Looking Beyond Cities: Smart Villages Spearheading a Sustainable Transition Across ASEAN

We are no strangers to smart cities, with major global metropolises adopting the label. Essentially, smart cities increasingly use ICT to improve the quality of life of their urban communities (Albino et al., 2015). In Southeast Asia, ASEAN established a transnational initiative through the Smart Cities Network (ASCN), comprising 34 cities. Meanwhile, global urbanization continues to rise, with 57.25% of the world’s population now residing in urban areas—a figure that reflects the shift in GDP and employment from agriculture to industry and services (UN Population Division, 2025; Tacoli et al., 2015). However, while cities have dominated the narrative, the future of sustainable development may depend just as much on how we extend these innovations to smaller and rural areas, such as villages.

The concept of smart villages has long been overlooked, as much of the development discourse remains fixated on city-centric innovation. This is ironic, considering that many vital resources, such as food, water, and labor, are extracted from rural areas and absorbed into urban systems as economic commodities (Elbersen, 2005). In this light, it is not an exaggeration to say that smart cities cannot thrive without smart villages. Although they share the term “smart,” the definitions differ. While smart cities prioritize ICT infrastructure, smart villages focus on improving residents’ quality of life based on local needs (Susilowati et al., 2024). In this context, “smart” is best understood through the prism of people’s actions rather than technological transformation alone (Komorowski, 2022). For instance, Kawa Village, a fishing village in Indonesia’s Maluku Islands, successfully adopted solar-powered ice storage to preserve catches with support from UNDP and the German Corporation for International Cooperation (GIZ) (UNDP, 2024). This initiative not only provides economic benefits but also reduces carbon emissions and empowers local fishermen with greater control over their supply chains. In short, ICT and digital technologies are important, but they should be seen as tools, not goals.

Smart villages aim to redistribute opportunities for economic activity, employment, and development that have long been concentrated in cities. In doing so, they reposition the “optimum” distribution of people between cities and villages (Heap & Hirmer, 2020). This represents a shift from a development model that concentrates resources in major urban hubs toward one that equalizes opportunities across rural and smaller areas. Beyond serving as a framework for rural sustainability, smart villages also improve quality of life and provide younger generations with positive reasons to stay rather than migrate to large cities (Holmes et al., 2015). Retaining rural youth is critical not only for balancing demographic shifts but also for sustaining local knowledge systems that underpin food production and environmental stewardship.

Villages, particularly those in agrarian and coastal regions, are already on the frontlines of climate impacts such as floods, landslides, and fires. This proximity fosters environmental awareness, whether shaped by lived experience, ecological concern, or aspirations for sustainable development (Komorowski, 2022). In this context, smart villages can play a pivotal role in advancing a just and sustainable transition across ASEAN. Highlighting their focus on improving quality of life with the assistance of ICT, it becomes clear that a green future is impossible without transforming rural systems to be both resilient and equitable. Local communities, farmers, fishermen, and indigenous groups, are key actors in driving grassroots sustainable transitions. This reflects a bottom-up development model, in which communities serve as initiators and motivators for other local stakeholders (Nikkhah & Redzuan, 2009). However, these initiatives depend on fundamental prerequisites such as basic infrastructure, public services, horizontally and vertically linked institutions, and the mobilization of local resources. Moreover, equity must remain central to ensure that vulnerable and minority groups have equal access to technology, training, and decision-making power, preventing the deepening of existing inequalities.

Looking beyond cities is not merely an option but a necessity. Recognizing their transformative potential, ASEAN should elevate smart villages as a development priority. One way forward is to expand the ASEAN Smart Cities Network into an ASEAN Smart Regions Network, emphasizing that “smart” development must extend beyond urban centers. Another priority should be facilitating cross-border knowledge sharing on rural innovation and development. South Korea, with its experience in rural modernization through the Saemaul Undong (New Village Movement), offers a valuable example. Its foundational principles, combined with advancements in ICT, could help catalyze ASEAN’s smart village strategies. By strengthening such partnerships, ASEAN can ensure that rural communities are not left behind but instead become vital drivers of an inclusive, innovative, and climate-resilient future.

References

Albino, V., Berardi, U., & Dangelico, R. M. (2015). Smart cities: Definitions, dimensions, performance, and initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(1), 3–21. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10630732.2014.942092.

ASEAN. (2024). ASCN Monitoring and Evaluation Report 2024.

Harrison, J., & Heley, J. (2015). Governing beyond the metropolis: Placing the rural in city-region development. Urban Studies, 52(6), 1113–1133. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26146039.

Heap, B., & Hirmer, S. (2020). Smart Villages. Horizons: Journal of International Relations and Sustainable Development, 15, 290–305. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48573654.

Holmes, J., Jones, B., Heap, B. (2015). Smart villages. Science, 350(6259), 359. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad6521.

Komorowski, L. (2022). Smart Initiatives in a Suburban Community: An Example From the Holy Cross Mountains in Poland. Mountain Research and Development, 42(1), D1–D9. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48664425.

Nikkhah HA., & Redzuan, M. (2009). Participation as a medium of empowerment in community development. European Journal of Social Sciences, 11(1), 170–176.

Susilowati, A. P. E., Rachmawati, R., & Rijanta, R. (2024). Analysis of Smart Village Development in Supporting Smart City in Indonesia: A Systematic Review. Forum Geografi. 38(3), 358–378.

Tacoli, C., McGranahan, G., & Satterthwaite, D. (2015). Urbanisation, rural–urban migration and urban poverty. International Institute for Environment and Development. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep01308.

UNDP. (2024, October 15). Launch of the solar ice maker in Kawa village to boost Indonesian small-scale fisheries. UNDP.

UN Population Division. (2025). “Urban population” [dataset]