The Gauteng City Region Observatory (GCRO) is a research institute set-up to support policy, planning and development in the Gauteng City-Region (GCR) - South Africa's most populous urban agglomeration and core economic hub. The GCRO is a unique partnership between two universities (the Universities of Johannesburg and the Witwatersrand), the Gauteng Provincial Government (GPG) and the South African Local Government Association (SALGA) in Gauteng. Since it was established in 2008, the GCRO has become a well-respected institution both locally and internationally [1-4], having made many contributions over the years to deepening public understanding of trends and dynamics in the region. The GCRO is an example of an organisation that is not only constituted through cross-sectoral collaboration but also explicitly designed to co-produce transdisciplinary research and strategic intelligence for decision-making across the science-policy interface. The growing strength of this approach and practice was in evidence in how the Observatory supported GCR governments to understand and respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, certain organisational challenges have emerged over time, requiring the GCRO to continue to innovate internally, flexibly respond to unmet expectations, and consolidate around key success factors.

Medellín has achieved an extraordinary transformation in the last 20 years (Figure 4.1), going from being one of the most dangerous cities in the world to becoming a model of social urbanism and economic transition based on science, technology and innovation (STI). This was achieved through the collaboration and collective intelligence of various actors such as academia, private companies, the State and citizens, who joined their efforts and capabilities to dream and work for a more humane city that serves and seeks to improve the quality of life of its inhabitants.

Another fundamental factor in Medellín's transformation has been establishing long-term public policies and the continuity of improvement actions in the different local administrations. A transcendental milestone was the collective decision to declare STI as an engine of development and focus on the territorial mission, which materialised in the creation of Corporation Ruta N as a public innovation and business agency 13 years ago with the purpose to become an articulator and facilitator of the STI ecosystem.

Recently, the designation of Medellín as a Special District of Science, Technology and Innovation consolidates this path of change and national recognition as a transformation reference. Today, Medellín is one of the most critical innovation ecosystems in Latin America. In a 2023 StartupBlink report, Medellín was ranked as the second innovation ecosystem after Bogota and seventh in Latin America, thanks to the evolution in the establishment of 471 technology-based companies from 33 countries (including Colombia) that have generated 22,500 quality jobs.

Translated from Spanish by Claudia Pava.

The City of Melbourne Chair in Urban Resilience and Innovation at the University of Melbourne is a research-practice partnership between a university and a central city local government. This unique partnership was formed in 2015 and renewed for a further five years in 2021, currently underpinning a suite of joint research and engagement projects centred around questions of sustainability and resilience. It is a case study in how city-university partnerships can be developed with benefits for a municipality looking to lead with best practice, and for a university wanting to leverage opportunities to conduct policy-relevant research. It stresses the value of co-design and co-investment not only in shared platforms but also in capacity building and human 'capital', and the potential of innovative institution-building through a 'civic university' model [1]. Striking a balance between academic imperatives and meeting the practical needs of the city has yielded mutual benefits for both partners. It has opened important spaces for reflection about this way of working for both partner organisations, as well as foregrounding the growth of joint commitments between the two institutions.

Since 2018, Smart Dublin through Dublin City Council has adopted a 'smart district approach' to fast-track innovation in strategically selected locations. The first of these districts, Smart Docklands, is a partnership between the city council and the CONNECT Research Centre for future networks and connectivity which is based in Trinity College Dublin. The partnership was established to focus on future connectivity requirements and better understand how this can underpin smart city innovation and engagement across the district. The success of the programme to date has resulted in the creation of several additional smart districts throughout the city as well as the establishment of a dedicated Telecoms Unit to support the rollout of digital connectivity for Dublin.

In our introduction, we showcased a new type of public private partnership emerging to better meet the needs and development of cities. While traditional public private partnerships were driven by urbanisation and the goal to fund and finance physical infrastructure like bridges and roads to support the growing population, community-centred public private partnership also sees a rapid digital transformation and climate change to couple urbanisation. These additional drivers mean that traditional public private partnerships are less effective in supporting cities.

Digital transformation accounts for the rapid expected and unexpected technological evolution. The speed and complexity of the technology, from digital, multichannel communications to air quality sensors, have created new ways of working and collaborating. For public private partnerships, this means that more actors are entering the space that may not have existed previously, and they are bringing new skills and assets to the partnership. We saw this in some of our case studies, like Smart Docklands where there are marketing communications firms that are driving stakeholder engagement. Digital transformation also exposes new risks, such as cybersecurity, that require more actors to come together to provide understanding, training, regulations and enforcement of the digital platforms.

The other driver for this new type of public private partnership is climate change. Similar to the new risks that digital transformation exposed, the fossil fuel-intensive way of living from rapid urbanisation and growth has exacerbated climate change. The greater frequency and severity of climate change impacts, like sea level rise and hurricanes, often mean that cities may need additional resources and expertise to tackle these problems. Climate change impacts the most vulnerable and they often have poorer physical and social infrastructure to begin with.

The impacts of climate change and digital transformation do not fall neatly within geopolitical lines, and local governments often need to coordinate support and resources from national or state governments like the Malaysia Think City. Or they find actors that do not have geopolitical limits like global corporations like Reckitt for Hull Net Zero, universities like University of Melbourne for Melbourne or foundations like Robert Wood Johnson Foundation for AIR Louisville. Opening up borders allows for more actors to work with local partners to ground the goal into local context and goals, but bring in wider ideas, and more resources.

The difference in structures, approaches and ways of working across the eight models varies significantly - even though they may have common drivers and objectives. Given the distinct features of each case study, how then can city leaders, policymakers and stakeholders determine what might be appropriate to a local area? A comparative analysis was undertaken of the characteristics of each case study as well as their collective lessons learned to highlight and contrast key elements and identify how and why case studies may have evolved in a certain direction. City leaders and policymakers may want to consider these elements to help them in assessing the relevance and appropriateness of different models.

The partnership model used by urban stakeholders will need to consider how wide and fixed the scope of the initiative needs to be. If there are multiple drivers and diverse needs, then a broader approach and potentially more complex and resource-intensive partnership will be required. Similarly, if the scope has a narrow or singular focus, a more simple structure or approach may be what is needed.