Table 12 The average rating of each of the criteria and sub-criteria
From: The social issues of smart home: a review of four European cities’ experiences
Average | Copenhagen | Berlin | Barcelona | London | Sub-criteria | Criteria |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
8.4 | 9.5 | 9 | 8.5 | 7.5 | Smart systems for surveillance | Privacy and security |
8.5 | 8 | 8 | 8.5 | Smart system for detection | ||
9 | 8.5 | 7.5 | 8 | Smart system for identification | ||
8.1 | 8 | 8.5 | 7.5 | 8.5 | Smart system for forecasting emergencies | Reliability |
8.5 | 8 | 8.5 | 7 | Smart system for environmental situations | ||
9 | 8 | 8 | 8.5 | Smart system for Remote control devices | ||
8.5 | 8.5 | 8 | 7 | Privacy protection | ||
7.5 | 8.5 | 7.5 | 8 | 8 | Safe internet connection | Satisfaction |
8.5 | 8 | 7.5 | 7 | Reducing energy consumption | ||
8 | 7.5 | 7 | 6.5 | Saving time | ||
8 | 7 | 7.5 | 7 | Reduce the cost of housing construction | ||
8.5 | 8 | 8 | 6 | Easier access to services | ||
7 | 6.5 | 7 | 6 | Better education | ||
8.5 | 8 | 7.5 | 8 | Increasing the health of residents | ||
6.4 | 7 | 7 | 6.5 | 6 | Operation of different devices with each other | Trust on controlling device. |
7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | Owners ability to change smart device settings |