14.01.2026

Cyber-physical systems in urban operations – digital twins meet sensor technology

Building design

Cityscape of a busy street with traffic and skyscrapers, photographed by Bin White

Digital twins are more than just a gadget for smart cities – they mark a paradigm shift in urban planning: real-time sensor technology, algorithmic simulations and data-based decision-making are merging to form an urban operating system that radically challenges the way urban designers, engineers and administrations see themselves. Those who embrace it will gain a tool for transparency, climate resilience and sustainable urban development – provided they are not afraid of open data or critical questions.

Definition and development of cyber-physical systems in an urban context
Functionality, potential and technical principles of digital twins
Practical examples: International pioneers and the status quo in Germany, Austria and Switzerland
Challenges: Law, governance, data ethics and cultural hurdles
Relevance for climate resilience, mobility, disaster prevention and participatory urban development
Risks: commercialization, algorithmic distortions and transparency deficits
Opportunities for planners, administrations and citizens through new opportunities for participation and simulation
The shift from model to dynamic process architecture in everyday planning
Outlook: The digital twin as a catalyst for sustainable, adaptive and resilient cities

Cyber-physical systems and digital twins: the new nervous system of the city

Cities are no longer just being built, they are being controlled, measured and analyzed. Cyber-physical systems – i.e. the close coupling of sensor technology, data processing and physical infrastructure – are the backbone of a new generation of urban control. At the center is the digital twin: a digital, data-based clone of the real city, fed by sensors, geographic information systems (GIS), real-time data and AI-supported algorithms. Such systems are no longer a vision, but have long been part of everyday life for many international cities. They allow the simulation and control of traffic flows, energy consumption, microclimatic effects, disaster prevention measures and even social dynamics – at the touch of a button, with a precision that traditional planning could never achieve.

The principle is impressively simple, but technically complex: sensors continuously record data in the urban space. This data flows into a central system that simulates the physical characteristics, conditions and processes of the city in real time. The digital twin thus becomes a control panel for urban developers, infrastructure operators, disaster prevention experts and urban planners alike. While traditional models often remain static, the digital twin is dynamic and adaptive: it constantly adapts, integrates new data sources and can even run through scenarios – for example, how a new bus route will affect CO₂ emissions, pedestrian flows or noise pollution.

This integration of cyber-physical systems into urban operations is a quantum leap: it transforms the city from a built object into a process-based, intelligent platform. For planners, this means that it is no longer enough to deliver urban planning designs and visualizations – what is needed is the ability to work with data streams, algorithms and simulations. The job profile is changing fundamentally and traditional disciplines are merging. At the same time, new interfaces are emerging: between technology companies, administration, science and civil society.

The complexity of such systems is enormous. In addition to the integration of a wide variety of data sources – from OpenStreetMap to LoRaWAN sensors and mobility data – the focus is on issues such as data security, data protection and interoperability. This is where it is decided whether the digital twin becomes an open urban operating system or a closed black box of a software provider. The governance of these systems is therefore just as relevant as their technical excellence.

The coupling of physical and digital urban worlds in particular opens up undreamt-of potential: from the intelligent control of urban infrastructures to the adaptive adjustment of public spaces and proactive crisis intervention. However, any system is only as good as its database, its openness and its integration into democratic processes. The digital twin is not an end in itself – it is a tool, a medium and a challenge at the same time.

From simulation to control: digital twins as a planning and operations laboratory

The digital twin takes classic urban planning to a new level. What used to end in elaborate 3D renderings and static simulation studies is now a permanently updated, interactive city model. This model is not just illustrative material, but has become a decision-making authority: it simulates construction projects, analyzes the effects of mobility concepts or evaluates climatic changes in the neighborhood – all in real time. As a result, the roles in planning are fundamentally shifting: instead of retrospective evaluation, forward-looking scenario development dominates.

International pioneers are impressively demonstrating what these systems are capable of. Singapore, for example, uses its digital twin to control traffic flows, monitor the environment and involve citizens. Real-time data from sensors, public infrastructure and mobility platforms flow together to not only map urban processes, but actively control them. Helsinki, on the other hand, links the Digital Twin with climate policy goals: Here, construction projects, planting, mobility strategies and energy supply are synchronized and tested in advance for their climate resilience.

In Vienna, too, the digital twin is gradually growing into an urban process architecture. Here, microclimatic effects of new urban districts are simulated in order to prevent heat islands and ensure quality of life. Neighborhood development is thus becoming a data-driven, participatory process: citizens are given an insight into simulations, can make suggestions and experience the effects of planned measures directly on screen. In Zurich, on the other hand, traffic planning, environmental monitoring and real estate development are merging into a data-driven overall process. The digital twin serves as an interface between administration, business and society.

The technical basis for all of this is a highly modular, open platform. Key terms such as open urban platforms, interoperability and data lake characterize the discussion. A digital twin that is not open – for new data sources, external players and participatory use – remains an obstacle to innovation. Conversely, open systems can become a driver of innovation: They promote transparency, enable rapid scenario development and lower the threshold for participation and cooperation.

However, the success of digital twins depends on the quality of the sensors, data integration and algorithms. If the data is incomplete, outdated or distorted, the simulation becomes a mirage. The question of control is just as critical: who defines which scenarios are played out? Who sets the parameters? Who is allowed to interpret the results and translate them into political decisions? This is where the real challenge begins – and the great opportunity for a new planning culture.

Between pioneering spirit and everyday planning: the current situation in German-speaking countries

German cities often find it difficult to make the leap into the data-based planning age. While international metropolises have long been operating with urban digital twins, in many places in Germany there is still a spirit of experimentation – but little standardization. Pilot projects in Hamburg, Munich, Ulm and Cologne show how digital twins can enrich city operations, but they mostly remain isolated solutions. Different software solutions, a lack of interfaces and a patchwork of legal frameworks are slowing down the widespread introduction.

One major obstacle is the uncertainty surrounding governance, data protection and data sovereignty. Who is the master of the data and algorithms? The local authority, the software provider or even a consortium of public and private players? The answers vary, which leads to caution and skepticism. Many administrations fear that operating the digital twin will also mean relinquishing control and responsibility. The cultural barrier should also not be underestimated: planners and administrative staff have to learn to work with real-time data and algorithmic systems – this requires new skills, the courage to be transparent and an open error culture.

Austria and Switzerland show that things can be done differently: Vienna, for example, is already using its digital twin for participatory urban development and climate adaptation. Zurich combines the possibilities of digital twins with a consistently open data strategy. Here, citizens, companies and the administration are seen as equal users and designers of the system – an attitude that promotes innovation and acceptance.

Nevertheless, the road remains rocky. There is a lack of technical standards, open source approaches are rare and there is often insufficient integration between municipal planning and digital infrastructure. There is also the risk of commercialization: many providers rely on proprietary solutions, which can mean dependencies and cost increases in the long term. Anyone introducing digital twins must therefore not only keep an eye on the technical, but also the strategic and ethical level.

The crucial question is: will the digital twin become an open, democratic instrument or a black box? Only if governance, data ethics and participation are taken into account can digital twins develop their potential for sustainable, resilient cities. Otherwise, there is a risk of a relapse into technocratic control and a lack of transparency that undermines trust in the digital city.

Democratic potential, ethical dilemmas and new cultures of participation

The introduction of cyber-physical systems and digital twins is not a purely technical issue – it is deeply political. Who decides what data is collected and how it is interpreted? How can algorithmic distortions and technocratic bias be avoided? And how can we prevent the promise of participatory urban development from ultimately becoming an instrument of control and commercialization?

Transparency and traceability are the be-all and end-all. If digital twins are operated as black boxes, their functionality remains opaque for citizens, politicians and often even the administration. The more artificial intelligence and algorithmic decision-making come into play, the greater the risk of misdirection, discrimination and loss of trust. This is why explainable AI – i.e. the ability to understand algorithmic decisions – is not a luxury, but a democratic necessity.

At the same time, digital twins offer enormous opportunities for new cultures of participation. Well-designed systems make complex planning processes understandable and accessible. Citizens can experience simulations, feed in their own proposals and follow developments in real time. Platforms such as Vienna’s “Stadtmacherei” or Zurich’s “Data Lab” show how participation, transparency and innovation can go hand in hand – provided that the systems are open, modular and user-friendly.

New horizons are also opening up for the administration: decisions become more comprehensible, communication becomes more dialogical and planning errors can be identified and corrected at an early stage. Planners can not only run through scenarios, but also prioritize them together with citizens and politicians. The city becomes a laboratory in which innovation, adaptability and resilience become part of everyday life.

But beware: without clear ethical guidelines, new risks are looming. Commercialization, surveillance, algorithmic distortion and the exclusion of certain user groups are real dangers. The digital twin is not a neutral technology – its design reflects social values, political priorities and economic interests. Whoever has control over the systems ultimately also controls the development of the city.

