sustainability Review Social Inclusion Indicators for Building Citizen-Centric Smart Cities: A Systematic Literature Review Jalaluddin Abdul Malek 1 , Seng Boon Lim 1, * and Tan Yigitcanlar 2   Citation: Malek, J.A.; Lim, S.B.; Yigitcanlar, T. Social Inclusion Indicators for Building Citizen-Centric Smart Cities: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 376. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010376 Received: 11 October 2020 Accepted: 17 November 2020 Published: 4 January 2021 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neu- tral with regard to jurisdictional clai- ms in published maps and institutio- nal affiliations. Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Li- censee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and con- ditions of the Creative Commons At- tribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). 1 Social, Environmental and Developmental Sustainability Center (SEEDS), Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, University Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi 43600, Selangor, Malaysia; jbam@ukm.edu.my 2 School of Built Environment, Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, Brisbane 4000, QLD, Australia; tan.yigitcanlar@qut.edu.au * Correspondence: lims@ukm.edu.my Abstract: Despite the rhetoric of “citizen-first,” which has been tokenized in recent years by the smart city administrations, what it means has long been unclear to many, including the public at large. Put simply, this rhetoric concerns the mindset of the members of a local community and places them at the heart of the smart city initiatives. In order to bring further clarity to this issue under the current neoliberal urbanism, this study aimed to identify the key indicators of citizen-centric smart cities from the perspective of participative governance practices and citizens’ responsibilities. To achieve this aim, this study involved a systematic literature review of the social inclusion indicators for building citizen-centric smart cities. The social inclusion indicators that were formed were verified by practitioners to suit the local contexts of an emerging and developing country, in this case, Malaysia. The findings of the review revealed that: (a) the acceptance of social inclusion indicators was mainly limited to the realm of democratic developed countries, leaders’ understanding of citizenship, the delegation of decision-making power in governance practices, the participative culture of societies, and individual citizens’ self-discipline; (b) the social inclusion indicators may not be welcomed in emerging and developing countries; (c) in the long term, these indicators would shed light on the rise of self-organizing cities that will gain popularity in potential city developments, be it in developed or developing countries. Keywords: citizen centrism; citizen-centric smart cities; neoliberal urbanism; public participation; participative governance; participatory planning; right to the city; smart city; smart citizenship; social inclusion indicator; sustainable urban development 1. Introduction To date, considering citizens’ perceptions about and perspectives of smart city develop- ment is seen as a sound strategy for many political and administrative leaders. Particularly, this has taken the form of promoting eGov (citizen centricity in e-government) that has been upheld in Europe since the mid-2000s [1] and is rooted in the perspective of “citizens as customers” under the new public management [2]. Based on this influence, apart from technological needs or smart cities, in recent years, city administrators have shifted their focus to co-creating smart cities with their citizens [3–6]. The rhetorical smart city visions in emerging and developing countries [7,8], such as the slogans of the federal government of Malaysia and the state government of Selangor’s “Peduli Rakyat” (literally care for citizens) [9], have rightly inspired and motivated the gen- eral public, who are entirely depending on government resources or actions. Nevertheless, the targeted passive users, beneficiaries, or the public are unaware of their responsibilities, even though “citizen-centric smart city initiatives are rooted in stewardship, civic pater- nalism, and a neoliberal conception of citizenship” [10]. These neoliberal conceptions “prioritized choice of consumption and individual autonomy within a framework of state and corporate-defined constraints that focused on market-led solutions to urban issues, Sustainability 2021, 13, 376. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010376 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability