Skip to main content

Reclaiming the Smart City: Toward a New Right to the City

Abstract

This chapter explicates that the smart city is defined by a techno-utopian discourse, which presents smart technology as a value-neutral and rational tool in solving all kinds of urban problems. After analyzing several ethical issues relating to the smart city concept, Lefebvre’s notion of the “right to the city” from the 1960s is examined. While the Lefebvrian “right to the city” is a utopian project, it offers an opportunity to reflect upon what an emancipatory and fair smart city should be like. We examine the current debate on the smart city by looking at three contemporary perspectives on the “right to the city.” The chapter concludes by describing three trajectories that could lead to a more open, flexible, diverse, and participatory smart city, particularly in relation to issues of (a) participation, (b) communing, and (c) citizenship. These trajectories are illustrated by providing examples of different smart initiatives in the city of Barcelona.

Keywords

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

References

  • Ahmed, F., & Harvey, D. (2012). Interview: David Harvey on the right to the city. https://www.iconeye.com/architecture/features/interview-david-harvey-on-the-right-to-the-city. Accessed 18 Aug 2020.

  • Anastasiu, I. (2019). Unpacking the smart city through the lens of the right to the city: A taxonomy as a way forward in participatory city-making. In M. de Lange & M. de Waal (Eds.), The hackable city: Digital media and collaborative city-making in the network society (pp. 239–260). Singapore: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Angelidou, M. (2016). Four European smart city strategies. International Journal of Social Science Studies, 4(4), 18–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barredo Arrieta, A., Diaz-Rodriguez, N., Del Ser, J., Bennetot, A., Tabik, S., & Al Barbado, A. e. (2020). Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Information Fusion, 58, 82–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bela, J. (2014). User-generated urbanism and the right to the City. In J. Hou, B. Spencer, T. Way, & K. Yocom (Eds.), Now urbanism: The future city is here (pp. 149–164). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinbine, B. J. (2018). Commons praxis: Toward a critical political economy of the digital commons. TripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 16(1), 290–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollier, D., & Helfrich, S. (2019). Free, fair and alive: The insurgent power of the commons. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busquet, G. (2019). Right to the city. In A. Orum (Ed.), The Wiley Blackwell. Encyclopedia of urban and regional studies (pp. 1–9). Cambridge, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, C. (2012). Henri Lefebvre: Spatial politics, everyday life and the right to the city. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Capdevila, I., & Zarlenga, M. I. (2015). Smart city or smart citizens? The Barcelona case. Journal of Strategy and Management, 8(3), 266–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardullo, P. (2019). Smart commons, or a ‘smart approach’ to the commons? In P. Cardullo, C. Di Feliciantonio, & R. Kitchin (Eds.), The right to the smart city (pp. 85–98). Bingley: Emerald Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cardullo, P., & Kitchin, R. (2019a). Being a ‘citizen’ in the smart city: Up and down the scaffold of smart citizen participation in Dublin, Ireland. GeoJournal, 84(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardullo, P., & Kitchin, R. (2019b). Smart urbanism and smart citizenship: The neoliberal logic of ‘citizen-focused’ smart cities in Europe. EPC: Politics and Space, 37(5), 813–830.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowley, R., Joss, S. & Dayot, Y. (2018). The smart city and its publics: insights from across six UK cities. Urban Research and Practice, 11(1), 53–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, M. (2011). Rethinking ‘rights’, rethinking ‘cities’: A response to David Harvey’s ‘the right to the city’. In Z. Begg & L. Stickells (Eds.), The right to the city (pp. 33–36). Sydney: Tin Sheds Gallery, Faculty of Architecture, Design and Planning, University of Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelbert, J., Van Zoonen, L., & Hirzalla, F. (2019). Excluding citizens from the European smart city: The discourse practices of pursuing and granting smartness. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142, 347–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabrys, J. (2014). Programming environments: Environmentality and citizen sensing in the smart city. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 32(1), 30–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galič, M. (2019). Surveillance, privacy and public space in the Stratumseind Living Lab: The smart city debate, beyond data. Ars Aequi, juli/augustus, 570–579.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galič, M. & Gellert R. (2020). Data protection law beyond identifiability? Atmospheric profiles, nudging and the Stratumseind Living Lab. Computer Law & Security Review (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Harcourt, B. E. (2007). Against prediction: Profiling, policing, and punishing in an actuarial age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (2008). The right to the city. New Left Review, 53, 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (2012). Rebel cities. From the right to the city to the urban revolution. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iveson, K. (2013). Cities within the city: Do-it-yourself urbanism and the right to the city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(3), 941–956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iveson, K., & Fincher, R. (2012). “Just diversity” in the city of difference. In G. Bridge & S. Watson (Eds.), The new Blackwell companion to the city (pp. 407–418). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, J. (2011). The death and life of great American cities. New York: Modern Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keymolen, E., & Voorwinden, A. (2019). Can we negotiate? Trust and the rule of law in the smart city paradigm. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2019.1588844.

  • Kitchin, R. (2016). Getting smarter about smart cities: Improving data privacy and data security. Dublin: Data Protection Unit, Department of the Taoiseach.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchin, R. (2019a). The ethics of smart cities: Using big data and AI to manage cities creates many ethical issues, but efforts to address these concerns can be just as contentious. https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2019/0425/1045602-the-ethics-of-smart-cities/. Accessed 20 Aug 2020.

  • Kitchin, R. (2019b). Toward a genuinely humanizing smart urbanism. In P. Cardullo, C. Di Feliciantonio, & R. Kitchin (Eds.), The right to the smart city (pp. 193–204). Bingley: Emerald Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchin, R., & Dodge, M. (2011). Code/space: Software and everyday life. Cambridge, MA: MIT University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lacinák, M., & Ristvej, J. (2017). Smart city, safety and security. Procedia Engineering, 192, 522–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, H. (1968). Le droit à la ville. Paris: Éditions Anthropos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, H. (1970). Le manifeste différentialiste. Paris: Galimard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, H. (1996). Writings on cities. Cambridge, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, H. (2014). Dissolving city, planetary metamorphosis. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 32, 203–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcuse, P. (2009). From critical urban theory to the right to the city. City, 13(2–3), 185–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaren, D., & Agyeman, J. (2015). Sharing cities. A case for truly smart and sustainable cities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrifield, A. (2017). Fifty years on: The right to the city. In The right to the city: A Verso report (pp. 13–18). London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. (1995). The end of public space? People’s park, definitions of the public, and democracy. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 85, 108–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. (2003). The right to the city. Social justice and the right to public space. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. (2009). Against safety, against security: Reinvigorating urban life. In M. J. Thompson (Ed.), Fleeing the city (pp. 231–248). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. (2018). Revolution and the critique of human geography: Prospects for the right to the city after 50 years. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 100(1), 2(11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D., & Heynen, N. (2009). The geography of survival and the right to the city: Speculations on surveillance, legal innovation, and the criminalization of intervention. Urban Geography, 30(6), 611–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monahan, T. (2017). Regulating belonging: Surveillance, inequality, and the cultural production of abjection. Journal of Cultural Economy, 10(2), 191–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morozov, E. (2013). To save everything, click Here. New York: Public Affairs Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morozov, E., & Bria, F. (2018). Rethinking smart cities: Democratizing urban technology. New York: Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, C. (2005). For an agonistic public sphere. In L. Tonder & L. Thomassen (Eds.), Radical democracy: Politics between abundance and lack (pp. 123–132). Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pali, B., & Schuilenburg, M. (2019). