Following the principles of the knowledge economy, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the European Union (EU), among others, have adopted knowledge management (KM) frameworks in their strategic directions for global and local development (Angelidou, 2015). This paradigm shift in strategic planning has strongly influenced urban development, with the result that knowledge is now conceived as the core component that makes cities smart (Bakici et al., 2013; Hollands, 2008). Accordingly, we hereafter refer to smart cities as “the result of knowledge-intensive and creative strategies aiming at enhancing the socio-economic, ecological, logistic and competitive performance of cities” (Kourtit and Nijkamp, 2012:3). In turn, the rationale underlying the so-called knowledge-based urban development (KBUD) approach is becoming more and more prevalent for the design and implementation of smart city projects (e.g. Yigitcanlar, 2010; Yigitcanlar and Velibeyoglu, 2008). Despite the emergence of the KBUD approach, there are few examples of successful KM initiatives in smart cities since managing knowledge in smart city projects is not straightforward (Yigitcanlar, 2014). Notably, two main issues to the effective implementation of KM practices within smart city projects can be recognized, namely KM governance and KM processes (e.g. Anttiroiko et al., 2014; Lombardi et al., 2012; Winden et al., 2007). KM governance reflects the complex relationships among the main partners involved in smart city projects – i.e., the government, the private sector, the academia, and, more recently, the civil society – which represent the four eliches managing knowledge assets in novel urban ecosystems (Selada, 2017). Instead, KM processes refers to the multiple processes to set and implement for managing (diverse types of) knowledge in the development of smart cities – e.g. the SECI model (Nonaka et al., 2000) – which involve different actors and KM capabilities (Bhatt, 2001; Bresciani et al., 2017). Furthermore, recalling the link between open innovation and KM literatures (Chesbrough, 2003; Natalicchio et al., 2017; Santoro et al., 2017), we recognize that the knowledge needed for the development and prosecution of smart city projects can reside in different domains, i.e. within or beyond projects’ boundaries (Pancholi et al., 2015; Paskaleva, 2011). Thus, the mechanisms to manage the two main KM issues may differ depending on the origin of knowledge, hence highlighting how modern urban planning is a complex task requiring appropriate managerial and KM actions.