Locating the citizen in the smart city

The label “smart city” is being attached to a wide range of urban initiatives and policies. Most, but not all, relate to the application of digital to some aspect of the urban. Smartness is viewed as a key characteristic... [ view full abstract ]

The label “smart city” is being attached to a wide range of urban initiatives and policies. Most, but not all, relate to the application of digital to some aspect of the urban. Smartness is viewed as a key characteristic of contemporary urban competitiveness. While much of the debate over smart focused on the technology there is growing concern regarding the role of the citizen in the smart city and the implications of smart for cities as political communities. Themes around exclusion and the danger of digital divides, that were a feature of early debates over e-governance and democracy in the digital age have re-emerged in the smart city context. A key theme in the current discussion is the value of citizen-led, bottom-up initiatives deploying low-cost, open-source smart technologies in the city. Such initiatives are championed as a more pluralist and egalitarian alternative to a future in which the smart city becomes locked in to a trajectory determined by proprietary, commercial hardware and software supplied by multinational corporations. While considerable effort is being expended in developing local initiatives rooted in citizen science or co-producing smart technologies to meet community needs, a second theme of the current debate is how to deliver the citizen-centred smart city at scale. This paper examines these two strands of the current debate. In doing so it reflects on the recent example of Dampbusters in Bristol, England, which sought to document and address the problem of poor indoor housing conditions through a citizen sensing project. It argues that while the practical barriers to remaining citizen-centric when seeking smart at scale are undoubtedly formidable, it is equally important to recognise that this debate raises more profound theoretical questions about power and participation in the contemporary city