The article represents the analysis of the vital activity of one of the youngest cities in Russia - Innopolis (Republic of Tatarstan), which is being built as a high-tech space, designed with modern concepts of urban development in mind. This is an ambitious project to create a special environment filled with modern “smart” infrastructure and “smart” management methods, as well as a space with an innovative economy fully focused on the work of large, medium and small companies in the field of high technologies and IT education.

The focus of attention is the population of the city, the originality of which lies in the synthesis of its economic, historical, socio-demographic and ethnic characteristics. This is a newly formed urban community, where almost every resident is a newcomer. The history of the city officially began in 2015, the social structure of the city is in the process of formation. The population is represented mainly by specialists in the field of high technologies, by occupation they are management personnel, teaching staff, employees of IT companies. In the future, this group may be replenished with graduates of the country's first IT university, operating in the city, open both to local and foreign students. The demographic uniqueness of the city is in the young age of its inhabitants: two thirds of them are young people, including students. In essence, Innopolis is a multifaceted urban community, that is a social construct in the process of formation.

The study of Innopolis and the social well-being of its residents is a rare opportunity to consider the current case of designing a “smart city” in modern Russia. Based on the analysis of conceptual approaches to the interpretation of the “smart city” phenomenon, the analysis of the compliance of the newly created urban environment with the main parameters of “smart” and effective urban development is carried out. The research is focused on finding quantitative and qualitative indicators of the level of satisfaction of residents and employees of the city of Innopolis with their lives in general. The level of satisfaction of residents with various aspects of the urban environment and the level of happiness are considered as the main integrated indicators. Based on the results of the empirical study, significant differences were found in the respondents' assessment of the qualitative and quantitative components of the city's life. On the whole, the general rather high level of satisfaction of the urban community with the new habitat is stated, making evident the potential for the further development of Innopolis as a “smart city” of happy people. Implementation of the “Smart City” concept and ensuring sustainable urban development in Innopolis actualises the need to involve the population in the formation and development of urban space, this being necessary for both the authorities and the population. For the authorities, this is an opportunity to use the socio-cultural potential of residents to increase the efficiency of urban development, for citizens - an opportunity to realise their expectations in the space of the “smart city” through active involvement in its daily life.

“smart city”, urban environment, concepts, everyday life, satisfaction, happiness index, information and communication technologies, urban community, creative class, socio-cultural environment, sustainable development, relevant indicator

1. Baburov V. A. Umnyye goroda: istorii uspekha [Smart Cities: a Success Story]. Gradoustroystvo, 2012: 12: 45–56 (in Russ.).

2. Khulamkhanova S. B., Tkhalidzhokov S. L., Gergokova M. A. Ustoychivoye razvitiye — put′ k resheniyu ekonomicheskikh i ekologicheskikh problem [Sustainable development — a way to solve economic and environmental problems]. Prostranstvo ekonomiki, 2006: 4-2: 316–319 (in Russ.).

3. Abreu M., Grinevich V., Kitson M., Savona M. Absorptive capacity and regional patterns of innovation. Research Report. DIUS RR-08-11, Cambridge MA, MIT, 2008.

4. Coe A., Paquet G., Roy J. E-governance and smart communities: a social learning challenge. Social Science Computer Review, 2001: 19 (1): 80–93.

5. Florida R. L. The rise of the creative class: and how it's transforming work, leisure, community and every day life. New York, Basic Books, 2002: 10–14.

6. Graham S., Marvin S. Telecommunications and the city: electronic spaces, urban place. London, Routledge, 1996: 96–100.

7. Hollands R. G. Will the real smart city please stand up? City, 2008: 12 (3): 303–320.

8. Joss S. «Smart City»: A Regressive Agenda University of Westminster. 2016. Accessed 30.11.2017. URL: https://www.westminster.ac.uk/news/2016/smart-city-a-regressive-agenda

9. Komninos N. Intelligent cities: innovation, knowledge systems and digital spaces. London, Spon Press, 2002: 20–22.

10. Mark E. Hepworth Planning for the Information City: the Challenge and Response First Published, 1990. August 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00420989020080501.

11. Neirotti P., De Marco A., Cagliano A. C., Mangano G., Scorrano F. Current trends in Smart City initiatives: Some stylised facts. Cities, 2014: 38: 25–36. DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2013.12.010