This is an interesting post that presents us with an overview of digital and smart cities, on how technologies shape our physical and social connections. I am particularly enthralled by your discussion on digital civics as we are in the midst of information age. As digital civics could be utilised by designers to ensure that the collective ideas are sought with the resources that flow from the project (Hack & Sagalyn, 2011). Thereby, this present an open opportunity for the public community to engage via digital media in shaping the urban realm.
Although Grossi and Pianezzi (2016) believes smart cities are an expression of neoliberal and market led restructuring process of the urban space. It also engages with the wider communities, or better known as consumers, which are essential to provide the data required. Hence the joint endeavour of consumer engagement and their counterparts planning private developments becomes a creation of valued space in the urban realm (Hack & Sagalyn, 2011).
Expanding on, the smart city ideology aims to create an improved relationship between the city and its inhabitants based on three accounts: environment sustainability, economic development, and social equity (Ghose & Johnson, 2020). Tomitsch (2018) elaborated a series of appropriate solutions for citizen-led approach. Tomitsch firstly explained that creating accountability with consumers before they become participants. As he illustrated, this can be acquired by creating ‘defining city app’ to record the urban experience. Furthermore, his approach is focuses on the citizens as the end user rather overseer or sensory methods.
In essence, smart city projects can only operate because of citizen participation and engagement rather purely surveillance (Ghose & Johnson, 2020). However, along the physical aspect, framework for design led urban innovation can also be introduced by the combination of ‘Space of flows’ and the ‘Space of place’ (Castell, 2001,2002). In addition, ‘space of flow’ has become a space means of everywhere, this is reinforced by the technological uses during the Covid-19 pandemic. Electric nodes are now embraced as part of a framework for design led urban innovation. Sharifi at el (2020) further suggests this can further enhance the collective shaping of neighbourhoods as it is not blinded by physicality.
However, Willis and Aurigi (2018) suggests sensors and digital technology implementations and so on are already been imbedded in cities, and that, in fact digitalisation can no longer be separated. So, moving forward, emerging technologies and their increasing intergrating in urban environment will require governmental framework in order to proceed with design led urban innovation. Inherently, this will bring a closer gap between spatial segregation and social requirement.
Reference:
Castells, M. (2001, 2002) ‘Space of Flows, Space of Places: Materials for a Theory of Urbanism in the Information Age’, in LeGates, R. And Stout, F. (5th ed.) The City Reader. Taylor & Francis Group.
Ghose, R. And Johnson, A. (2020) “Introduction to the special section: Smart citizens creating smart cities: Locating citizen participation in the smart city, The Canadian geographer, Volume 64, Issue 3, Page 340-343.
Grossi, G. And Pianezzi, D. (2016) “Smart cities: Utopia or neoliberal ideology?”, Cities, Volume 69, September 2017, Page 79-85.
Hack, G. And Sagalyn, L. (2011) ‘Value Creation Through Urban Design’, in Tiesdell, A. And Adams, D. (1st ed.) Urban Design in the Real Estate Development Process. Blackwell, pp 258- 259.
Tomitsch, M. (2018) Making Cities Smarter: Designing Interactive Urban Application. Jovis, Berlin.
Sharifi, A., Garmsir, K. And Reza, A. (2020) “The COVID-19 pandemic: Impacts on cities and major lessons for urban planning, design, and management”, The Science of the total environment, Volume 749, Page 142391-142391.
Willis, K. And Aurigi, A. (2018) Digital and Smart Cities. Routledge, Oxon.
This is an interesting post that presents us with an overview of digital and smart cities, on how technologies shape our physical and social connections. I am particularly enthralled by your discussion on digital civics as we are in the midst of information age. As digital civics could be utilised by designers to ensure that the collective ideas are sought with the resources that flow from the project (Hack & Sagalyn, 2011). Thereby, this present an open opportunity for the public community to engage via digital media in shaping the urban realm.
Although Grossi and Pianezzi (2016) believes smart cities are an expression of neoliberal and market led restructuring process of the urban space. It also engages with the wider communities, or better known as consumers, which are essential to provide the data required. Hence the joint endeavour of consumer engagement and their counterparts planning private developments becomes a creation of valued space in the urban realm (Hack & Sagalyn, 2011).
Expanding on, the smart city ideology aims to create an improved relationship between the city and its inhabitants based on three accounts: environment sustainability, economic development, and social equity (Ghose & Johnson, 2020). Tomitsch (2018) elaborated a series of appropriate solutions for citizen-led approach. Tomitsch firstly explained that creating accountability with consumers before they become participants. As he illustrated, this can be acquired by creating ‘defining city app’ to record the urban experience. Furthermore, his approach is focuses on the citizens as the end user rather overseer or sensory methods.
In essence, smart city projects can only operate because of citizen participation and engagement rather purely surveillance (Ghose & Johnson, 2020). However, along the physical aspect, framework for design led urban innovation can also be introduced by the combination of ‘Space of flows’ and the ‘Space of place’ (Castell, 2001,2002). In addition, ‘space of flow’ has become a space means of everywhere, this is reinforced by the technological uses during the Covid-19 pandemic. Electric nodes are now embraced as part of a framework for design led urban innovation. Sharifi at el (2020) further suggests this can further enhance the collective shaping of neighbourhoods as it is not blinded by physicality.
However, Willis and Aurigi (2018) suggests sensors and digital technology implementations and so on are already been imbedded in cities, and that, in fact digitalisation can no longer be separated. So, moving forward, emerging technologies and their increasing intergrating in urban environment will require governmental framework in order to proceed with design led urban innovation. Inherently, this will bring a closer gap between spatial segregation and social requirement.
Reference:
Castells, M. (2001, 2002) ‘Space of Flows, Space of Places: Materials for a Theory of Urbanism in the Information Age’, in LeGates, R. And Stout, F. (5th ed.) The City Reader. Taylor & Francis Group.
Ghose, R. And Johnson, A. (2020) “Introduction to the special section: Smart citizens creating smart cities: Locating citizen participation in the smart city, The Canadian geographer, Volume 64, Issue 3, Page 340-343.
Grossi, G. And Pianezzi, D. (2016) “Smart cities: Utopia or neoliberal ideology?”, Cities, Volume 69, September 2017, Page 79-85.
Hack, G. And Sagalyn, L. (2011) ‘Value Creation Through Urban Design’, in Tiesdell, A. And Adams, D. (1st ed.) Urban Design in the Real Estate Development Process. Blackwell, pp 258- 259.
Tomitsch, M. (2018) Making Cities Smarter: Designing Interactive Urban Application. Jovis, Berlin.
Sharifi, A., Garmsir, K. And Reza, A. (2020) “The COVID-19 pandemic: Impacts on cities and major lessons for urban planning, design, and management”, The Science of the total environment, Volume 749, Page 142391-142391.
Willis, K. And Aurigi, A. (2018) Digital and Smart Cities. Routledge, Oxon.