Implementing a Culture-Based Smart City in Bali: The Potential and Implications of a Social Smart City
Article information
Abstract
This study examines the practical viability of a culture-based Social Smart City by analyzing Bali’s smart city strategy, which integrates technological innovation with the island’s indigenous philosophy, Tri Hita Karana. The research aims to identify how cultural values, community-based governance, and sustainability-oriented policies shape an alternative smart city model distinct from conventional technology-driven approaches. A qualitative case study was conducted using government policy documents, statistical data, academic literature, and recent field-based reports. Comparative analysis was used to assess Bali’s governance systems—electronic government (SPBE), public Wi-Fi expansion, Single Sign-On (SSO) platforms, creative economy programs, and environmental initiatives—within the Social Smart City framework. Findings reveal that Bali’s model operationalizes cultural principles through institutionalized governance, participatory mechanisms, and creative-economy integration. SPBE and SSO enhance administrative transparency and citizen participation, while public Wi-Fi and digital platforms improve service accessibility. Tri Hita Karana-based policies strengthen alignment between cultural identity, environmental stewardship, and urban innovation. However, the model faces structural challenges, including digital literacy gaps, uneven infrastructure distribution, cybersecurity weaknesses, policy inconsistency, and limited technological capacity. Bali presents an emerging Social Smart City model that demonstrates the importance of embedding cultural identity, community participation, and ecological values into smart city planning. Although still in an experimental phase, the model offers transferable insights for urban policy, international development cooperation, and culturally adaptive smart city strategies in regions such as Korea. Strengthening data-driven evaluation, digital literacy, and multi-stakeholder governance will be essential for ensuring long-term sustainability and broader applicability.
Introduction
Smart cities have emerged as a key strategy for urban development in the 21st century, leveraging information and communication technologies (ICT) to enhance operational efficiency and optimize data-driven public services worldwide (Lee, 2024). However, early technology-centric smart city models have increasingly revealed their limitations, as issues such as digital divides, insufficient civic participation, and governance systems dominated by technological determinism have been identified as threats to long-term sustainability (Lee, 2023; Nam, 2022). Consequently, recent discussions on smart cities have shifted toward a “people-centered” approach that emphasizes social inclusion, cultural values, and the overall quality of urban life (Lee, 2022; Choi, 2025).
This paradigm shift has materialized in the concept of the social smart city, which highlights the realization of social value through technology, community-based urban management, and the harmonization of tradition and modernity (Alizadeh & Sharifi, 2023). More recently, the discourse has evolved further into the notion of the culture-based smart city, a model that incorporates local culture and community identity as central pillars of urban strategy. This approach reframes cultural assets, traditional knowledge, and community-based heritage as core urban resources, while employing digital technologies as tools for both cultural preservation and creative economic development (Angelidou & Stylianidis, 2020; UNESCO, 2021).
Within this context, the Indonesian island of Bali has drawn international attention as an experimental site for culture-based smart city development. As the foremost tourist destination of the world’s largest archipelagic nation—comprising approximately 17,500 islands—Bali has cultivated a distinctive cultural–economic model grounded in its Hindu heritage and Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK). Through the Bali Smart Island initiative, the provincial government has expanded ICT infrastructure such as the Electronic-Based Government System (Sistem Pemerintahan Berbasis Elektronik, SPBE) and public Wi-Fi networks, while simultaneously positioning cultural identity and heritage preservation as core policy values (Chong & Lai, 2018; Sanjaya & Darma, 2023). Anchored in the “One Island, One Management” principle, the initiative includes concrete programs such as circular waste management led at the level of Desa Adat (traditional villages), the “Love Bali” application promoting tourist participation in heritage protection, and the Bali Digital Festival designed to activate digital communities (Sanjaya & Darma, 2023; UNESCO, 2021).
Although Bali’s smart city strategy remains in its early stages regarding institutionalization and practical implementation, its integrated approach—combining smart tourism, eco-friendly mobility, and carbon-neutral policies—has been recognized as an experimental model that simultaneously fosters urban competitiveness and sustainable development (Sanjaya & Darma, 2023; Saputra, 2024). Importantly, Bali’s initiatives align closely with Indonesia’s national agenda to address regional tourism imbalances, build sustainable tourism ecosystems, and promote balanced development through the integration of traditional knowledge and advanced technologies—particularly under the expansion strategy of the “Five Super-Priority Tourism Destinations” (Destinasi Super Prioritas, DSP).
Therefore, this study aims to conduct an in-depth analysis of Bali’s culture-based smart city implementation—focusing on smart tourism, environmentally sustainable transport, and carbon-neutral initiatives—and to derive implications for the scalability of the Bali model within Indonesia’s DSP regions, as well as for future cooperation between Indonesia and South Korea. Specifically, this research explores the applicability of a culture-integrated smart city model—grounded in traditional knowledge, community participation, and culture-based creative economies—to tourism-oriented islands, culturally diverse archipelagic regions, Pacific Island nations, and other DSP candidate areas in Indonesia (e.g., Labuan Bajo, Borobudur, Mandalika). By doing so, it seeks to offer strategic insights for South Korea’s urban diplomacy and smart city internationalization efforts.
Theoretical Background: Concept and Characteristics of the Social Smart City
1. Paradigm Shift in Smart City Development
Smart cities were initially introduced as a strategy to address urban challenges and optimize urban management through the application of information and communication technologies (ICT). Early approaches were predominantly technology-driven, focusing on enhancing the efficiency of physical infrastructure such as energy, transportation, the environment, and public safety (Lee, 2024). Indeed, most global smart city projects in the 2010s concentrated on infrastructure automation and large-scale data analytics. While such systems improved operational efficiency, they were limited in advancing social values such as quality of life and social inclusion (Lee, 2024; Kim et al., 2018).
Efforts to overcome these limitations have shifted the discourse from technology-centered to human-centered frameworks, and from efficiency-oriented to value-oriented models (Nam & Park, 2022). This paradigm reframes the smart city not as a bundle of technologies but as a medium for enhancing human life and community well-being, placing emphasis on the aspiration to realize “a better life” through technology (Greco & Bencardino, 2014). The perspective that highlights cultural sustainability, social inclusion, and community-based governance as core components of smart cities aligns with contemporary urban planning approaches that conceptualize cities as living, dynamic organisms.
The international community has strongly endorsed this direction. Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 11 emphasizes safety, resilience, and sustainability in cities, underscoring that smart cities must integrate social and cultural dimensions into technological systems (United Nations, 2015). OECD (2020) similarly stresses the inclusion of citizen participation, cultural diversity, policy transparency, and inclusive growth strategies as essential elements of smart city development, recommending the creation of systematic indicators for evaluating social sustainability. The World Bank (2023) also identifies sociocultural inclusion as a core evaluation metric alongside physical infrastructure performance. These converging policy directions illustrate a global movement toward smart cities as integrated urban strategies that combine technology, society, and culture.
In sum, the essence of the smart city lies in its capacity to enrich human life through technology. Within this context, the concept of the Social Smart City offers a direction for inclusive and sustainable urban transformation that moves beyond technological innovation alone. It highlights the need for future urban policies to integrate community identity, cultural heritage, and civic empowerment alongside technological solutions.
2. Definition and Concept of the Social Smart City
As the notion of smart cities continues to diversify beyond technological deployment, the Social Smart City has emerged as a development model that places non-material values—such as quality of life, social inclusion, and community resilience—at its core (KOTRA, 2023). In this model, technology is viewed not as an end in itself but as a means to enhance human-centered urban systems and strengthen social cohesion.
According to the 2023 Smart City Overseas Expansion Strategy Report published by the Korea Trade–Investment Promotion Agency (KOTRA), a Social Smart City is defined as “a city model that enhances quality of life, embraces socially vulnerable populations, and incorporates civic participation into urban operations” (KOTRA, 2023). This model emphasizes the image of a “warm city” in which diverse age groups and cultural communities coexist harmoniously.
Academic discussions also draw clear distinctions between the Social Smart City and traditional technology-centered models. Ahvenniemi and Huovila (2017) highlight that more than 30% of commonly used smart city evaluation metrics are directly associated with non-technological values such as social inclusion, civic engagement, and cultural diversity. Caputo et al. (2023) further argue that the core of the Social Smart City lies in participatory governance, the preservation of local identity, and culture-based urban strategies. Such an approach conceptualizes smart cities not merely as improvements to physical infrastructure but as transformative systems that encompass broader sociocultural structures (Caputo et al., 2023).
In practice, key policy mechanisms include participatory budgeting, community design, and civic engagement through public data platforms. Accessibility for vulnerable populations and the preservation of cultural heritage also emerge as central policy domains (Kim et al., 2025; Kim & Lee, 2016; Ministry of the Interior and Safety, 2023). Ultimately, the Social Smart City is an urban strategy that leverages technology to foster social solidarity and cultural sustainability, thereby expanding the discourse on smart cities into a more community-oriented and human-centered development paradigm (Alizadeh & Sharifi, 2023).
3. Comparison of Smart City Types
Smart cities can be categorized into various models depending on the policy priorities and social objectives of each city. KOTRA (2024) systematizes these into four representative types. Table 1 conceptually illustrates this classification.
Classification of Four Smart City Types (KOTRA, 2024)
Within this framework, the Social Smart City model positions technology as a means rather than an end. Its ultimate goal lies in enhancing citizens’ quality of life and ensuring the long-term sustainability of the community, with technology functioning as a tool to support these objectives. Civic participation extends beyond passive consultation and instead involves active engagement in policy design and implementation. Moreover, intangible assets—such as culture, the arts, and traditional knowledge—are integrated as both drivers of economic development and foundational elements of urban identity, thereby strengthening policy legitimacy and long-term sustainability (KOTRA, 2024).
Ultimately, the Social Smart City expands the conceptual boundaries of existing technology-centered smart city discourse by actively incorporating the dimensions of social solidarity, public interest, and cultural sensitivity. The case of Bali examined in this study serves as a practical example that demonstrates how such theoretical transitions are being operationalized within actual policy contexts.
Case Analysis: Bali’s Culture-Based Smart City Strategy
1. Bali Smart Island: An Integrated Approach Combining Tradition and Technology
Bali has emerged as a key region in Indonesia’s national digital transformation agenda and creative economy development strategy, advancing its smart city initiatives while preserving traditional culture and community-centered values. The Bali Smart Island strategy consists of the following core components:
1. Implementation of Electronic-Based Government Systems (SPBE): Based on Presidential Regulation No. 95 (2018), the provincial government has institutionalized the Electronic-Based Government System to enhance administrative efficiency. As of 2021, Bali recorded an SPBE index score of 3.68, indicating a strong level of system maturity and performance (Sanjaya & Darma, 2023).
2. Expansion of Public Wi-Fi Infrastructure: To strengthen digital infrastructure and support local communities, the Bali provincial government has actively expanded public Wi-Fi installations (Pramana, 2023). Since the initiative began in 2018, a total of 2,307 free access points had been installed across the island by 2023, covering all nine regencies and reaching every village. The provincial government also allocates annual Special Financial Assistance (Bantuan Keuangan Khusus, BBK) to municipal and regency governments for system installation and maintenance (Pramana, 2023; Radar Bali, 2023).
3. Operation of an Integrated Digital Platform: Bali has developed the Bali Smart Island Single Sign-On (SSO) system, which enables users to access a wide range of public services and applications through a unified authentication portal. Services integrated through the SSO framework include budget planning, administrative service requests, public program proposals, human resource management, educational platforms (e.g., the Bali Melajah portal), tourism information (e.g., Bali Era Baru), healthcare services (including hospital appointments), and disaster information. This system enhances accessibility and convenience for both residents and visitors (Sanjaya & Darma, 2023).
4. Parallel Advancement of Sustainability Strategies: Bali promotes smart city development as part of a broader response to urban congestion, climate change, and sustainable growth. Efforts include environmentally friendly mobility initiatives, the expansion of carbon-neutral accommodations, and long-term strategies for integrating sustainability into urban planning (Institute for Essential Services Reform, 2024; World Tourism Cities Federation & Bali Tourism Office, 2020).
Core Components of the Bali Smart Island Strategy
1.1 Potential and Limitations of a Smart City Model Grounded in Local Philosophy
The Bali Smart Island initiative represents a leading example of culture-based smart city development in Bali Province, Indonesia. It is particularly notable for integrating Tri Hita Karana—a traditional Balinese philosophical framework—into both urban policy and technology-driven strategies. Literally meaning “three harmonious relationships,” Tri Hita Karana has long served as a foundational axis of life within Balinese Hindu tradition. The philosophy defines ideal living conditions as the achievement of material well-being and spiritual, social, and ecological balance through harmonious relations between humans and the divine (Parahyangan), among humans (Pawongan), and between humans and nature (Palemahan) (Pramana, 2023).
Bali Smart Island Strategy Grounded in Local Philosophy
Conceptual Diagram of Tri Hita Karana
Tri Hita Karana extends far beyond a religious doctrine; it is deeply embedded in the operational structures of Balinese communities, principles of land use and spatial organization, environmental resource management, and the broader socioeconomic system of the island. For instance, the traditional Banjar community governance system, the collective irrigation management network known as Subak, and temple-centered spatial arrangements all represent institutionalized manifestations of this philosophy (Sanjaya & Darma, 2023). This cultural value system serves as a normative framework that guides the direction of technology-driven urban development under the Bali Smart Island initiative, ensuring that technological integration does not undermine community solidarity, cultural preservation, or ecological balance. Instead, it provides policy guidelines that align technological advancement with local values and collective well-being.
This philosophical foundation is structurally embedded within each core policy component of the Bali Smart Island strategy. First, the implementation of the Electronic-Based Government System (SPBE) strengthens trust and transparent communication between residents and government agencies— an institutional expression of Pawongan, which emphasizes harmonious relations among people (Sanjaya & Darma, 2023). Likewise, the expansion of public Wi-Fi enhances information accessibility and digital equity, reducing intra-community disparities and supporting inclusive participation. This represents an urbanized form of Pawongan, in which technology facilitates social interaction and cooperative community structures.
The Bali Smart Island Single Sign-On (SSO) integrated platform connects administrative, welfare, cultural, tourism, and other public services through a unified digital gateway (Mai-Melajah, 2021). This system reflects the principle of Parahyangan, which promotes harmony between humans and the divine through order, coherence, and balanced governance—reinterpreted here as a digitally mediated form of integrated public service delivery (Gudang Jurnal Multidisiplin Ilmu, 2023). Furthermore, the promotion of environmentally friendly mobility, carbon-neutral accommodations, and energy transition initiatives reflects the Palemahan principle, which centers on maintaining ecological balance and safeguarding the natural environment (IIETA, 2023).
The Bali Smart Island strategy, therefore, is fundamentally grounded in the Tri Hita Karana philosophy—a core tenet of Balinese Hinduism that emphasizes harmonious relationships between humans and the divine, among humans, and between humans and nature. As such, the strategy can be understood as a culture-based smart city model that organically integrates technology, culture, community governance, ecological sustainability, and economic development (Pitana, 2010; Goca et al., 2024). It represents a practical embodiment of the Social Smart City model, which seeks to reconcile technological efficiency with cultural identity and social inclusion (Anggadini et al., 2023). Moreover, it illustrates how local philosophical traditions can be strategically incorporated into contemporary digital urban planning, offering a distinctive case within the Southeast Asian context (Wardana et al., 2025).
1.2 Strengths of a Smart City Model Grounded in Local Philosophy
The primary strength of this model lies in its simultaneous pursuit of technological efficiency, cultural identity, and social inclusion. Electronic-based government systems, public Wi-Fi expansion, and the SSO-integrated platforms enhance administrative transparency and improve access to information, thereby reinforcing trust and cooperation within the community.
Beyond offering technological convenience, these systems reinterpret traditional values and communal principles in a contemporary context, enabling their practical application in modern urban governance. Furthermore, initiatives such as environmentally friendly mobility, carbon-neutral accommodations, and energy transition policies connect the philosophical principle of human–nature harmony with advanced technological tools, contributing to more sustainable urban development.
Such a philosophy-centered smart city model holds strong potential because it preserves urban identity and coherence while enabling technological innovation to meaningfully enhance the quality of life for the entire community. It encourages cultural pride and active civic participation among residents, strengthening social trust and inclusiveness. As an empirical example of the complementary interaction between traditional values and modern technology, the model presents a valuable benchmark for regions across Southeast Asia and other cultural areas where strong traditional heritage shapes community life.
1.3 Limitations and Challenges of a Philosophy-Centered Smart City Model
Despite its strengths, several limitations and challenges remain. First, gaps may arise between the modern interpretation of traditional philosophy and the concrete implementation of policy. If traditional values are not consistently integrated into urban planning and technological strategies, the model risks being reduced to symbolic rhetoric.
Second, conflicts may occur when local philosophical principles diverge from the interests of external stakeholders or global standards, potentially weakening policy momentum.
Third, persistent issues such as uneven technological infrastructure, disparities in human capital, and concerns over data management and cybersecurity continue to require resolution. Finally, if residents do not hold a sufficient understanding of or consensus around the underlying philosophy, the sustainability and effectiveness of the policy may diminish.
1.4 Recommendations for Improving the Model and Pathways to Successful Replication
To ensure that this model can be effectively benchmarked and replicated in other regions’ smart city strategies, several improvements are necessary.
First, local philosophical principles must be systematically translated into concrete policies, services, and technological standards.
Second, education and participatory mechanisms are needed to support shared understanding and engagement among residents and diverse stakeholders, enabling them to appreciate the meaning and practical relevance of the philosophy.
Third, policy flexibility and openness should be strengthened to facilitate the harmonious integration of global technological standards with local values.
Fourth, to prevent philosophical principles from remaining merely symbolic, rigorous performance indicators and evaluation systems must be established to measure tangible outcomes and provide continual feedback.
In conclusion, the Bali Smart Island strategy reveals both the potential and the limitations of a smart city model grounded in local philosophy. While the model effectively demonstrates a virtuous cycle linking cultural identity, social inclusion, and technological innovation, enhancing its practical impact and sustainability requires multidimensional improvements—including policy specification, expanded participation, and global–local integration strategies. If such conditions are met, a philosophy-centered smart city model can become a new standard for sustainable urban development in culturally diverse regions.
2. Denpasar’s Culture-Based Creative City Strategy and Governance
Denpasar, the capital city of Bali, presents a culture-based creative city model in which traditional Balinese culture, modern technologies, and community-driven creative ecosystems are harmoniously integrated. The city fosters both traditional arts and contemporary creative industries while strengthening its cultural identity and ensuring economic sustainability through civic participation and digital technologies.
2.1 Three Pillars of Denpasar’s Creative City Governance
Denpasar’s creative city governance is structured around three major pillars.
First, a government-led support system for cultural and creative industries has been established. The Denpasar Creative Agency (Badan Kreatif Denpasar), founded in 2017, develops and implements creative city policies based on core values such as youth empowerment, creative communities, incubation, integration, and collaboration. The agency supports creative initiatives and enterprises across diverse fields—including arts, handicrafts, fashion, and digital content—while connecting local small businesses, artists, and startups. Additionally, institutions such as the Bali Creative Industry Center (BCIC), the Digital Innovation Lounge (DiLo), and digital creative hubs like Dharma Negara Alaya operate through partnerships between government and private sectors (British Council, 2019).
Second, Denpasar actively promotes the fusion of culture and technology. Through the Smart City Denpasar mobile application and the city’s official geoportal, the city provides digital cultural services such as online registration of cultural assets and QR-code–based tourism information. Digital infrastructure—including public Wi-Fi, digital parks, cafés, and coworking spaces—has expanded across the city, forming hubs where artists, entrepreneurs, and citizens interact and engage in creative projects. A representative example is the Rumah Sanur Creative Hub, which serves as a collaborative space for communities, artists, and startups while offering programs in design incubation, resource management, and business development. In this context, technology contributes meaningfully to the preservation and dissemination of traditional culture, the growth of creative industries, and the revitalization of community networks (British Council, 2019).
Third, community-led and inclusive governance is a defining feature. Denpasar strengthens cultural identity and stimulates creative economic activities through various cultural events and festivals—such as the Denpasar Festival— where citizens, artists, businesses, and government agencies participate collaboratively (Sudarsana & Parwati, 2018). The local government encourages participation from diverse groups, including socially vulnerable populations, youth, and small entrepreneurs, and supports community-driven projects through public assistance schemes such as Bansos. Digital participation platforms, open public data initiatives, and education and capacity-building programs are also widely implemented (British Council, 2019; Suardana et al., 2016).
2.2 Potential for Transformation into a Smart City Model
These governance practices provide a foundation for Denpasar to evolve beyond a cultural city into a full smart city. In fact, Denpasar was selected as one of Indonesia’s “100 Smart Cities” in 2018 (Fikri et al., 2018) and has since incorporated advanced technologies—such as spatial data analysis (SDA) and machine learning—into public services to enhance administrative efficiency and inclusiveness. Recent studies indicate that Denpasar’s smart city strategy balances technological infrastructure with community engagement, positively influencing quality of life and sustainability (Waciko, 2024). Nonetheless, challenges remain, including shortages in technical expertise, uneven data management capacity, and the need for stronger collaboration among stakeholders. Continuous education and improvements in governance are also emphasized as essential for long-term success (Waciko, 2024).
Denpasar’s case empirically demonstrates that a creative city can evolve into a smart city when technology, culture, and community engagement function synergistically. Academic research has increasingly supported the idea that culture-based creative city models can expand into smart city frameworks (Angelidou et al., 2017).
2.3 Limitations in Advancing Toward a Smart City Model
Despite its promising trajectory, Denpasar’s smart city model faces distinct limitations. To begin with, the shortage of technological expertise and digital skills presents barriers to the adoption and diffusion of advanced technologies. Weaknesses in data governance, including personal data protection and cybersecurity, also remain unresolved. Furthermore, insufficient coordination and cooperation among stakeholders may undermine policy effectiveness and long-term sustainability. Enhancing digital literacy among citizens, ensuring inclusive governance that respects cultural diversity, and strengthening participatory mechanisms remain ongoing challenges.
While the Denpasar model illustrates how the organic integration of technology, culture, and community engagement can drive the evolution of a creative city into a smart city, achieving substantial and sustainable outcomes requires reinforced human and institutional capacities, stronger stakeholder collaboration, and continuous education and governance innovation.
3. Characteristics of a Social Smart City as Demonstrated in the Bali Case
The Bali Smart Island initiative and Denpasar’s culture-based creative city governance illustrate the defining characteristics of the Social Smart City model. By integrating Tri Hita Karana, a distinctive local philosophy, into urban policy and technological innovation, the model simultaneously advances technological efficiency, cultural identity, and social inclusion (Suartha et al., 2024; Nurita & Santika, 2022).
Electronic-based governance systems, public Wi-Fi expansion, and integrated administrative platforms enhance transparency and civic engagement, thereby strengthening trust and cooperation among residents, government institutions, and local communities (Suartha et al., 2024). This demonstrates that technology can serve as a mechanism for reinforcing community cohesion and social trust.
Furthermore, environmentally friendly mobility initiatives, carbon-neutral accommodations, and energy transition policies contribute to sustainable urban development grounded in the local philosophy of human–nature harmony. Denpasar’s creative industry hubs, digital innovation spaces, citizenled festivals, and community-based public programs foster voluntary participation and social inclusion, showcasing how culture and community-based initiatives can reinforce urban innovation. These practices empirically demonstrate that when technology, culture, and community engagement function complementarily, a smart city can evolve beyond a technology-driven urban model into a Social Smart City that effectively enhances social value and quality of life (Suartha et al., 2024).
At the same time, the Bali and Denpasar cases highlight the challenges that Social Smart Cities may confront. Persistent issues—such as shortages in technological expertise, insufficient data management capacity, limited stakeholder coordination, and the need for sustained citizen education—indicate the necessity of continuous improvement. Overcoming these limitations requires the systematic translation of local philosophy into actionable policies, expanded participation, harmonization with global standards, and the development of sophisticated performance evaluation systems.
Overall, Bali’s Social Smart City model demonstrates that when technological innovation, local identity, and community-centered governance are integrated organically, cities can achieve both sustainability and social inclusion. The model provides a promising paradigm for smart city development that can be benchmarked across diverse cultural contexts (Suartha et al., 2024).
Potential of the Bali Model: Practical Features of a Culture-Based Social Smart City
Bali’s smart city strategy has evolved into a culture- and community-centered model that diverges from conventional technology-driven urban planning. The strategy integrates key components required for Social Smart Cities—quality of life, cultural creativity, civic engagement, and environmental sustainability—into practical policies, supported by official statistics, government documents, and local academic research that collectively demonstrate its feasibility.
1. Characteristics of Bali as a Social Smart City Model
The Bali model exhibits strong potential as a Social Smart City across four major dimensions:
(1) institutionalization of cultural centrality,
(2) participatory governance,
(3) integration of the creative economy and cultural tourism, and
(4) convergence of environmental sustainability with smart city strategies.
1.1 Institutionalization of Cultural Centrality
Bali’s smart city policies go beyond adopting new technologies by systematically embedding local philosophy and cultural values into urban planning and infrastructure design (Sanjaya & Darma, 2023). The philosophy of Tri Hita Karana—which emphasizes harmony among the divine, humans, and nature—has been officially adopted as a core value of urban governance and is reflected across long-term development plans, spatial planning, and tourism policies.
The Tri Hita Karana Tower of the Nuanu Creative City, unveiled in 2024, embodies this integration. As a phygital (physical + digital) structure blending artificial intelligence with sustainable architectural technologies, it represents a collaboration between local artists and international architects, showcasing a cultural–technological fusion that defines new spatial expressions in smart city development (Stirworld, 2024).
1.2 Participatory Governance
Participatory governance forms the operational foundation of the Bali model. Cities such as Denpasar incorporate citizen input into policy-making through focus group discussions (FGDs), the Bali Smart Island Single Sign-On (SSO) digital administrative platform, and online public service systems. These mechanisms institutionalize community-centered urban management and contribute to administrative efficiency, transparency, and improved digital accessibility (Denpasar City Government, 2023).
Recent studies and media reports highlight positive assessments of the SSO system. Both residents and civil servants report increased convenience and accessibility, with users able to access a wide range of public services—including civil administration, social welfare, permits, healthcare, and disaster information—through a single account. Satisfaction is particularly high in areas with extensive public Wi-Fi coverage, comprising 1,834 active access points across urban and tourist zones. Integrated access to healthcare appointments, tourism services, and disaster alerts enhances the perceived usefulness of the system, with many interviewees noting reduced time and financial burden due to consolidated administrative workflows (Denpasar City Government, 2023).
However, limitations remain. In rural areas and among elderly or digitally marginalized populations, accessibility and utilization of the SSO system are relatively lower. Insufficient digital literacy, uneven network infrastructure, and incomplete system integration are cited as ongoing challenges. In some cases, fragmented data systems and siloed platforms still require separate logins or additional authentication processes, indicating that full system integration has yet to be achieved (Sanjaya & Darma, 2023).
1.3 Integration of the Creative Economy and Cultural Tourism
Integration of the creative economy and cultural tourism is another major pillar of Bali’s smart city strategy. Bali transforms its abundant cultural assets—traditional arts, crafts, folklore—into key resources for digital content development and tourism innovation.
Digital tourism platforms, VR-based cultural experiences, online craft and art marketplaces, and intellectual-property–driven creative economy policies contribute not only to local economic revitalization but also to expanding social and economic participation among youth and women, preserving cultural heritage, and building a sustainable tourism ecosystem (The Bali Sun, 2024; WIPO, 2024; The Traveler VR, 2023).
1.4 Integration of Environmental Sustainability and Smart City Strategies
The convergence of environmental sustainability with smart city strategies is one of the Bali model’s most distinctive strengths. The province pursues multiple initiatives—electric vehicle infrastructure, smart waste management, carbon-neutral accommodations, and ecological tourism—demonstrating the fusion of technological efficiency with ecological values (IESR, 2024; Sanjaya et al., 2025). These efforts embed sustainability into local communities and the broader tourism industry, positioning Bali as a practical model for socio-ecological transition.
For example, the Bali Net Zero Emission 2045 strategy prioritizes organic agriculture, expansion of clean energy usage, and widespread adoption of electric motorbikes (KBLBB). The policy is implemented through multi-stakeholder collaboration involving local communities, startups, academia, and international organizations, accelerating the island’s transition toward a low-emission economy (Declaration of Bali’s Net Zero Emissions 2045, n.d.).
Additionally, the TPS 3R (Tempat Pengolahan Sampah 3R) program serves as a community-based waste management model grounded in the principles of reduce, reuse, and recycle. TPS 3R functions not merely as a waste collection point but as a multifunctional processing facility that handles sorting, recycling, composting of organic waste, and biogas production. Designed for communities of over 400 households, TPS 3R sites include waste storage areas, composting zones, and buffer spaces and categorize more than five types of waste. The system reduces waste sent to final disposal sites (TPA), mitigates environmental pollution, and creates a foundation for a local circular economy led by the community (TPS3R, n.d.).
In sum, Bali’s culture-based Social Smart City model demonstrates how technological innovation, local philosophy, community governance, creative industries, cultural tourism, and environmental sustainability can be organically integrated. The model offers a new paradigm for urban development in which cities achieve both sustainability and social inclusion through the convergence of technology, culture, and community systems.
2. Limitations: Challenges Facing Bali’s Smart City Strategy
Despite its promising potential, Bali’s smart city strategy faces several structural challenges and limitations.
First, digital literacy and infrastructure gaps remain significant. While Denpasar and major tourist areas benefit from concentrated digital infrastructure, rural and inland regions—as well as elderly and socially vulnerable populations—continue to experience limited access to digital technologies. As of 2023, Indonesia’s rural internet penetration rate stood at 74%, substantially lower than that of urban areas (82.2%). Nationwide, approximately 57 million people—about 20% of the population—still lack internet access (Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia, 2024; Center of Governance & Digitalization, 2024). Digital literacy also displays pronounced generational and socioeconomic disparities, with vulnerable groups such as older adults, persons with disabilities, low-income households, and agricultural workers possessing only 64.5% of the digital competency levels of the general population (Kementerian Komunikasi dan Informatika & Katadata Insight Center, 2023). Reports indicating that many elderly residents in rural Bali use smartphones only for basic call functions further illustrate this divide.
Second, budget constraints, limited technological capacity, and cybersecurity vulnerabilities present structural obstacles. Indonesia’s national infrastructure budget for 2025 was reduced by 73% compared to the previous year (Xinhua, 2025a; PwC Indonesia, 2025a), creating uncertainty for new smart city initiatives. As a result, 21 major infrastructure projects were postponed or cancelled. Persistent challenges also include insufficient digital skills among civil servants and inadequate system integration across administrative institutions. In June 2024, Indonesia’s national data center suffered a large-scale ransomware attack, disrupting 282 government agencies and more than 7,000 digital services (Complete Cyber, 2024; Jacobson, 2024). With only 2% of data properly backed up, the incident exposed severe weaknesses in national data management systems and underscored the urgent need to strengthen cybersecurity capabilities.
Third, institutional and social challenges continue to affect implementation. Inconsistencies in policy enforcement, regulatory disparities across regions, and varying degrees of public acceptance of technological change hinder effective governance. Tensions between the commercialization of the tourism industry and the preservation of traditional culture remain unresolved. In the first half of 2024, Bali welcomed 6.3 million foreign tourists—accounting for roughly 60% of Indonesia’s total. In response, provincial authorities introduced a foreign tourist levy and declared a moratorium on new hotel and villa construction. However, concerns persist regarding the effectiveness of these regulations in balancing cultural preservation with economic growth, and in coordinating policy implementation across stakeholders (Hayat Estate, 2024; Lets Move Indonesia, 2024a).
Finally, empirical assessment of sustainability outcomes remains insufficient. The long-term impacts of Bali’s smart city strategy have yet to be systematically evaluated, and the tourism-dependent economic structure continues to expose the region to external shocks. Scholars emphasize the need for both quantitative and qualitative assessments that address social, spatial, economic, and governance inclusivity (Sanjaya et al., 2024). Recent studies highlight the importance of conflict mediation among stakeholders, inclusive policy design, and balanced approaches to cultural, environmental, and economic sustainability.
3. Evaluation and Implications
As examined above, Bali’s smart city strategy demonstrates that smart cities need not remain assemblages of advanced technologies but can evolve into urban governance models centered on culture, community, and social inclusion. The institutionalization of Tri Hita Karana, participatory governance structures, and the integration of the creative economy with tourism and environmental policies represent localized realizations of the core tenets of the Social Smart City framework—namely, quality-of-life–oriented planning, cultural creativity, and citizen-centered governance (Sanjaya & Darma, 2023; Yasa et al., 2020).
However, the Bali model should not yet be regarded as a fully achieved success case; rather, it remains in a transitional and experimental phase. Persistent challenges include uneven digital infrastructure across regions, limitations in data utilization and system integration, a tourism-dependent economic structure, and varying levels of technological acceptance among residents (IESR, 2024; Baliola, 2024). Thus, Bali’s strategy is more appropriately understood as a “developing experimental model” rather than a “completed blueprint” for smart city success.
Within this context, the Bali case offers several significant implications.
First, smart cities lacking sociocultural foundations are unlikely to achieve long-term sustainability. Prior to technological deployment, in-depth research and design centered on urban identity, community structures, and cultural context are essential. Bali’s experience clearly illustrates the shortcomings of smart city policies that neglect cultural and community-based frameworks (UNESCO, 2012).
Second, decentralized and community-driven strategies are crucial for inclusive and effective urban governance. Genuine policy outcomes and governance improvements arise when local governments and residents—not solely central authorities—act as primary agents. In this regard, Bali’s FGDs and digital administrative platforms demonstrate the effectiveness of citizen-participatory governance (Denpasar City Government, 2023).
Third, ecological, economic, and cultural integration is fundamental to smart city sustainability. When technology, culture, and economic systems operate in isolation, none can be sustained in the long term; an integrated, cross-sectoral approach is indispensable. Bali’s efforts combining the creative economy, tourism, cultural heritage preservation, and environmental policy provide a substantive foundation for sustainability (IESR, 2024).
In conclusion, the Bali model offers an alternative perspective that extends beyond technology-centered smart city discourse. It serves as a meaningful case with practical lessons and potential applicability particularly for developing cities, tourism-centered regions, and areas where cultural preservation is paramount. However, long-term sustainability and broader replication will require ongoing improvements and empirical validation addressing the limitations and challenges highlighted above.
Conclusion and Implications
Bali’s smart city strategy demonstrates the practical potential of a culture-based Social Smart City model that transcends the limitations of conventional technology-centered smart city approaches. This study identifies several key features and implications offered by the Bali case.
First, urban strategies grounded in philosophical values enable a more holistic form of digital transformation. By systematically embedding the local philosophy of Tri Hita Karana into urban policy and technological development, Bali ensures that the adoption of technology operates not merely as a tool for efficiency but as a mechanism for reinforcing community solidarity, ecological balance, and cultural preservation. This value-oriented approach facilitates a virtuous cycle in which digital transformation proceeds while local autonomy and cultural identity are maintained.
Second, the Bali model demonstrates the potential for integrating cultural specificity with universal applicability. Although rooted in local cultural heritage and community traditions, Bali’s approach offers practical insights that can be adapted to broader smart city policies. Participatory governance, culture-based creative economy strategies, and community-centered urban management represent policy tools that can be applied across diverse cultural contexts. In doing so, the Bali model complements global technology standardization discourses and underscores the relevance of context-sensitive urban development strategies.
Third, empirical validation and data-driven policy design are essential for future development. Bali’s strategy remains in an experimental transitional phase, facing persistent challenges such as regional disparities in digital infrastructure, varying levels of technological acceptance, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and limitations in data integration. To enable successful future scalability, comprehensive improvements are needed—including data-driven policy evaluation, enhanced stakeholder coordination, and efforts to bridge digital literacy gaps. The institutionalization of evidence-based performance management systems and policy feedback mechanisms will be vital in improving the model’s sustainability and transferability.
Based on this analysis, several broader implications can be drawn.
First, embedding culture and community within smart city policy design is not optional but essential. The sustainability of technological innovation ultimately depends on community value acceptance, participatory capacity, and cultural continuity.
Second, meaningful outcomes emerge when technological deployment is integrated with value-oriented governance. Bali’s participatory governance demonstrates that the alignment of technology, policy, and civic engagement is a decisive factor in smart city success.
Third, a philosophy-centered model has strong potential for expansion into customized urban policy transfer and international cooperation frameworks, particularly in culturally diverse regions. This offers strategic relevance for global urban diplomacy and development cooperation efforts in countries such as Korea.
In conclusion, Bali’s culture-based Social Smart City strategy presents an alternative urban development model capable of achieving technological efficiency, cultural identity, and community well-being simultaneously. It expands prevailing smart city paradigms and provides new theoretical and policy-oriented entry points. Future comparative studies and empirical evaluations will be essential to assessing the model’s generalizability and informing strategies for international policy transfer and cooperative implementation.