0, "432953": 0, "436830": 0, "436831": 0, "436838": 0, "436839": 0, "436836": 0, "436837": 0, "436834": 0, "436835": 0, "436832": 0, "436833": 0, "449130": 0, "449131": 0, "458903": 0, "458902": 0, "458901": 0, "458900": 0, "458899": 0, "458898": 0, "458907": 0, "458906": 0, "458905": 0, "458904": 0, "403886": 0, "403887": 0, "403884": 0, "403882": 0, "403883": 0, "403881": 0, "403894": 0, "403890": 0, "403888": 0, "403889": 0, "408263": 0, "408270": 0, "408271": 0, "408268": 0, "408269": 0, "408266": 0, "408267": 0, "408264": 0, "408265": 0, "461527": 0, "443350": 0, "443351": 0, "443349": 0, "408272": 0, "456158": 0, "461535": 0, "443358": 0, "456159": 0, "461534": 17, "456156": 0, "461533": 0, "443356": 0, "466652": 4, "456157": 0, "461532": 0, "443357": 0, "466651": 0, "461531": 0, "443354": 0, "466650": 0, "461530": 0, "443355": 0, "461529": 0, "443352": 0, "461528": 0, "443353": 0, "456164": 0, "456165": 0, "456162": 0, "456163": 0, "456160": 0, "456161": 0, "461536": 0, "453615": 0, "453622": 0, "453623": 0, "453620": 0, "453621": 0, "453618": 0, "453619": 0, "453616": 0, "453617": 0, "453624": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "e2ef06e1-10e6-423c-ab19-9ba0ce72bb57"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });