Hindawi

Journal of Sensors
Volume 2021, Article ID 4680021, 17 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/4680021

Research Article
Stakeholders’ Viewpoints toward Blockchain Integration within
IoT-Based Smart Cities

Nada Alasbali , Saaidal Razalli Bin Azzuhri , and Rosli Salleh

Department of Computer System and Technology, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, Universiti Malaya,
50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Correspondence should be addressed to Saaidal Razalli Bin Azzuhri; saaidal@um.edu.my

Received 17 July 2021; Revised 4 August 2021; Accepted 16 August 2021; Published 27 August 2021

Academic Editor: Abdelouahid Derhab

Copyright © 2021 Nada Alasbali et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

This study intends to assess the development of IoT-based smart cities industry and the possibilities of blockchain integration
from the perspective of industry stakeholders as the vision for a modern, integrated smart city future is predicated upon
intelligence and the relationship between data-rich connections and human activities. Although this ideal of an interconnected
urban landscape is currently being tested and actively used by consumers spanning a range of connected nodes and service
solutions, the scalability, interoperability, and security of this emergent cyber-physical ideal has yet to be adequately resolved.
This study used an exploratory study design following a mixed method design approach. A structured questionnaire survey
(quantitative) and interviews (qualitative) were conducted for collecting data. IBM SPSS was used for the analysis of the data,
which computed descriptive statistics, cross-tabulation, Pearson correlation, and ANOVA for quantitative data and thematic
analysis for qualitative data. Through an empirical assessment of the perceptions and expertise of 122 stakeholders from within
the worldwide IoT smart city industry, conceptual support for blockchain integration into the IoT solution was acquired,
highlighting the solution-oriented, system-centered advantages of a decentralised, autonomous data management backbone
that could be applied to future IoT-based smart city solutions. To meet the broad and diversified needs of the smart city and
its future evolution, this study has confirmed that a commitment to decentralisation and blockchain intermediary data
management is critical to scalable, secure, and autonomous negotiations of the IoT-enabled smart city networks.

1. Research Background a network-bridged cyberphysical solution that will transform

The potential advantages of smart, connected systems are
manifest as urban density increases and internet connec-
tivity becomes ubiquitous from data mining to service effi-
ciency to network coordination [1]. At the core of this
new, interconnected urban infrastructure is the concept of
the smart city which is an idealistic, technoutopian environ-
ment that is based on digital information exchange [2]. [3]
highlighted that majority of these devices are connected with
each other, which are then further connected to other
devices forming an Internet of Things (IoT). From energy
management to water demand monitoring to waste pickups
and in-home automation, the Internet of Things (IoT) is
translating once-independent digital nodes and sensors into
the behaviours and interactions of an internet-supported
modern society [4].
Given the connectivity between the devices, these are
vulnerable to various issues, including interoperability,
interconnectivity, security, and privacy threats [5]. These
security threats account for an increase in the attacks on
the device integrity, data privacy, and security and secrecy
[6]. [7] highlights that making the IoT operational model
decentralised, self-regulating, and self-managing is critical
to improving it. This transformation is likely to provide it
with more scalability, minimised infrastructure cost, auton-
omy, and a secure and user-driven environment. Also, a crit-
ical attribute of a functional and efficient smart city solution
is the ability to ‘transfer data across the network without the
2 Journal of Sensors
need for human agency or manual intervention.’ By avoiding
the proclivity to attain short-term financial benefits in favour
of a long-term, system-wide opportunity for interconnectiv-
ity, vendors of IoT technologies can unify their communica-
tion platforms and data management systems according to a
universal, interoperable standard.
The smart city development and deployment present
the evidence concerning the intermediary work model,
which serves as a solution for the decentralisation challenges,
security, and scalability of the IoT devices. For undergoing
transaction, users are required to employ initiatives which
help approve other transactions, all aimed at improving the
security of the network, which confirm and approve that no
conflict occurs amongst transactions such as the one existing
with other incoming transactions (e.g., double-spending) [8].
This approval encompasses the approval of two other trans-
actions, rejection of any conflicting transactions, and solu-
tion to a cryptographic puzzle [8]. Given the heterogeneous
as well as distributive IoT nature, an asynchronous aspect
exists in the IOTA network, where many nodes do not see
or attempt to approve same transactional sets. However,
understanding the deployment challenges of the smart city
continues to serve as a thwarting block concerning its
integration.
The failure to develop interconnectivity across data com-
munication networks restricts the capacity for efficient and
secure information exchange, diluting the broader scale
advantages of the smart city standard. To circumvent such
pitfalls, modern researchers and experimental theorists such
as [9–11] have proposed the integration of blockchain infor-
mation management standards capable of not only securing
the process of cross-network data exchange but also validat-
ing and protecting the legitimacy and interoperability of such
exchange processes. This proposed investigation will com-
pare and critically evaluate the requirements and potential
advantages of this blockchain-supported standard for smart
city-oriented IoT connectivity from the IoT-based smart city
stakeholders’ viewpoints. The remainder of the article is
structured as follows: Section 2 presents research problem
and aim. Section 3 addresses the research methodology.
Then, the results of the mixed method approach (Section 4)
are presented in two subsections (Sections 4.1 and 4.2,
respectively). Section 5 presents the discussion. Finally,
Section 6 concludes the paper.
2. Research Problem and Aim
For smart city design to meet the complex requirements of
integration, network interoperability, and security, there
must be a centralised transaction management technology
capable of processing terabytes of data, millions of daily
transactions, and a variety of complementary, but inherently
proprietary technologies. Prior empirical research reveals a
lack of formalisation and continuity in the development of
a pragmatic, integrated solution for the network design,
system standards, and IoT interoperability within smart
cities. Also, the range of security threats posed by a lack
of a unified framework governing the installation of APIs
and data management systems raises concerns about the vul-
nerability of user data to malicious attacks and manipulation.
Moreover, the overarching problems and challenges such as
scalability, interoperability, cost barriers, security threats,
and a lack of systemic flexibility will continue to persist in
an IoT network that is characterised by siloed information
and restrictive proprietary databases [9]. However, several
experimental solutions [10–12] have recently emerged as
indications of the potential advantages of a unified, multino-
dal, edge-based blockchain solution to the IoT challenges.
These models provide valuable indications of the combina-
tive potential of a unified blockchain solution that is able to
exploit the concept of infrastructure as a service (IaaS) to
connect the entirety of the IoT industry. Motivated by this
knowledge gap, this research paper is aimed at capturing
and evaluating empirical evidence from IoT-based smart city
stakeholders related to current efforts in the IoT-connected
smart city industry and the possible pathways that can be
developed to optimise blockchain technology integration
for an IoT-connected smart city to shape a sustainable way
forward.
3. Methodology
3.1. Research Method. Throughout the literature reviewed in
relation to this topic and the range of associated variables, it
is evident that experimentation is the primary modality of
empiricism in this field of study. Ragin and Amoroso [13]
propose that when confronted with a variety of exemplary
studies, researchers often rely upon comparative methods
to study the internal commonalities, identify diversity, and
assess the relationships between the approaches. However,
when considering the breadth of IoT-based solutions being
developed, the literature review has demonstrated that
approaches such as a case study analysis or systematic liter-
ature review would be inherently limiting to the current
study.
Rather than attempting to mirror or mimic the experi-
mental trials of the prior researchers in this field, which would
be both cost prohibitive and time and technology consuming,
it is more appropriate for the current study to develop a blue-
print of industry solutions from the collection of real-world
empirical evidence. By applying what Bryman [14] describes
as a ‘nonprobabilistic, purposive sampling’ to the collection
of evidences using a mixed method approach to collect both
questionnaire survey-based quantitative (QUAN) evidence
and interview-based qualitative (QUAL) evidence from a
discrete sample population of qualified participants with direct
experience and knowledge relative to this industry.
3.2. Research Design. The mixed method approach involves
what Watkins and Gioia [15] refer to as a ‘convergent par-
allel design,’ or an administrative process which collects
and analyses quantitative and qualitative evidence sepa-
rately and then combines the findings in order to generate
a comprehensive interpretation. The rationales behind the
selection of the combination of mixed methods, sampling
strategies, and multiple variables are as follows: to mini-
mise errors that may arise from a single technique and
Journal of Sensors
to maximise the meaning from results of data interpreta-
tion [16].
By designing a survey instrument that is based upon core
concepts from the literature related to security, interopera-
bility, scalability, network design, and system requirements,
supporting this survey, the interview designed to include a
series of six open-ended questions that focused on specific
challenges and opportunities in applying blockchain tech-
nologies to the IoT-connected smart city solution and to
illuminate potential concerns and to allow the leadership
team members to provide more dynamic insights regarding
their experiences in this innovative field of IoT and smart
city design.
3.3. Research Population and Data Collection. The focus of
the empirical data collection process for this study emphasised
the perceptions, experiences, and insights of professionals
currently working to facilitate the smart city revolution in dif-
ferent cities around the world. Multiple layers of experiential
insights related to technologies, feasibility, and interoperability
were determined to be only accessible from a primary, first-
hand perspective, and therefore, a targeted sampling approach
was developed. The population of the research and the
primary target for this study are IoT industry professionals,
businesses, and software developers who are actively crafting
the new standard of blockchain integration in relation to
smart city-oriented IoT solutions. [14] suggests that in cases
where the research involves individuals with specific qualifica-
tions, backgrounds, or responsibilities, then a purposive, non-
probabilistic sampling approach is justified. Therefore, a
representative sample of 108 uniquely skilled and experienced
professionals was attained for the online questionnaire survey
(including software developers, software architects, software
engineers, and solution architects to name a few). On the
other hand, a 14-person sample population represented a
cohort of decision-makers with the unique experience of
managing and developing new, innovative IoT-based smart
city solutions (Chief Technology Officer/Chief Information
Officer/Smart City Expert/Smart City Director and so on)
have been targeted for a more detailed data collection via
interviews.
3.4. Participants Recruitment. For the online questionnaire, a
survey link from Google forms has been distributed via e-
mail and social and professional network like LinkedIn and
Twitter amongst worldwide corporations’ staff members
responsible for the network upgrades, IoT, and innovations
in the world’s smart city solutions. For the interview, identi-
fying worldwide corporations currently responsible for
developing smart city, IoT-based technologies; then, they
have been invited and contacted via social and professional
network like LinkedIn and Twitter and direct e-mails of
the individual human resource departments and leadership
inboxes within the corporate e-mail systems. Additionally,
various stakeholders have been invited and interviewed from
participant companies and corporations at the 2020 Saudi
Internet-of-Things Conference conducted on March, 2020
in Riyadh (https://saudiiot.com/).
3
3.5. Research Ethics. Prior to the collection, ethical approval
was obtained from the University of Malaya Research Eth-
ical Committee (UMREC). During data collection (Feb–
Oct, 2020), participant consent was also sought from the
participants on an online questionnaire survey by agreeing
to participation before answering the questions and before
submitting their answers. In the interview, the research
participation invitation was sent before the interview takes
place and the consent form was signed off by the partici-
pant during the interview. Clearly, all participants were
communicated about the data anonymity as well as
confidentiality.
3.6. Data Analysis. The convergent design proposed by [15]
involves analysing the data by applying appropriate tech-
niques in separate stages to the comparison of the findings.
Data came from a multitude of sources; quantitative (QUAN),
qualitative (QUAL), and the three authors who conducted the
study bringing different perspectives and analytical skills in
the analysis and interpretation of the data. Hence, the empir-
ical findings were subdivided into two concurrent triangula-
tion strategies (QUAN+QUAL) [17], overlapping segments
of evidence in order to facilitate the analytical process [15].
The QUAN results presented a range of findings that
included both independent and dependent variables that were
compared according to their statistical relationships and
potentially significant biases. Bryman [14] recommends con-
ducting a statistical comparison of means, which involves
calculating the mean responses and standard deviations for
each independent group in relation to each of the structured
prompts. Whilst such descriptive statistics provide a basis for
determining the level of consensus, [18] recognises that to
generate meaningful quantitative analysis, a statistical com-
parison of means must be performed. This one-way analysis
of variance (ANOVA) test involves calculating the statistical
significance of the relationship between grouped biases and
each of the individual prompts (significant at less than or
equal to 5%). The QUAN data analysis employs appropriate
quantitative instruments, including Microsoft Excel and IBM
SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) version 20.0.
The QUAL findings resulted in multiple layers of individ-
ual responses to each of the interview questions that varied in
scope, focus, and depth of analysis. Merriam and Tisdell [19]
propose that by employing an analytical thematic coding pro-
cess, researchers are able to distil the participants’ responses
into their underlying themes, resulting in a measurable
frequency of thematic elements that, when combined across
the responses, provides the group consensus. The code then
provided the basis for any comparative analyses and allowed
insights to be drawn that involved degrees of similarity and
variance in relation to this central reference point. To be more
confident of the internal validity of the results, most of the data
collection could be classified as being “within-methods” [20]
triangulation. That is, many different techniques were used
to gather qualitative data. Using an open-ended question for-
mat, “between-methods” triangulation also occurred whereby
data on the same specific questions were gathered from ques-
tionnaire and analysed together with the qualitative data gen-
erated from interviews on the same topics [21].
4 Journal of Sensors
4. Results
Although the technical and academic antecedents to block-
chain adoption have been firmly established over the past
decade of exploratory research, the transformative role of
private sector engagement in propagation and adoption of
blockchain technologies in smart city applications remains
underdefined and uncertain. This empirical study was
undertaken to assess the perceptions of key stakeholders
within the IoT-smart city industry regarding the transitional
challenges supporting and restricting the transformative
effects of this process. The following sections will introduce
a comparative survey of internal stakeholders, focusing on
aligning and differentiating perspectives, and will then sup-
plement those findings with an in-depth exploration of
insider experiences and perceptions captured via a targeted
interview. The full result of the questionnaire survey (prior
analysis) is published at https://docs.google.com/forms/d/
1WCFQg-FpabvuKZV3WoqJ9a1OR3zzlCJ5rljFguZShMY/
viewanalytics.
4.1. Survey (QUAN) Findings. The first dimension of this
empirical research involved the administration of a struc-
tured survey instrument to (n1 = 108) representatives from
the IoT industry, focusing on the supporting and detracting
elements of the blockchain debate, the challenges of techno-
logical adoption, and the concerns and expectations held by
inside stakeholders in this industry. For participant’s cate-
gorisation for comparative purposes, the demographic and
experiential prompts were presented at the beginning of
the survey. The feedback of these personnel was used for
determining the statistical significance as well as quantita-
tively weight patterns. The following sections present these
findings, separating the prompts according to their thematic
focal points and their role in the facilitation of this surveying
instrument. Before presenting our findings, some notations
are defined in Table 1.
4.1.1. Demographic and Experience Overview. In order to
group and categorise the participants for comparative pur-
poses, a series of demographic and experiential prompts
were introduced at the beginning of this survey process.
The feedback provided to these independent variables was
then used to test statistical significance and quantitatively
weight patterns within the findings against grouped biases.
Figure 1 revealed that there were more participants between
ages 25 and 34 years (23%) compared to those who were
more than 55 years (15%). However, a middle-aged bias,
with 61% of the participants indicating that they were
between the ages of 35 and 54 years, was found. This bias
was not considered to influence the reliability or validity of
these findings, as this age distribution is indicative of the
grouped median of workers within this field of technological
solutions and IoT development. Highlighting the weight
placed upon education in this industry, Figure 1 shows the
distribution of educational attainment across this sample.
About 59% of the respondents having attained at least a
Master’s degree, the findings highlight the critical role which
education plays in supporting the development of high tech-
Table 1: Notations and meanings.
Notation Meaning
Df Degrees of freedom from the source
F Degrees of freedom from the mean
M Mean
N Total number of a sample
nðxÞ A subset of the total number of a sample
P Significance (if less than %5)
PC Pearson correlation
SD Standard deviation
nology solutions and applications. A Pearson correlation
analysis revealed a positive statistical correlation (PC =
0:413, P ≤ 0:01) between age and education level. In addi-
tion, correlation tests for age and length of experience (smart
city, PC = 0:312, P = 0:001; technology industry (PC = 0:276,
P = 0:004) visualised in Figure 2 confirmed statistically pos-
itive correlations between these variables, suggesting that
participants are likely progressing through continuing pro-
fessional development or education.
A significant result visualised in Figure 1 is indicative
of the relatively limited experience of these stakeholders
with smart city technologies—a field of research that has
emerged into the mainstream within the past five years.
At the same time, these participants indicated extensive
employment experience in the technology/software indus-
try which suggests that there has been a direct transition
from general to smart technologies within the past five-year
period. The cross-tabular comparison revealed that the
majority of participants with 5-6 years of experience in smart
city technologies were over the age of 55, whilst those partic-
ipants with 7 years’ experience or more were between 35 and
54 years. This distinction was statistically significant when
compared with general software experience, as participants
with 7 or more years of experience were between 25 and over
55 years, which was consistent with their reported experience
in smart city technologies.
In spite of a broad distribution in understanding regard-
ing blockchain technologies, the Pearson correlation test was
unable to confirm a statistical relationship between age and
the degree of understanding of blockchain technologies.
The visual distribution in Figure 2 confirms a large percent-
age of the sample population (54%) with direct, professional
experience with blockchain technologies. The correlation
analysis confirmed a direct, positive relationship between
experience with smart technologies and the degree of under-
standing of blockchain technologies (PC = 0:387, P = 0:006),
suggesting that experience has the potential to positively
contribute to understanding.
In addition to the relationship between understanding
and experience, the expectations visualised in Figure 3 were
found to be positively correlated with the participants’
length of experience with smart city technologies (PC =
0:400, P ≤ 0:01). In spite of such experience levels, however,
almost 15% of participants rated blockchain as essential,
whilst 34.5% indicated that this technological solution is
Journal of Sensors 5

100
80
60
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5

Age range
Education level
Gender

Figure 1: Participants age range, education levels, and gender.

100

50

0
1 2 3 4 5
Length of experience in general technology/software industry
Length of experience in smart city technologies
Degree of understanding and knowledge regarding blockchain technologies beyond cryptocurrencies

Figure 2: Relations between length of experiences and understanding of blockchain technologies.

Essential, backbone of smart city technologies

Important, adopted on large scale by many companies
General solution that will resolve some security concerns
Limited, could benefit some companies
None, irrelevant to smart city
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Figure 3: Expected role of blockchain technologies in system harmonisation.

important which will likely be adopted on a large scale and a
general solution that will resolve some security concerns,
respectively. Besides, 17.5% opined that blockchain is lim-
ited and could benefit some companies and 5% in their opin-
ion feel it is irrelevant to smart city.
4.1.2. Structured Prompts. The second series of prompts were
based upon an assessment of agreement and subdivided into
the central themes identified within the literature review,
including system design, network management, competitive
pressures, blockchain innovation, and security standards.
Figure 4 groups the responses related to system design con-
siderations, highlighting a relatively strong group consensus
for two of these three prompts. Specifically, 57% of the
participants agree that because the IoT is a fragmented and
vulnerable network, it cannot be secured in its current state.
Also, 65% of the participants agree that an integrated block-
chain storage solution would allow the IoT to meet a mini-
mum standard of security; however, 59% agree that API
design around a central cloud-based solution would allow
for proprietary and innovative solutions. Such a variance
may indicate concerns amongst the participants regarding
the overall competitive advantages and proprietary solutions
associated with a singular, unified blockchain standard.
Figure 4 displays system design considerations.
The second series of prompts visualised in Figure 5
focused on network architecture and management and con-
sidered the impacts of scale on IoT integration in smart city
design. The result shows that about 82% of these participants
agree that the smart city design is being driven by big data
resources which are contingent upon capacity-building and
multinodal data collection. To support such technologies,
72% of the participants agreed that there is a need for a central
network architecture that is capable of integrating such diver-
sified nodes and scaling to meet the needs of the IoT. Such
findings confirm the potential advantages of a revised network
solution and the support levied by these industry insiders for
such a transformative technological intervention.
The third category of prompts visualised in Figure 6
focused on the range of competitive pressures and threats
6 Journal of Sensors

Strongly agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

The IoT is a fragmented and potentially vulnerable mesh network of varying technologies,
APIs, and software solutions that cannot be effectively secured in its current state
Designing around a central cloud-based database solution allows IoT nodes to be developed
according to proprietary APIs and innovative solutions
An integrated blockchain-based storage solution would ensure that the IoT was meeting a
minimum standard of securitisation

Figure 4: System design considerations.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

The scalability of the IoT is contingent upon the central network architecture and its ability to
integrate multiple nodes of contact
Smart city design is driven by big data resources and the capacity for distributed, multi-nodal points
of capture

Figure 5: Network architecture and management.

Strongly agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Proprietary software and network design limits the ability of this industry to expand beyond its
existing, dissociated standards of practice
Greater collaboration between IoT design companies would allow this industry to develop a more
unified central framework
For many companies, the open-source, public solution offered by blockchain technologies is a
threat to their internal goals

Figure 6: Competitive pressures and threats.

that might impact the overall scalability of the IoT and the cal backbone. In addition, 61% of the participants agree that
realisation of a smart city standard. 83.3% of these partici- proprietary network designs limit the industry’s ability to
pants agree that greater collaboration between IoT design expand beyond its existing and limiting standards of prac-
companies would allow the industry to unify its technologi- tice. Given that just 23% of the participants agreed that the
Journal of Sensors
blockchain solution is a threat to corporations’ internal stra-
tegic goals, these findings further confirm the viability of a
more unified, collaborative infrastructure standard.
Although statistical comparisons using ANOVA were
performed to assess the weighted impact of the indepen-
dent demographic/experience variables on the participant
responses to these prompts, this category revealed statisti-
cally insignificant relationship with regard to the responses
to the proprietary software query and two independent vari-
ables: age range (F = 1:078, P = 0:372) and length of experi-
ence in the general tech industry (F = 0:165, P = 0:956).
As a statistical correlation was recorded between these
two independent variables, cross-tabular analysis was per-
formed with age range initially to determine a predictive
relationship, whereby it was revealed that 35.30% of the par-
ticipants who disagreed with this statement were between
the ages of 35 and 44 years. At the same time, 41% of the
participants over the age of 45 years agreed with this state-
ment, creating a perceptual gap which, when compared with
experience, revealed an age-experience hurdle associated
with the participant’s understanding of proprietary software
and network design.
The fourth category of prompts visualised in Figure 7
was comprised of just two queries and resulted in similar
levels of consensus. In particular, 70.37% of the participants
agree that for many, the complexity of blockchain creates
barriers to adoption. At the same time, 65.74% agrees that
the categorical advantages of a distributed ledger could have
implications for system responsiveness and interdepen-
dencies. By agreeing with each of these prompts, the partic-
ipants suggest that whilst advantages are being recognised,
technological complexity and a lack of understanding could
potentially lead to resistance or lagging adoption. Statisti-
cally significant relationships between these prompts and
age range were observed via ANOVA comparison; the result
revealed that age range (F = 2:567, P = 0:042) has an effect
on the technological complexity of blockchain as it creates
barriers to adoption and engagement; however, age does
not influence greater collaboration between IoT design com-
panies which could allow this industry to develop a more
unified central framework. A cross-tabular comparison did
reveal that youngest participants were less likely to agree
fully with these statements than their older counterparts—a
phenomenon that may indicate confidence, experience, or
concern-based variations.
The final category of prompts consisted of the largest
number and focused on security concerns as they relate to
the blockchain and the IoT. Figure 8 visualises a range of
varied responses which create opportunities for exploring
these majority and minority opinions in greater detail. It
was discovered that 84.25% of the participants agree that
current security threats create vulnerabilities for consumers,
exposing their data and restricting access to critical systems.
In spite of this increasing threat level, it was 66% of the
participants who agree that the intrinsic value of the data
should determine the level of security required when holding
that data. Whilst 55% of the participants do not believe that
the current standard of IoT security is adequate to meet the
needs of an expanding smart city network, 35% agreed that
7
their company had developed proprietary security solutions
to address the varied needs associated with IoT devices.
These findings suggest that there is a contradiction
between the security concerns of those firms involved in
developing IoT security solutions and their internal capacity
to address those concerns via proprietary means. Confirm-
ing an opportunity for integrating blockchain technologies
into this complex dynamic, 64% of the participants agree
that this solution would create the minimum level of secur-
itisation needed for the IoT. The ANOVA comparison of
means test revealed statistically significant relationships
between three of these prompts and five different indepen-
dent variables see Table 2. Cross-tabular analysis revealed
that the majority of the female participants disagreed or
strongly disagreed with the statement regarding the current
standard of security, whilst only male participants actually
agreed with this statement. An age range assessment was
unable to identify any age group biases that might lead to
a statistically significant variation, with the exception of the
91.7% of the participants over the age of 55, who disagreed
with the statement. This statistical bias was important when
further explored in relation to experiential effects, whereby
75% of the participants who agreed with this statement of
sufficiency have worked with smart technologies for less
than 1 year.
For the prompt regarding the intrinsic value of publicly
shared data, the statistical findings were conflicting, with
some participants with more than 7 years of experience
disagreeing and some agreeing. The highest number of
participants who disagreed had 3-4 years of tech experience,
but some of those participants also agreed. Therefore, it was
determined that this statistically significant relationship was
sample related and not a broader experiential predictor of
general perceptions regarding data security. The final
statistical relationship drew upon one of the last queries in
the survey regarding whether the participants felt that
consumers were unclear about the blockchain to assess
whether security threats create extreme vulnerabilities. The
cross-tabular comparison revealed that participants who
agree strongly that most consumers are unclear about the
blockchain are more likely to strongly agree that security
threats could create extreme vulnerabilities for consumers.
This finding indicates a strong positive relationship between
perceived threat levels and perceived user vulnerability and
risks.
4.1.3. Weighted List. To further extend the empirical findings
and assess the scope of concerns shared by these partici-
pants, they were asked to rank a list of 9 factors related to
data security management practices and the influence of
blockchain integration on IoT security. The top-ranked
factors were those that were most influential in supporting
the blockchain adoption process was the transparency of
blockchain technology (M = 3:97, SD = 0:08), the outlying
connectivity of API interfaces (M = 3:73, SD = 0:09), and
the potential for insider access (M = 3:71, SD = 0:102). These
considerations are largely practical in nature, and they avoid
some of the other prompts related to perceptual, expecta-
tion-based, or legal concerns regarding blockchain adoption.
8 Journal of Sensors

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

The categorical advantages of a distributed ledger could have significant implications for system
responsiveness and interdependencies
For many in this industry, the technological complexity of blockchain creates barriers to adoption
and engagement

Figure 7: Blockchain innovation effects and engagement.

The intrinsic value of publicly shared data should define

the level of security (e.g. low, medium, high) that is
adopted to protect it

Current security threats such as hijacking and brute

force attacks create extreme vulnerabilities for
consumers who could lose access to critical systems

Our company has developed its own, proprietary

security solution in order to negotiate the range of needs
associated with our IoT devices

The current standard of IoT security is sufficient to meet

the future needs of expansion

An integrated blockchain-based storage solution would

ensure that the IoT was meeting a minimum standard of
securitisation

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Strongly disagree Agree

Disagree Strongly agree
Neutral

Figure 8: Security, blockchain, and the IoT.

Further, the lowest-ranked prompt on this list, a centralised
database capable of anonymising user transactions (M =
3:24, SD = 1:105), was still identified as somewhat influen-
tial, but it purposefully focuses on the broader, general defi-
nition of blockchain technology. The result is a weighted list
of influential forces that prioritise innovation and novelty
over generality and sociotechnical concerns. The blockchain
influence results are shown in Table 3.
4.1.4. Final Considerations. There were several final prompts
introduced at the end of this survey in order to elicit addi-
tional insights from the participants regarding their observa-
tions regarding organisational intentions and blockchain
adoption. Figure 9 showed that 80% of the participants
would support a unified standard interface for routing and
managing IoT traffic, confirming prior findings regarding
the anticipated advantages of this technological solution as
the IoT continues to evolve towards an integrated smart city
standard. Support for a unified blockchain standard is
displayed in Figure 9.
The majority of the participants (77%), as shown in
Figure 10, agree that most consumers are unclear about
blockchain and its potential value for nonfinancial transac-
tions. This finding is important because it highlights a
Journal of Sensors 9

Table 2: Statistical results for prompts in Figure 8.

Length of Length of
Most consumers
experience with experience with
Gender Age range are unclear about
Prompt smart city general
blockchain
technologies technology
F P F P F P F P F P
The current standard of IoT
security is sufficient to meet the 0.321 0.572 0.787 0.536 1.268 0.287 1.259 0.291 3.110 0.03
future needs of expansion.
The intrinsic value of publicly
shared data should define the
level of security (e.g. low, 0.572 0.451 2.619 0.039 0.932 0.449 0.875 0.482 0.860 0.464
medium, and high) that is
adopted to protect it.
Current security threats such as
hijacking and brute force attacks
create extreme vulnerabilities for 3.246 0.067 1.181 0.323 0.191 0.943 0.145 0.965 2.567 0.05
consumers who could lose
access to critical systems:

Table 3: Influence of blockchain integration factors on IoT security.

Rank Factor Mean SD

1 The transparency of blockchain technology and its applicability in IoT solutions 3.97 0.77
2 The outlying API interfaces and their ability to connect seamlessly to the blockchain 3.73 0.89
3 The potential for insider access and system compromise in the blockchain 3.70 1.06
4 The influence of regulatory oversight and guidelines regarding data security and management 3.66 1.15
5 The capacity for blockchain transactions to efficiently manage the scope of user data generated by IoT nodes 3.60 0.874
6 The willingness of industry leaders to adopt a unified standard and employ a blockchain-based solution 3.46 1.210
7 Consumer expectations and understanding regarding data security and resource management 3.32 0.965
8 The corporate right to proprietary, technically protected data management resources 3.31 0.882
A centralised database capable of anonymising user transactions, whilst ensuring the legitimacy of authenticated
9 3.24 1.09
behaviour

potential barrier to adoption that will need to be addressed
when IoT services are deployed in order to attain and sustain
consumer buy-in and support.
Resolving a critical point of industry contention in
Figure 11, the results showed that 69% of the participants
agree that the security risks posed by proprietary technologies
are too high for independent data management. This find-
ing is important because it confirms that these industry
leaders are amenable to supporting a new, centralised stan-
dard of secure, authenticated data management such as
blockchain.
Although there was consensus regarding the need for block-
chain integration and improved security standards, Figure 12
highlights varying modalities for transitioning from the current
state of independent competition towards a more proactive
state of network integration. The highest represented approach
(31%) suggested adopting performance-oriented integration
standards, whilst 21% remain unsure about how to proceed in
the future and an additional 17% are awaiting some form of
innovation to be developed.
4.2. Interview (QUAL) Findings. In order to draw more
meaningful insights and conclusions regarding the effects
of technological innovation and blockchain transitioning
on smart city applications, a series of six questions were pre-
sented to a small-scale cohort of industry insiders (n2 = 14
participants (P)). With industry experience ranging from 2
to 15+ years, these business owners, software developers,
and technical engineers are experienced in both blockchain
and IoT-based applications. Their insights were aggregated
by question, distilled by applying a line-by-line thematic
coding technique and then analysed critically and compara-
tively for similarities and variations. The following sections
present these findings and discuss the implications of the
responses in relation to the central focus of each individual
interview question.
4.2.1. Question 1: What Role Do you Foresee the IoT Playing
in Smart City Design in the Future? Will Your Company’s
Technology Support This? Major themes are as follows:
smart, IoT, city, company, technology, solutions, automa-
tion, and environment.
This initial interview question was designed to illuminate
any potential biases or concerns associated with the partici-
pant population, focusing on the relationship between the
IoT and smart city design. P3 suggests that a ‘smart city
10
I would support a unified, standard blockchain interface for routing and
managing all IoT traffic within a given industry or function (e.g. traffic
monitoring, water usage)
Yes
No
Maybe
Figure 9: Support for a unified blockchain standard.
utilising IoT can provide a highly productive living environ-
ment for its residents,’ further proposing that control-
oriented mechanisms such as safety monitoring, automation,
and service response solutions can be used to improve the
overall lifestyle benefits of the environment. Extending the
impact of the IoT, P4 also suggested that inclusion would
‘contribute to a healthier and sustainable environment’, by
targeting development goals and pollution reduction solu-
tions that would ideally benefit all members of the connected
community. Both P5 and P6 discussed their personal experi-
ences in home automation and connected services, suggest-
ing that the IoT will support a ‘smarter world’ (P5). P2
recognised that where organisations are working towards
IoT integration, ‘training’ and technological enablement
through cost reduction, and infrastructure connections will
be the central catalysts for wider scale adoption. Participants
opined that IoT can be integrated with larger-scale systems
which would contribute to a less polluted, well-connected,
and secure living. However, works have begun on IoT educa-
tion as stated by P2 who said “we are already working
towards IoT education and working towards some IoT
projects with Blockchain. Also, we did some IoT training
not only in Malaysia but also in abroad like Middle East
and other countries. I think IoT is going to play a huge role
in the few coming years when 5G enable cheap data towards
IoT to utilise.” Also, it is expected that a smart city utilising
IoT would provide a highly productive living environment
for its residents thereby creating a very safe crime-free envi-
ronment, unified healthcare, and good traffic control and
safety for the populace. Conclusively, P4 highlighted that
“IoT-enabled smart city design would contribute to a health-
ier and sustainable environment if aligned towards sustain-
able development goals defined by UNO.”
4.2.2. Question 2: What Are the Primary Security Challenges
Facing the IoT as the Urban Landscape Grows More
Connected? Major themes are as follows: challenges, data, IoT,
devices, security, personal, and infrastructure automation.
The primary security challenges illuminated by these
participants are directly linked to the structurally connected
Journal of Sensors
advantages of the IoT: scale and scope of data collection and
exchange. P1, for example, acknowledged that ‘the question
that comes to mind is how safe are your personal data,’
suggesting that consumer data is vulnerable to hacks and
unauthorised access, and in extreme cases, ‘misuse by people
you don’t want it to.’ P2 suggested that the concerns are more
complex than data management and system security—they
are linked to the ‘design of the device, battery lives…hardware
challenges’ which either enable or inhibit IoT security. In addi-
tion, there is the ‘framework challenge’ which considers how
the IoT is structured and how data transactions are processed
safely and securely within the network (P2). P3 supported this
network-based concern, suggesting that the ‘main security
challenge would be to keep the IoT infrastructure secure from
unauthorised data access and keeping the data encrypted.’
This data-centered focus was also replicated by the initiatives
being proposed by P4, P5, and P6, as protection-oriented
system design and encryption were highlighted as critical
antecedents to a safer, data-secure IoT solution.
4.2.3. Question 3: How Much Time Has your Organisation
Spent considering Blockchain Technologies in relation to the
IoT? Major themes are as follows: blockchain, technology,
system, data, company, decentralised, database, networks.
This fourth question considered the degree to which
these firms which are internal stakeholders from worldwide
IoT industry have invested in the emergent potential of
blockchain technologies. As visualised, the central themes
within these responses considered a range of immediate
and future technological advantages which were firm-
specific and programme-oriented. P2, for example, acknowl-
edged that at first, their company ‘didn’t have a lot of under-
standing of blockchain and what the technology is meant
for’ and recognised that this same burden extended down-
stream throughout various markets as well. To overcome
this hurdle, their organisation assumed an early adopter
position, focusing on ‘promoting this technology to facilitate
and work closely with all new emerging technologies’ related
to blockchain. Other participants such as P5 indicated that
their company was ‘still exploring blockchain,’ whilst P4
and P6 both indicated working with blockchain in relation
to the IoT for the past two years. P1 suggested that whilst
their organisation was focused on blockchain in relation to
database management, they were ‘not thinking in IoT, but
more in a sense of whether it is necessary and how it does
change the way things work.’ Whilst this statement may sug-
gest a form of outside proposition, the anticipated functional
advantages of the blockchain were further described by this
participant and suggest that in time, the blockchain solution
will be optimised for IoT applications as it ‘will replace the
traditional database system offering a decentralised gover-
nance that is trustless.’
4.2.4. Question 4: How Could the Competitive Objectives of
Software and IoT-Oriented Companies Be Preserved but
Still Focused on a More Unified Standard of Design? Major
themes are as follows: companies, standards, implementa-
tion, infrastructure, design, security, and collaboration.
Journal of Sensors 11

Most consumers are unclear about the blockchain and its potential value in non-
financial industries

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Figure 10: Consumers are unclear about blockchain.

The security risks posed by proprietary technologies are too high to allow
companies to remain independent in their data management protocol:

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Figure 11: Security risks posed by proprietary technologies are too high for independent data management.

In order for our company to realise benefits from blockchain integration, we would
need to achieve the following level of integration

Unsure
Some alternative level of innovation that has not yet
been developed
Robust, network-defining intermediary role

Performance-oriented integration standards

General system design and connection solutions

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Figure 12: Company integration level.

For corporate executives and leaders, this question was
designed to trigger consideration for those commercial hur-
dles and competitive barriers that could potentially restrain
growth or limit expansion due to network dependency and
proprietary agendas. Whilst the IoT remains a proprietary
resource, the underlying infrastructure is likely to evolve,
as observed by P3, who predicts that as ‘more and more gov-
ernments push for smart cities, this will result in the forma-
tion of organisational quorum that should standardise the
IoT infrastructure for global connectivity.’ This solution
would effectively eliminate the competitive advantages of
proprietary infrastructure and instead allow companies to
focus on what P4 describes as ‘common SDKs, protocol
adapters, and security measures’. P2 suggests that ‘there is
going to be somebody who does the infrastructure and
another implementing the device…everybody will have their
12
own room to play so they see where to position themselves’.
Ultimately, this standard will be contingent upon oversight,
which will be developed by government consensus, which P1
suggests will result in a ‘set of acceptable standards to ensure
that there is a unified or uniformed standard of design that
can ‘facilitate collaboration between multiple companies
with the same objective: To develop a system design that
can fit most, if not all, blueprints of smart cities.’ Conclu-
sively, the use of nationwide framework, formation of orga-
nisational quorum, open-source use, protocol adapters, and
standardisation of IoT infrastructure for global connectivity
were the identified measures to preserve the software and
IoT companies. P10 and P12 elucidate that “adherence to
international standards (ISO, IEC etc.) in everything that
they do” and “Regulations from communication commis-
sions to set a common ground and ecosystem.” This unified
standard builds upon the idealisation of standardised
authentication and security solutions which allow compa-
nies to focus on the commercial aspects of the IoT (e.g.,
modules, solutions, software), whilst relying upon a central,
ledger or database that is most likely going to be based upon
blockchain-based solutions.
4.2.5. Question 5: What Role Will Industry Leadership Play
in Determining the Adoption of Blockchain Technologies in
the Future? Major themes are as follows: government, vision,
technology, industry, companies, startups, build, purpose,
and services.
By situating the perceptions of these managers in rela-
tion to their role and identity within the smart city solution,
this question challenged the participants to consider their
role in shaping the future of blockchain integration and
adoption. The findings revealed emphasis on particular sec-
tors of the smart city solution, including government
services and those companies responsible for IoT-based
solutions. P1, for example, suggested that industry leaders
will provide the ‘bridge that can connect the government
directly to users,’ assuming the role of technology innovator
to ‘lead their blockchain initiatives’ towards a productive
solution that can support smart city needs. Also, they are
the promoter, influencer and decision maker as explained
by P13 who said “Industry leadership plays an important
role as promoter, influencer and decision maker. I believe
it will play a major role and influence the adoption of block-
chain technologies”. Furthermore, they are expected to
enforce law, conduct education awareness, and push forward
to bring the technology to the entire populace. P3 supports
this proposition, suggesting that ‘industry leadership has to
find ways where governments can benefit greatly from the
blockchain use,’ essentially mainstreaming adoption by
making this technology an essential resource for government
institutions. Yet in spite of this potential advantage, P2
suggested that a core advantage of the decentralised and
autonomous development process of the blockchain solution
was that ‘it actually did not have a leader from the beginning
and anonymity meant to allow it to survive.’ In other indus-
tries, there is ‘some body that has founded it and tells it what
is the vision’; instead, blockchain has ‘passed this long ago
and everyone has their own vision and is bringing their
Journal of Sensors
own roads’ (P2). The expectation is that in order to main-
stream blockchain technologies, there must be some degree
of collaboration, whilst still allowing companies to maintain
their competitiveness, thereby facilitating disruptive change
without limiting the innovativeness of the organisations
(P2, P4).
4.2.6. Question 6: What Do you Feel Would Be the Greatest
Strengths of Blockchain Integration into the Smart City
Fabric? Limitations and Concerns? Major themes are as
follows: security, network, information, technology, manage-
ment, benefits, identities, and privacy.
The final question presented to these stakeholders
focused on the end outcome of blockchain integration: an
ultimate realisation of a technological standard that could
potentially alter the fabric of smart city collaboration.
Although P3 is optimistic that ‘blockchain can solve many
issues related to the security and standardisation of the
IoT,’ they also suggested that there is a need to develop a
solution that resolves the efficiency concerns related to the
‘execution speed and mining costs.’ These cost- and speed-
related concerns were repeated by P4 and P5, who also view
the security advantages and potential reliability of the block-
chain as motivating benefits that could drive this process
of standardisation forward. P1 indicated the following
strengths: “Blockchain has several advantages over tradi-
tional database system: decentralisation and transparency.
Transactions over a blockchain network have also proven
to be fast and efficient in terms of time, money, and
energy utilised.” Building upon these potential benefits, P2
highlighted the critical advantages of an automated, smart
city solution in terms of ‘liberty, protection, and privacy’
creating a protective infrastructure capable of meeting the
expanding digital needs of society whilst also improving the
transparency of information systems. To realise such advan-
tages, however, all P1, P2, and P14 indicated that concerns
regarding scalability, cost, and government support were
likely to restrict the viability of investment and agency com-
mitments, as ‘technologies are merging’ (P2) and forming a
more tangible ‘blockchain community’ (P1) of services and
technological solutions and its implementation as stated by
P11 “… the challenges that will be faced during the imple-
mentation and the adoption would be the main limitation.”
Acknowledging the potential for standardisation through
international organisations such as the ISO, P1 also identified
‘documentation being proposed,’ which is focused on
addressing the range of interoperability hurdles that arise
from the current state of variable standards, as the ‘active
committee looks into blockchain standards’ to create a com-
mon basis for all industry participants.
5. Discussion
5.1. Smart City Realisation. Central to the objectives of this
study was the assessment of the current advantages and
potential limitations of the IoT as facilitator of a smart city
solution from the viewpoint of various stakeholders. The
feedback from the participants in this study has confirmed
that the IoT is a fragmented network of devices that lacks
Journal of Sensors
interoperability and information exchange capabilities
because of the proprietary nature of the individual nodes
and their associated data management systems. When inter-
actions between users and the API-supported IoT becomes
permissions based, then it is possible to extend the scope
of integrated nodes in order to respond on-demand to
consumer behaviour (e.g., GPS, proximity, and request,
time) [22]. [23] acknowledges that because of the spectrum
of sources generating data throughout the smart city such
as the diversified network of smart automobiles with real-
time sensor data, systems must be able to analyse, interpret,
and respond to a variety of triggers in order to make the data
management process functional and socially valuable.
Whilst machine learning capabilities can provide the smart
city with decision-making and solution-finding advantages,
the siloed characteristics of the data being collected and the
lack of interoperability between networks, devices, and data-
sets creates limitations that may ultimately restrict cross-
platform information exchange [23].
Targeting a resolution to the common infrastructure
challenge at IoT corporation [24] acknowledge that siloed
IoT applications mean that ‘the information technology
layer does not interact with operational technology systems
used to monitor events, processes, and devices.’ The primary
consequence of proprietary siloes is the lack of interoperabil-
ity across interconnected systems and user devices, a con-
straint that makes triggering responses or user-optimised
events a challenging, multistep process [24]. Interview
participants in this study confirmed their concerns regarding
organisations applying their ‘own vision…and own roads’
(P2) to the realisation of smart city solutions, indicating a
challenging transitional proposition in an innovative field
that is supported by trailblazers and thought leaders. [10]
has acknowledged the need for decentralisation at the root
level, leveraging lightweight multinodal wireless solutions
to connect consumers across distributed and interoperable
networks. [8] refers to this form of integrated coordination
as ‘the tangle,’ envisioning an IoT-supported networking
solution that builds upon the proprietary strengths of the
individual APIs and connective nodes.
Given that the primary strengths of the IoT are associ-
ated with its capacity for distributed computing and inter-
operability (e.g., one event triggers multiple responses) and
the fact that innovative companies are continuing to
develop their own proprietary services (e.g., connected
lighting, security systems), then, it is essential for future
smart city technologies to be connected to an intermediary
solution that is scalable, decentralised, and adaptive relative
to the underlying purposes of the IoT itself. The practical
examples of blockchain contributions to smart city optimisa-
tion presented by [25, 26] suggest that in order for a smart
city to flourish, it is essential for innovative companies to
be able to develop technological solutions that meet a diver-
sified range of needs. Therefore, siloed databases and
restricted big data resources are inadequate in a complex,
multidimensional urban setting. Instead, what is required is
a state of maximal decentralisation that allows companies
to develop and improve innovative technological solutions
over time that are service centered rather than derived
13
from proprietary, restrictive technologies. Based upon the
insights from the academic literature review [27] and the
empirical findings, this study offers an initial proposition
for realising the integrated capabilities of the IoT-derived
smart city agenda: establish and maintain a network shaped
by maximal decentralisation which reduces network vulner-
ability, improves interoperability, and facilitates cooperative
innovation to improve the scale and functional value of the
IoT.
The central advantage of the blockchain is that it is not
restricted to any single network or database; therefore, as
individual users update their chains, they are receiving,
confirming, and proving the transactions of other users
without requiring additional measures or interventions
[28]. This autonomous, decentralised solution is fundamen-
tally distinct from more traditional modes of data manage-
ment and system hoarding of proprietary data resources.
The participants in this study are very concerned about the
weight and value of data being held within the big data archi-
tecture of the modern information standard, and as a result,
are willing to support the implementation of a decentralised,
service-optimised solution that is based upon a standard of
service sharing and support. Core principles such as ano-
nymity and minimal data hoarding will improve the security
of user data, whilst improving the relative trustworthiness
of the systems being used to facilitate lifestyle services
and systemic responses [25]. Ultimately, it is the decentral-
isation effect of data management that will transition away
from a management-based standard of information silos
towards a service-based standard of customer support
and responsiveness.
5.2. The Practical Opportunity for Standardisation. In addi-
tion to the more general considerations of the effects of the
IoT in shaping smart city planning and system design, the
core objectives of this study have focused on what revisions
would need to be made in order to realise the standardisa-
tion, optimisation, and network integration of the IoT.
Although broadly defined, these expectations were revealed
to include a more irrefutable and reliable standard of secu-
rity and the capacity to scale and expand the reach of the
IoT. Systemic reliability has been identified by Sun et al.
[25] as a critical antecedent to user trust; and in a user-
centered environment of ubiquitous computing, the future
of smart city connectivity is wholly based upon the ability
to secure its connective nodes. Within the survey evidence
captured from worldwide IoT insiders, the current study
has revealed that there are significant concerns regarding
security threats, a lack of system transparency, and the con-
sequences of insecurity for network trustworthiness and
consumer engagement. Such findings confirm prior evidence
presented by [29, 30] that suggest that robust and predict-
able security standards are critical antecedents to consumer
confidence and trust.
The insider feedback has also revealed that security
risks associated with proprietary IoT technologies are too
high to allow continued independent data management.
This argument is about the vulnerabilities associated with
varying security standards, inconsistent or inadequate
14
security protocol, and inconsistent data management prac-
tices. Kravitz [29], Hong et al. [30], and Hakak et al. [27]
have confirmed that in order for IoT adoption to be main-
stream and broadly distributed across consumer popula-
tions, there must be a secure standard that not only
enhances user confidence, but clearly outlines the fair use
policies and practices that govern the data mining behav-
iours of the associated commercial agents. Whilst Bruneo
et al. [31] have suggested that the revised standard of data
management should be user-defined, recent evidence
regarding user awareness and concerns regarding security
threats and vulnerabilities presented by [32, 33] suggest
that users are unprepared and uninformed regarding the
true vulnerability of their data within the breadth of the
IoT.
The alternative to a user-defined privacy solution is a
service-oriented standard which promotes a system of sys-
tems (SoS) approach over the distributed computing infra-
structure that has enabled siloed IoT software solutions
and proprietary standardisation. [34] acknowledges that
data complementarity is a central antecedent to nodal func-
tionality and performance. Therefore, by definition, the data
associated with IoT nodes should be restricted to the mini-
mum functional output, or what P2 in the interview process
highlighted as a restrictive standard emphasising ‘liberty,
protection, and privacy.’ This restraint could be formalised
into a central guideline for universal application suggesting
that IoT data management should do as follows:
Marginal functionality establish and preserve a marginal
functionality standard for data collection which restricts
data storage to the minimal amount required to achieve
desired nodal functionality.
This idea of marginal functionality is an important
contradiction of more overt data collection and big data
practices in the modern ubiquity of social media and
always-on computing. Decentralised, big data collection
practices in the IoT need to be based upon functional objec-
tives that are node-constrained [35]. There is no need for a
smart lighting system to be tracking user social media behav-
iour, friend activity, or financial information unless it is
directly related to the marginal functionality of the IoT
device itself. Specificity in relation to data-driven needs fulfil-
ment, therefore, should become a new overarching standard
of the IoT management protocol which can be accepted
and agreed upon universally in order to eliminate many of
the privacy concern related to unchecked data mining and
sharing [34, 35]. By incorporating corporations, developers,
and consumers into a multistakeholder model of protocol
definitions and system design, it is proposed that the unified
standard of IoT security and data management will improve
the acceptance of these consumers regarding a broader, tran-
sitional adoption of new technologies, data collection nodes,
and interactive systems.
5.3. Smart City Applications and the Blockchain Advantage.
The pragmatic focus of the IoT revolves around the func-
tional intersection between technology and physical envi-
ronments, a proposition which is complicated by the
variations in the structural systems currently driving urban
Journal of Sensors
activities [36]. Ageing infrastructure and the rapid rate of
urban expansion have led to inconsistent and sometimes
incompatible systems that can fail to meet increasingly
efficient guidelines and standards [36]. For this reason,
[37] contests that there must be a transition towards
‘incentivised openness’ amongst technology companies in
the IoT industry as technological solutions are developed
that can be distributed across the complex, oftentimes
overlapping architecture of the smart city. [38] predicts
that by eliminating those intermediary services (e.g., soft-
ware and proprietary databases) that are corruptible and
potentially fallible, an autonomous and adaptive smart city
ecosystem will flow organically and securely. The central
concerns raised by the participants in the current study
have revolved around the limiting effects of a competitive
and proprietary standard of smart city architecture, sug-
gesting that in order to maximise the integrative advan-
tages of such a system, ownership should be distributed
and cooperative.
The transformative smart city agenda is predicated upon
an ‘integrated system of systems approach’ that exploits
multiple streams of information flows in order to coordinate
the seamless, efficient, and effective management of appro-
priate resources and services [36]. These predictions of
future technological interactions and user-system-service
dynamics are indicative of an integrated system approach
that cannot survive the rigidity of proprietary and competi-
tive system architecture. With threats such as security, scal-
ability, and performance all confronting the network of
techno-entrepreneurs and innovative corporations designing
IoT solutions, it is evident from these findings that a more
pragmatic, collaborative, and unified system is needed in
the form of blockchain-based IoT.
Within the questionnaire responses, concerns were
raised about the current diversified network characteristics
of the IoT and the structural implications of its fragmented
architecture. [24] proposes that a system of systems
approach to smart city integration involves four different
segments of information management including connect,
collect, analyse, and act. The interview responses from a
population of highly qualified industry managers revealed
that it will take a strong leadership base to transition this
industry towards more open and adaptive technological
solutions, the basis for which will likely involve some form
of blockchain system solution. Researchers such as [39, 40]
have proposed a unified and centralised data sharing service
that relies upon a blockchain backbone to ensure the security
and authentication of data transfers.
The range of smart city applications associated with the
proposed decentralised blockchain solution is extensive. For
example, [41, 42] have proposed smart waste management
solutions that can be used as a form of on-demand bin collec-
tion standard. The technique would improve the trash routing
information used by the waste management companies and
would allow for a more dynamic pickup schedule than the
current route-based standard [41]. In response to the qualita-
tive prompts during the interview, the participants also identi-
fied the emergent opportunity for ‘digital identities’ (P2) a
consumer-based empowerment initiative that would allow
Journal of Sensors
consumers to customise their interaction with the built envi-
ronment as they navigate the IoT-integrated urban landscape.
From these overlapping propositions, there are commercial
and there are personal applications of the IoT to an urban
landscape that is increasingly supported in its efficiency, flow,
and navigation by ubiquitous computing technologies. The
result of this conflict of functional purpose is a need for max-
imal scalability that emerges beyond the proprietary scope of
corporate vision, requiring some form of unified security,
contractual, and transmission standard to provide the back-
bone of the IoT network. Accordingly, this proposition
suggests the following:
Maximal scalability establish and exploit the maximal
scalability of the distributed computing network of the
blockchain, its decentralised nodes, and the capacity for
linking IoT devices across software services in order to facil-
itate secure transactional execution.
Although the ideal of scalability represents a distributed,
autonomous network of IoT nodes connected to a functional
and adaptive blockchain backbone, [43, 44] have demon-
strated that the commercial viability of this transformative
solution is predicated upon a standard of intra-agency trust
that largely precludes participation and adoption. The inter-
view participants have suggested that by adopting a
blockchain-based cryptosolution such as Ethereum which
is lightweight and commercially practical, the industry could
accelerate the transition towards a unified standard. Such
findings are similar to [27, 45–47] who have all demon-
strated the potential advantages of smart industry unity
and a mesh-based network of IoT nodes capable of meeting
the smart demands of the future. By eliminating the heavy-
weight requirements of hosting the entire blockchain on
each decentralised node, and instead utilising what [31] have
proposed as edge-level nodes secured by encrypted keys, the
scalability of the IoT data management solution becomes a
viable and potentially commercially advantageous proposi-
tion. This study has confirmed the ideological and sys-
temic transformation of industry agendas towards a more
pragmatic, unified solution. Accordingly, the optimal solu-
tion for the IoT-based smart city extrapolated from the
academic and empirical findings is a pyramid of three core
requirements:
(1) Scalable: the IoT must be able to grow organically.
Therefore, any smart city solution must be scalable,
and for this reason, individual, proprietary middle-
ware solutions are inefficient and inadequate
(2) Secure: the IoT must be end-to-end secure, meaning
that data transfer will be immutable and provable
and that interference by unauthorised users will be
mitigated in all cases [40]. Therefore, any smart city
solution must be secure, and for this reason, private-
sector cloud-based computing solutions that are
nonstandardised and proprietary fail to achieve the
standard of end-to-end security
(3) Autonomous: the IoT must be able to operate auton-
omously to realise the full potential of smart city
15
operations, applying prescribed sequencing and
APIs to the functionality of distributed network of
devices [42]. Therefore, any smart city solutions
must be autonomous, and for this reason, proprie-
tary middleware solutions fail to achieve the require-
ments of an expedient, software-driven end-to-end
relationship.
6. Conclusion and Future Work
This article carried out an explorative study that provided
insider evidence related to internal stakeholders for asses-
sing potential value for a blockchain-optimised standar-
dised, integrated system solution for solving the
limitations of IoT-based smart city industry. In summary,
an in-depth presentation of the empirical results captured
from a mixed method an online questionnaire survey
(QUAN = 108 participants) and interviews (QUAL = 14
participants) that was administered to stakeholders and
leaders from worldwide IoT and smart cities marketplace.
Coincidentally, the research study was conducted as
planned from Feb 2020 till Oct 2020 along with the peak
of worldwide pandemic Covid-19; however, due to time
constraints and limited funds, the research study cannot
extend or change the timeframe. Also, every effort has
been taken to reach more participants; however, due to
Covid-19, the study confronted with challenging commu-
nications which is another limitation of this study to be
considered. Nonetheless, this study is designed as a purpo-
sive, nonprobabilistic sampling approach. Hence, a repre-
sentative sample of 122 uniquely skilled and experienced
stakeholders from worldwide IoT-smart city organisations
was attained. The findings confirm that blockchain is a
viable and attractive solution for these organisations, but
there are hurdles related to regulations, competitive stan-
dards, and a lack of industry interoperability and unity.
The findings have also confirmed that there is a conflicted
knowledge base surrounding blockchain technologies that
is likely to prevent the accelerated adoption of a unified
standard without international support and operationalisa-
tion. Accordingly, to realise the intelligent and smarter ideals
of an urban cyberphysical utopia, future research can explore
in greater details blockchain technologies to a series of decen-
tralised transactions and smart contracts that will continue to
scale and expand in lifestyle importance over the coming
decade of deployment.
Data Availability
The survey data used to support the findings of this study
are included within the article.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to
report regarding the present study.
16
Acknowledgments
The authors are very thankful to all the associated personnel
in any reference that contributed in/for the purpose of this
research. Further, the authors are very thankful to all partic-
ipants who voluntarily took part in this research study.
References
[1] B. Liu, X. L. Yu, S. Chen, X. Xu, and L. Zhu, “Blockchain based
data integrity service framework for IoT data,” in in Proc. 2017
IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS),
pp. 468–475, Honolulu, HI, 2017.
[2] N. Cam-Winget, A. R. Sadeghi, and Y. Jin, “Can IoT be
secured: emerging challenges in connecting the unconnected,”
in in Proc. 53rd ACM/EDAC/IEEE Design Automation Confer-
ence (DAC), pp. 1–6, IEEE, 2016.
[3] I. Makhdoom, M. Abolhasan, and W. Ni, “Blockchain for IoT:
the challenges and a way forward,” in in Proc. the 15th Interna-
tional Joint Conference on e-Business and Telecommunications
(ICETE), pp. 594–605, 2018.
[4] D. Lund, C. MacGillivray, V. Turner, and M. Morales, World-
wide and Regional Internet of Things (IoT) 2014–2020 Forecast:
A Virtuous Circle of Proven Value and Demand, International
Data Corporation, Tech. Rep, 2014, http://branden.biz/wp-
content/uploads/2017/06/IoT-worldwide_regional_2014-
2020-forecast.pdf.
[5] S. A. Kumar, T. Vealey, and H. Srivastava, “Security in Internet
of Things: challenges, solutions and future directions,” in in
Proc. 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
(HICSS), pp. 5772–5781, IEEE, Koloa, HI, 2016.
[6] T. Borgohain, U. Kumar, and S. Sanyal, “Survey of security and
privacy issues of Internet of Things,” International Journal of
Advanced Networking Applications, vol. 6, pp. 2372–2378,
2015.
[7] P. Brody and V. Pureswaran, Device democracy: saving the
future of the Internet of Things, IBM, 2015, https://www.ibm
.com/downloads/cas/Y5ONA8EV.
[8] S. Popov, The Tangle, IOTA, 2018, http://www.iota.org/
research/academic-papers.
[9] Waltonchain, Waltonchain white paper V2.0, Walsonchain
Org, 2018, https://www.waltonchain.org/en/Waltonchain_
White_Paper_2.0_EN.pdf.
[10] A. Haleem, A. Allen, A. Thompson, M. Nijdam, and R. Garg,
Helium: a decentralized wireless network, Helium, 2018,
http://whitepaper.helium.com/.
[11] IoTeX, A decentralized network for Internet of Things powered
by a privacy-centric blockchain, IoTeX, 2018, https://
whitepaper.io/coin/iotex.
[12] Moeco, White paper Moeco, V0.9, Moeco, 2018, https://moeco
.io/moecowp.pdf.
[13] C. C. Ragin and L. M. Amoroso, Construction Social Research:
The Unity and Diversity of Method, CA: Sage Publications, Los
Angeles, 3rd edition, 2018.
[14] A. Bryman, Social Research Methods, Oxford University Press,
Oxford, NY, 4th edition, 2015.
[15] D. Watkins and D. Gioia, Mixed Methods Research, Oxford
University Press, New York, NY, 2015.
[16] M. Q. Patton, “Two decades of developments in qualitative
inquiry,” Qualitative Social Work: Research and Practice,
vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 261–283, 2002.
Journal of Sensors
[17] R. B. Johnson and A. J. Onwuegbuzie, “Mixed methods
research: a research paradigm whose time has come,” Educa-
tional Researcher, vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 14–26, 2004.
[18] K. Singh, Quantitative Social Research Methods, Sage Publica-
tions, Los Angeles, CA, 2007.
[19] S. B. Merriam and E. J. Tisdell, Qualitative Research: A Guide
to Design and Implementation, John Wiley & Sons, 2015.
[20] N. K. Denzin, “The social survey: uses and problems,” Socio-
logical Methods, pp. 315–319, 2017.
[21] A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie, “Issues and dilemmas in
teaching research methods courses in social and behavioural
sciences: US perspective,” International Journal of Social
Research Methodology, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 61–77, 2003.
[22] M. Stone, J. Knapper, G. Evans, and E. Aravopoulou, “Infor-
mation management in the smart city,” The Bottom Line,
vol. 31, pp. 214–249, 2018.
[23] M. Barlow and C. Levy-Bencheton, Smart Cities, Smart Future:
Showcasing Tomorrow, John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ,
2019.
[24] R. Mody and M. Krishnamoorthy, Staying ahead of the game: a
transformative, integrative approach to the infrastructure value
chain, Aveva, 2019, https://sw.aveva.com/hubfs/assets-2018/
pdf/whitepapers/Whitepaper_Infrastructure-Value-Chain_
EN.pdf.
[25] J. Sun, J. Yan, and K. Z. K. Zhang, “Blockchain-based sharing
services: what blockchain technology can contribute to smart
cities,” Financial Innovation, vol. 2, no. 1, 2016.
[26] E. Wokye, Blockchain is helping build a new kind of energy grid,
MIT Technology Review, 2017, https://www.technologyreview
.com/s/604227/blockchain-is-helping-to-build-a-new-kind-
of-energy-grid/.
[27] N. Alasbali, S. R. Azzuhri, and R. Salleh, “A blockchain-based
smart network for IoT-driven smart cities,” in in Proc. the 2020
2nd International Electronics Communication Conference
(IECC 2020), Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 17–
23, New York, NY, USA, 2020.
[28] S. Ibba, A. Pinna, M. Seu, and F. E. Pani, “CitySense:
blockchain-oriented smart cities,” in Proceedings of the
XP2017 Scientific Workshops, 2017.
[29] D. W. Kravitz, “Transaction immutability and reputation
traceability: blockchain as a platform for access controlled
IoT and human interactivity,” in in Proc. IEEE 15th Annual
Conference on PST, vol. 1, pp. 3–12, 2017.
[30] H. Hong, B. Hu, and Z. Sun, “Toward secure and accountable
data transmission in narrow band internet of things based
on blockchain,” International Journal of Distributed Sensors
Networks, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 1–10, 2019.
[31] D. Bruneo, G. Patane, A. Puliafito et al., “Building a smart city
service platform in messina with the #Smart Me project,” in in
Proc. the 32nd International Conference on Advanced Informa-
tion Networking and Applications Workshops (WAINA),
pp. 343–348, Krakow, Poland, 2018.
[32] S. Sahmim and H. Gharsellaoui, “Privacy and security in
internet-based computing: cloud computing, internet of
things, cloud of things: a review,” Procedia Computer Science,
vol. 112, no. 5, pp. 1516–1522, 2017.
[33] E. Zeng, S. Mare, and F. Roesner, “End user security and pri-
vacy concerns with smart homes,” in Proc. the Thirteenth USE-
NIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS '17),
2017, pp. 65–80, USENIX Association, 2017.
Journal of Sensors 17

[34] C. Lazaroiu and M. Roscia, “Smart district through IoT and

blockchain,” in in Proc. IEEE 6th International Conference on
Renewable Energy Research and Applications (ICRERA),
pp. 454–461, San Diego, CA, 2017.
[35] R. Casado-Vara, P. Chamoso, F. De la Prieta, J. Prieto, and
J. M. Corchado, “Non-linear adaptive closed-loop control sys-
tem for improved efficiency in IoT- blockchain management,”
Information Fusion, vol. 49, pp. 227–239, 2019.
[36] J. Campbell, A system of systems approach to breaking down
smart city silos, Smart Cities World, 2020, https://www
.smartcitiesworld.net/opinions/opinions/a-system-of-
systems-approach-to-breaking-down-smart-city-silos.
[37] E. Almirall, J. Wareham, C. Ratti et al., “Smart cities at the
crossroads,” California Management Review, vol. 59, no. 1,
pp. 141–152, 2016.
[38] D. Kundu, “Blockchain and trust in a smart city,” Environment
and Urbanization ASIA, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 31–43, 2019.
[39] B. K. Zheng, L. H. Zhu, M. Shen et al., “Scalable and
privacy-preserving data sharing based on blockchain,” Com-
puter Science and Technology, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 557–567, 2018.
[40] H. Shafagh and A. Hithnawi, “Privacy-preserving quantified
self: secure sharing and processing of encrypted small data,”
in in Proc. the Workshop on Mobility in the Evolving Internet
Architecture-Mobi Arch’17, Association for Computing
Machinery, pp. 25–30, New York, NY, USA, 2017.
[41] S. Sharmin and S. T. Al-Amin, “A cloud-based dynamic waste
management system for smart cities,” in in Proc. the 7th
Annual Symposium on Computing for Development, Associa-
tion for Computing Machinery, pp. 1–4, NY, USA, 2016.
[42] S. Shukla and N. Shukla, “Smart waste collection system based
on IoT (Internet of Things): a survey,” International Journal of
Computer Applications, vol. 162, no. 3, pp. 42–44, 2017.
[43] A. Ouaddah, A. A. Elkalam, and A. A. Ouahman, “FairAccess:
a new blockchain-based access control framework for the
internet of things,” Security and Communication Networks,
vol. 9, no. 18, 2016.
[44] M. A. Rahman, M. M. Rashid, M. S. Hossain, E. Hassanain,
M. F. Alhamid, and M. Guizani, “Blockchain and IoT-based
cognitive edge framework for sharing economy services in a
smart city,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 18611–18621, 2019.
[45] A. Fayad, B. Hammi, and R. Khatoun, “An adaptive authen-
tication and authorization scheme for IoT’s gateways: a
blockchain based approach,” in in Proc. the Third Interna-
tional Conference on Security of Smart Cities, Industrial Con-
trol System and Communications (SSIC)7 pages, 1, Shanghai,
2018.
[46] A. Reyna, C. Martín, J. Chen, E. Soler, and M. Díaz, “On
blockchain and its integration with IoT. Challenges and
opportunities,” Future Generation Computer Systems,
vol. 88, pp. 173–190, 2018.
[47] O. J. A. Pinno, A. R. A. Grégio, and L. C. E. De Bona, “Control-
Chain: a new stage on the IoT access control authorization,”
Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience,
vol. 32, no. 12, 2019.