Advertisement

Smart City as a Mobile Technology: Critical Perspectives on Urban Development Policies

  • Patrizia LombardiEmail author
  • Alberto Vanolo
Chapter
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 8)

Abstract

This chapter aims at providing a critical reflection about the relation between smart city and neoliberal urban governance. In the current economic scenario of crisis and austerity, smart city policy is representing an attempt to attract and coopt private actors in the provision of urban services, opening new critical issues on urban neoliberalism and welfare. The hypothesis is that the smart city policy may be interpreted as a mobile technology (recalling Aihwa Ong’s definition) of governance circulating in cities across Europe. As a consequence of neoliberalism and economic crisis, local governments are more and more in charge of providing urban services, whereas the smart city paradigm is offering new areas of economic profitability for private companies promoting technological solutions. This process implies the development of new urban governance, where the smart city policy offers technological solutions, political responses and moral justifications that are socially and politically quite pervasive. According to this perspective, there is a great need for critical and global analysis, questioning the appropriateness of any smart city project in the context of its application.

Keywords

European Union Mobile Technology Smart City Urban Policy Urban Service 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Allwinkle, S., & Cruickshank, P. (2011). Creating smart-er cities: An overview. Journal of Urban Technology, 18(2), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amin, A. (2002). Spatialities of globalization. Environment and Planning A, 34(3), 385–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arun, M. (1999). Smart cities: The Singapore case. Cities, 16(1), 13–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arun, M., & Yap, M. T. (2000). Singapore: The development of an intelligent island and social dividends of information technology. Urban Studies, 37(10), 1749–1756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beatley, T., & Collins, R. (2000). Smart growth and beyond: Transitioning to a sustainable society. Virginia Enviromental Law Journal, 19(3), 287–322.Google Scholar
  6. Bell, S. (2011). System city: Urban amplification and inefficient engineering. In M. Gandy (Ed.), Urban constellations (pp. 72–74.). Berlin: Jovis.Google Scholar
  7. Brand, P. (2007). Green subjection: The politics of neoliberal urban environmental management. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 31(3), 616–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brandon, P. S., & Lombardi, P. (2005). Evaluating sustainable development in the built environment. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  9. Brenner, N., & Theodore, N. (2002). Cities and the geographies of ‘actually existing neoliberalism’. Antipode, 34(3), 349–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brooker, D. (2012). ‘Build it and they will come’? A critical examination of utopian planning practices and their socio-spatial impacts in Malaysia’s intelligent city. Asian Geographer, 29(1), 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Castells, M., & Hall, P. (1994). Technopoles of the world. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Catney, P., & Doyle, T. (2011). The welfare of now and the green (post)politics of the future. Critical Social Policy, 31(2), 174–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chatterton, P. (2013). Towards an agenda for post-carbon cities: Lessons from Lilac, the UK’s first ecological, affordable cohousing community. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(5), 1654–1674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Collier, S. J. (2006). Global assemblages. Theory, Culture & Society, 23(2–3), 399–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Collier, S. J., & Ong, A. (2005). Global assemblages, anthropological problems. In A. Ong & S. J. Collier (Eds.), Global assemblages: Technology, politics, and ethics as anthropological problems (pp. 3–21.). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  16. Davis, M. (2010). Who will build the ark? New Left Review, 61, 29–46.Google Scholar
  17. Deakin, M. (2010). SCRAN: The smart cities (inter) regional academic network supporting the development of a trans-national comparator for the standardisation of egovernment services. In C. Reddick (Ed.), Comparative e-government: An examination of e-government across countries (pp. 425–446.). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Deakin, M., Lombardi, P., & Cooper, I. (2011). The IntelCities community of practice: The capacity-building, co-design, evaluation and monitoring of e-Gov services. The Journal of Urban Technology, 18(2), 17–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. European Union. (2007). Territorial agenda of the european union: Towards a more competitive and sustainable Europe of diverse regions. Informal Ministerial Meeting on Urban Development and Territorial Cohesion, 24–25 May; http://www.eu-territorial-agenda.eu. Accessed Dec 2013.
