Volume 6 Number 4 December 2013 38 Public Policy for Intelligent eTransport, eMobility and Smarter Cities Roumiana Y. Ilieva 1 Abstract The policy role of the government in the eTransport is streamlined. The significance of the energy efficiency of co-operative transport management systems is outlined. Support to eCall implementation based on 112 is discussed. The importance of Traffic Simulation and Management is argued. Some Public Policy directions for Intelligent Car Awareness Actions are described. The need for Action at European Level is outlined. The great potential of Intelligent Cars and the Problem of their Market Implementation are accentuated. Policy context of the use of ICT for adaptive urban transport management infrastructure and services is discussed. The importance of a broad utilization of ICT in Transport Management and Infrastructure is emphasized. Ontology-based models for Smart Connected Electro-Mobility and scheduling and routing in eTransport are drawn with Protégé. Keywords - intelligent eTransport, eTicket, smart cities, electro-Mobility, traffic simulation I. INTRODUCTION Metropolitan performance management presently depends not only on the city's donation of hard physical infrastructure, but progressively more, on the availability and quality of intellectual knowledge communication and social infrastructure. The last form of investment is significant for urban competitiveness. It is against this background that the concept of the "smart city" has been introduced as a strategic device to encompass modern urban production factors in a common framework and to highlight the growing importance of ICTs, social and environmental capital in profiling the competitiveness of cities [1]. The implication of these two assets (social and environmental resources) drives a laborious way to distinguish smart cities from their more technology burdened equivalents, drawing a clear line between them and what goes under the name of either digital or intelligent cities. 1 Roumiana Ilieva is from the Faculty of Management, Department of Economics, Industrial Engineering and Management, Technical University of Sofia, 8 Kliment Ohridski, 1000 Sofia, Bulgaria II. POLICY CONTEXT OF THE SMART CITY MOBILITY STATE-OF-THE-ART AND TRENDS The concept of smart city as the next stage in the process of urbanization has been quite fashionable in the policy arena in recent years, with the aim of drawing a distinction from the terms digital city or intelligent city [3]. Its main focus is still on the role of ICT infrastructure, but much research has also been carried out on the role of human, social and relational capital, as well as, environmental interest as important drivers of urban growth. The European Union (EU), especially, has dedicated constant efforts to conceiving a strategy for reaching urban growth in a smart sense for its metropolitan city-regions [4][5]. Other international institutions also believe in a wired, ICT-driven form of development. The Intelligent Community Forum produces, for instance, research on the local effects of the worldwide ICT revolution. The OECD and EuroStat Oslo Manual [6] provides a toolkit to identify consistent indicators, shaping a sound framework of analysis for researchers on urban innovation. At a mesoregional level [7] observes renewed attention for the role of soft communication infrastructure in determining economic performance. The availability and quality of the ICT infrastructure is not the only designation of a smart or intelligent city. Other explanations stress the role of human capital education in urban development. In [8][9] it has been shown that the most rapid urban growth rates have been achieved in cities where a high share of educated labor force is available. Novelty is driven by entrepreneurs who renovate in industries and products which require an increasingly more skilled labor force. According to [17] an educated labor force – the 'creative class'– is spatially clustering over time, because not all cities are equally successful when investing in human capital. The attention of researchers and policy makers has been attracted from the tendency for cities to diverge in terms of human capital. It turns out that some cities, which were in the past better endowed with a skilled labor force, have managed to attract more skilled labor, whereas competing cities failed to do so. Policy makers, and in particular European ones, are most likely to attach a consistent weight to spatial homogeneity. In these conditions the advanced clustering of urban human capital is then a major anxiety.