Conclusion: Digital twins as an opportunity and mandate for urban development

Cyber-physical systems and digital twins are revolutionizing urban planning, operation and administration. With their ability to analyze, simulate and control urban processes in real time, they open up new perspectives for sustainable, resilient and adaptive cities. They turn traditional city models into learning systems and planners into data-driven decision-makers who not only visualize scenarios, but actively shape them. International pioneers such as Singapore, Helsinki, Zurich and Vienna show how these technologies can protect the climate, manage mobility, involve citizens and make infrastructures crisis-proof.

But getting there is challenging. Technical, legal and cultural hurdles require courage, a spirit of innovation and strategic vision. Without open data, transparent algorithms and participatory governance, there is a risk of new dependencies and a loss of trust. The digital twin is therefore not a sure-fire success – it is both a challenge and an opportunity. Those who understand it as an open, democratic process can shape the city of tomorrow in a resilient, vibrant and inclusive way. Anyone who hesitates will be overtaken by reality, which has long been ticking digitally.

The future of urban planning is no longer static, but dynamic, no longer exclusive, but participatory. Digital twins are the tool that makes this change possible – provided they are used with understanding, openness and the courage to engage in discourse. The age of classic designs is over: Welcome to the age of real-time planning, in which cities are not only built, but permanently rethought.

20.01.2025

Trade

What will the retail spaces of the future look like?

Building design

Management

Brick-and-mortar retailers are fighting back against competition from the Internet and developing new retail concepts.

Shopping centers and high streets will soon be superfluous because customers will order everything online anyway thanks to online retail. This was the theory of many market observers, but it is now clear that this is not the case. Brick-and-mortar retailers have long since taken measures to counter the competition from the Internet. They are developing new retail concepts and formats that have one thing in common: Stores as we used to know them are no longer really stores.

The trend towards new or modified location concepts prompted the research team at real estate company Catella to look into the question of whether increasing digital retail will make European retail spaces obsolete in the medium term. “The fact is that digitalization and demographic change will change demand patterns and lead to a reduction in retail space,” says Thomas Beyerle, Head of Research at the real estate company, summarizing the results.

The 28 EU member states currently have a total of around 590 million square meters of retail space, 510 to 550 million square meters of which will still be available in 2030 according to Catella’s forecast. So that doesn’t sound like a huge extinction of stores. Retailers are also finding new unique selling points in competition with e-commerce providers – for example, what Beyerle calls the “festivalization” of shopping: more and more providers, especially of high-quality products, are focusing on the experiential nature of shopping. Many retailers are therefore beginning to celebrate the shopping event and the brand in addition to the actual product.

A major project currently under construction in Switzerland, “The Circle at Zurich Airport”, is consistently geared towards such considerations: Riken Yamamoto has designed a building complex for the airport that is not only currently the largest building construction project in the country, but also aims to set new standards in terms of use. “The Circle” is no ordinary airport mall, but is intended to function like a city center, with narrow alleyways, small squares and a high quality of stay.

However, the area in which the retailers are to be located will differ significantly from a typical city center. Consequently, it is not called “Shopping Mall” at The Circle, but “Brands & Dialogue” – because this is not about shopping at all, but rather about trying out new formats for customer loyalty. For example, the luxury watch brand Omega will open a “Brand House” here. The focus is not on selling watches, only a very small store is planned. However, a large part of the 800 square meters will be occupied by a show workshop. Up to 40 employees will introduce visitors to the art of Swiss watchmaking and show how a ceramic movement works or how dials are made.

Another trend topic and unique selling point of the stationary retail trade that real estate professionals are currently talking about is the combination of retail and gastronomy. Many industry observers consider the Italian concept Eataly, which opened its first European location outside Italy last November in the converted Schrannenhalle in Munich, to be a prime example of this. The 4,600 square meter space houses 16 restaurants and food stalls, a shopping area with 10,000 delicatessen products and a cooking school – and even a small store for the traditional bicycle brand Bianchi. Eataly was founded in 2007 and is considered one of the fastest growing and most successful food service and retail companies with a recent turnover of around 400 million euros. The concept combines markets, restaurants, teaching facilities and show productions of Italian food under one roof – and prefers to rent space in prominent locations. The world’s largest branch, Eataly Alti Cibi, is located on Fifth Avenue in New York, directly opposite the Flatiron Building.

Whether watch workshop, restaurant or cooking school – the common goal of these retail concepts is to create a sensual counterpoint to sober online shopping. And the formats are quite space-intensive, usually covering around a thousand square meters or, as in the case of Eataly in Munich, many times that amount. However, the future of retail can also be seen in small spaces, where the connection between offline and online retail is being tested. The sporting goods retailer Decathlon, for example, known for its huge stores near the highway, launched its new concept called “Decathlon Connect” in February 2016 with its first city store on Munich’s Stachus.

In the stores of this format, the focus is on networking with the online store and other digital services: customers can have the sporting goods purchased via the online store delivered to the Connect store. There, the goods can be tested, tried on and exchanged if they are not to their liking when they pick them up. On-site tablets can be used to search for other collections, colors or models, which can also be ordered directly in the store.
Decathlon only needs a comparatively small space for this: The store on Stachus is 220 square meters in size; another Decathlon Connect has since opened on Königstraße in Stuttgart with just 50 square meters of space. Electronics retailer Saturn and toy chain Toys’R’Us, among others, have also introduced similar formats. In view of these new retail concepts, it is reasonable to assume that malls, shopping centers and inner-city shopping streets will change their face in the coming years; Catella researchers also assume this. However, Beyerle is convinced that bricks-and-mortar retail centers will retain one of their most important functions: “Increasing digitalization and constant networking will not replace the need for physical, social contact, but will complement it and demand it more than ever.” In the retail spaces of the future, the aspect of shopping will therefore only represent a partial element. At best, they will be places where urban life pulsates.

19.12.2024

Save the tombs!

Building design

Crypt archaeology? Another archaeology within an increasingly differentiated and specialized discipline? Crypt archaeology is still difficult to google, and there is no Wikipedia article either. The term probably first appeared in 2011 at the conference called “Transmortale”, which was jointly organized by the University of Hamburg and the Museum for Sepulchral Culture in Kassel. The […]

Crypt archaeology? Another archaeology within an increasingly differentiated and specialized discipline?

Crypt archaeology is still difficult to google, and there is no Wikipedia article either. The term probably first appeared in 2011 at the conference called “Transmortale”, which was jointly organized by the University of Hamburg and the Museum for Sepulchral Culture in Kassel. The protagonists who presented the topic are the same people who are now responsible for the book to be published. Some of them have been working underground for much longer, documenting crypts, struggling with fungal and mold infestation and often enough not only with the natural phenomena of transience, but also with the consequences of incorrect measures taken in the past or even with pure vandalism. And what can you do when twisted coffins are piled on top of each other in the crypt? What to do with the often mummified mortal remains, their clothing and grave goods? What can be saved, restored and perhaps made accessible to the public, how, with what effort and with what result? The collective of authors is also confronted with ethical questions. What should we do with these bodies that were laid to rest here for eternity some time ago? And they by no means leave it at reverence, but also shed light on the legal background when it comes to the ownership of the bodies or burial objects.

The topic certainly has a future, as burial vaults are increasingly being (re)discovered due to the growing awareness of priests, cemetery administrators, castle and mausoleum owners. Especially since the Reformation, the need for such exclusive burial sites has increased among the upper classes. Crypts can be found under almost every church that once had a noble patron who established his family burial place there. And as late as the 18th and 19th centuries, parishes were still building basements under their churches to create space for grand burial crypts. And what becomes of them once they have been restored – if the money was available? The interdisciplinary group of authors, ranging from archaeologists, historians and lawyers to textile restorers, addresses all these questions and proposes solutions that draw on a wealth of experience.

Although the “Cemetery Culture Today” series published by the Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences is primarily aimed at specialists in the cemetery sector, monument conservators, art historians and restorers will also find this book useful if they ever have to deal with the sepulchral underworld. And that will be the case more and more often. Above all, the case studies described provide suggestions as to how different the approach and results can be. It is not a guideline that should be followed when working on crypts in general, but rather documents that every crypt is different. You will not be overwhelmed by the size of the book, but it remains pleasingly compact and moderately priced. If you want to find out more about crypt archaeology, this is the book for you – but it is the only one currently available.

Preuß, Dirk et alii (ed.): Saving tombs! Ein Leitfaden zum pietätvollen Umgang mit historischen Grüften (Schriftenreihe Friedhofskultur heute, Vol. 5), Frankfurt/M 2014. ISBN 978-3-943787-29-0, 156 pages, 16 pages of color photos, € 18.