  20. Evans, J. P. (2011). Resilience, ecology and adaptation in the experimental city. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 36(2), 223–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ezkowitz, H. (2008). The triple helix: University, industry and government. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Falconer Al Hindi, K., & Till, K. (Eds.). (2001). Special issue: The new urbanism and neotraditional town planning. Urban Geography, 22(3), 189–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Felli, R., & Castree, N. (2012). Neoliberalising adaptation to environmental change: Foresight or foreclosure? Environment and Planning A, 44(1), 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class. And how it’s transforming work, leisure, community, and everyday life. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  25. Giffinger, R., Fertner, C., Kramar, H., Kalasek, R., Pichler-Milanovic, N., & Meijers, E. (2007). Smart cities. Ranking of European medium-sized cities. Vienna UT: Centre of Regional Science. http://www.smart-cities.eu/download/smart_cities_final_report.pdf. Accessed Jan 2014.
  26. Gibson-Graham, J. K. (1996). The end of capitalism (as we knew it): A feminist critique of political economy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  27. Gordon, I. (2005). Integrating cities. In N. Nuck, I. Gordon, A. Harding & I. Turok (Eds.), Changing cities. rethinking urban competitiveness, cohesion and governance (pp. 78–93.). Basingstoke: Palmgrave.Google Scholar
  28. Graham, S., & Marvin, S. (2001). Splintering urbanism. Networked infrastructures, technological mobilities and the urban condition. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hall, T., & Hubbard, P. (1998). The entrepreneurial city: Geographies of politics, regime and representation. Chicheste: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  30. Harvey, D. (1989a). The condition of postmodernity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  31. Harvey, D. (1989b). From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: The transformation in urban governance in late capitalism. Geografiska Annaler B, 71(1), 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hodson, M., & Marvin, S. (2009). Urban ecological security: A new urban paradigm. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33(1), 193–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hollands, R. (2008). Will the real smart city please stand up? Intelligent, progressive or entrepreneurial? City, 12(3), 303–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jessop, B. (1997). The entrepreneurial city: Re-imagining localities, redesigning economic governance, or restructuring capital. In N. Jewson & S. MacGregor (Eds.), Transforming cities: Contested governance and new spatial divisions (pp. 28–41.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Kitchin, R. (2014). The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal, 79(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Komninos, N. (2002). Intelligent cities: Innovation, knowledge systems and digital spaces. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Krueger, R., & Gibbs, D. (2009). ‘Third wave’ sustainability? Smart growth and regional development in the USA. Regional Studies, 42(9), 1263–1274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lefebvre, H. (1968) Le droit a la ville. Paris: Anthropos.Google Scholar
  39. Leitner, H., Sheppard, E., Sziarto, K., & Maringanti, A. (2007). Contesting urban futures: Decentering neoliberalism. In H. Leitner, J. Peck & E. Sheppard (Eds.), Contesting neoliberalism. urban frontiers (pp. 1–25.). London: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  40. Lombardi, P. (2011). Managing the green It agenda. Intelligent Buildings International, 3(1), 8–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lombardi, P., Cooper, I., Paskaleva, K., & Deakin, M. (2009). The challenge of designing user-centric e-services: European dimensions. In C. Reddick (Ed.), Strategies for local e-government adoption and implementation: comparative studies. Hershey: Idea Group Publishing.Google Scholar
  42. Lombardi, P., Giordano, S., Farouh, H., & Yousef, W. (2012a). Modelling the smart city performance. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 25(2), 137–149.Google Scholar
  43. Lombardi, P., Giordano, S., Caragliu, A., Del Bo, C., Deakin, M., Nijkamp, P., et al. (2012b). An advanced triple-helix network model for smart cities performance. In Y. Ozge (Ed.), Green and ecological technologies for urban planning: creating smart cities (pp. 59–73.). Hershey: Idea Group Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. March, H., & Ribera-Fumaz, R. (2014) Smart contradictions: The politics of making Barcelona a self-sufficient city. European Urban and Regional Studies, doi: 10.1177/0969776414554488.Google Scholar
  45. Marinetto, M. (2003). Who wants to be an active citizen? The politics and practice of community involvement. Sociology, 37(1), 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Marston, S. A., Jones, J. P. I., & Woodward, K. (2005). Human geography without scale. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 30(4), 416–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. McFarlane, C. (2011). Learning the city: Knowledge and translocal assemblage. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Morozov, E. (2013). To save everything, click here. Technology, solutionism and the urge to fix problems that don’t exists. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  49. Newman, P., Beatley, T., & Boyer, H. (2009). Resilient cities. Responding to peak oil and climate change. Washington: Island Press.Google Scholar
  50. OECD. (2002). Urban renaissance: Glasgow: Lessons for innovation and implementation. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  51. Olds, K., & Yeung, H. W.-C. (2004). Pathways to global city formation: A view from the developmental city-state of Singapore. Review of International Political Economy, 11(3), 489–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ong, A. (2007). Neoliberalism as a mobile technology. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 32(1), 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Osborne, T., & Rose, N. (1999). Governing cities: Notes on the spatialisation of virtue. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 17(6), 737–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Paroutis, S., Bennett, M., & Heracleous, L. (2013). A strategic view on smart city technology: The case of IBM smarter cities during a recession. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 1(89), 262–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.08.041. Accessed March 2014.
  55. Peck, J. (2005). Struggling with the creative class. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29(4), 740–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Peck, J. (2011). Geographies of policy: From transfer-diffusion to mobility-mutation. Progress in Human Geography, 35(6), 773–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Peck, J., & Theodore, N. (2010). Mobilizing policy: Models, methods, and mutations. Geoforum, 41(2), 169–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Prince, R. (2012). Policy transfer, consultants and the geographies of governance. Progress in Human Geography, 36(2), 188–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Raco, M., & Flint, J. (2012). Introduction: Characterising the ‘new’ politics of sustainability: From managing growth to coping with crisis. In J. Flint & M. Raco (Eds.), The future of sustainable cities. Radical reflections (pp. 3–27.). Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
  60. Rossi, U., & Vanolo, A. (2012). Urban political geographies. A global perspective. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Söderström, O., Paasche, T., & Klauser, F. (2014). Smart cities as corporate storytelling. City, 18(3), 307–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Summerville, J. A., Adkins, B. A., & Kendall, G. (2008). Community participation, rights and responsibilities. The governmentality of sustainable development policies. Environment and Planning C, 26(4), 696–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Swyngedouw, E. (2007). Impossible ‘sustainability’ and the postpolitical condition. In R. Krueger & D. Gibbs (Eds.), The sustainable development paradox. Urban political economy in the United States and Europe (pp. 13–40.). New York: Gilford Press.Google Scholar
  64. Swyngedouw, E. (2013). Apocalypse now! Fear and doomsday pleasures. Capitalism, Nature, Socialism, 24(1), 9–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tonkiss, F. (2011). Template urbanism. City, 15(5), 584–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2011). UNEP year book 2011: Emerging issues in our global environment, UNEP Division of Early Warning and Assessment United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya. http://www.unep.org/yearbook/2011/pdfs/UNEP_YEARBOOK_Fullreport.pdf. Accessed Jan 2014.
  67. Vale, L. J., & Campanella, T. J. (2005). The resilient city. How modern cities recover from disaster. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Vanolo, A. (2010). European spatial planning between competitiveness and territorial cohesion: Shadows of neoliberalism. European Planning Studies, 18(8), 1301–1315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Vanolo, A. (2014). Smartmentality: The smart city as disciplinary strategy. Urban Studies, 51(5), 881–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. While, A., Jonas, A., & Gibbs, D. (2010). From sustainable development to carbon control: Eco-state restructuring and the politics of urban and regional development. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 35(1), 76–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Whitehead, M. (2012). The sustainable city: An obituary? On the future form and prospects of sustainable urbanism. In J. Flint & M. Raco (Eds.), The future of sustainable cities. Radical reflections (pp. 29–46.). Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
  72. World Bank. (1991). Urban policy and economic development: An agenda for the 1990s. Washington, DC: World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. World Bank. (2000). Cities in transition: World bank urban and local government strategy. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  74. World Bank. (2008). The world bank annual report 2008. Year in Review. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTANNREP2K8/Resources/YR00_Year_in_Review_English.pdf. Accessed Jan 2014.
  75. Žižek, S. (2008) Nature and its discontents. SubStance, 37(3), 37–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Interuniversity Department of Regional & Urban Studies and PlanningPolitecnico di Torino and Università di TorinoTorinoItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento CulturePolitica e Società, Università di Torino, Eu-Polis, Politecnico di TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations