Is there a Gap Between Promise and Practice? A Critical Assessment of Digital Twins for Sustainable and Resilient Smart Cities

Urban areas face intensifying socio-ecological and socio-technical challenges – from climate change impacts and resource depletion to increasing polarization – demanding innovative approaches to build societal resilience. Digital twins (DTs) are touted as transformative tools for urban management, promising enhanced monitoring and modelling to ultimately make cities more sustainable and adaptable (Patel et al., 2024; Silva et al., 2018). However, Helbing and Sánchez-Vaquerizo (2023) highlight potential controversies relating to the limitations of DTs in complex dynamical systems and the ethical implications of treating society as something to be managed and optimised (Helbing and Sánchez-Vaquerizo, 2023). Although the concept of DTs is frequently employed to integrate and analyse various data streams, simulate complex urban processes, and facilitate informed decision-making regarding climate change strategies, their actual deployment appears to fall short of this potential (Ferré-Bigorra et al., 2022; Patel et al., 2024; Stufano Melone et al., 2025). Our contribution provides a critical assessment of the application of urban DTs, comparing their theoretical potential for sustainable development with the limitations and tensions affecting sustainability outcomes that have been observed in their practical implementation.

Drawing on a review of recent literature and case studies highlighting successful and problematic implementations, we analyse digital transformation initiatives, with a focus on the co-creation of digital technologies. We identify discrepancies between aspirational goals, such as holistic systems thinking and citizen engagement, and realised functionalities, which are often focused on infrastructure management and operational efficiency. The aim is to raise awareness of unintended social and ecological effects in urban DT initiatives and foster discussions for a more reflective modelling process.

• Abdeen, F. N., Shirowzhan, S. and Sepasgozar, S. M. (2023). ‘Citizen-centric digital twin development with machine learning and interfaces for maintaining urban infrastructure’. Telematics and Informatics, 84, 102032.
• Ferré-Bigorra, J., Casals, M. and Gangolells, M. (2022). ‘The adoption of urban digital twins’. Cities, 131, 103905.
• Helbing, D. and Sánchez-Vaquerizo, J. A. (2023). ‘Digital twins: potentials, ethical issues and limitations’, In Handbook on the Politics and Governance of Big Data and Artificial Intelligence: Edward Elgar Publishing, 64–104.
• Ibrahim, M., El-Zaart, A. and Adams, C. (2018). ‘Smart sustainable cities roadmap: Readiness for transformation towards urban sustainability’. Sustainable Cities and Society, 37, 530–40.
• Patel, U. R., Ghaffarianhoseini, A., Ghaffarianhoseini, A. and Burgess, A. (2024). ‘Digital Twin Technology for sustainable urban development: A review of its potential impact on SDG 11 in New Zealand’. Cities, 155, 105484.
• Shahat, E., Hyun, C. T. and Yeom, C. (2021). ‘City Digital Twin Potentials: A Review and Research Agenda’. Sustainability, 13, 3386.
• Silva, B. N., Khan, M. and Han, K. (2018). ‘Towards sustainable smart cities: A review of trends, architectures, components, and open challenges in smart cities’. Sustainable Cities and Society, 38, 697–713.
• Stufano Melone, M. R., Borgo, S. and Camarda, D. (2025). ‘Digital Twins Facing the Complexity of the City: Some Critical Remarks’. Sustainability, 17, 3189.
• Weil, C., Bibri, S. E., Longchamp, R., Golay, F. and Alahi, A. (2023). ‘Urban Digital Twin Challenges: A Systematic Review and Perspectives for Sustainable Smart Cities’. Sustainable Cities and Society, 99, 104862.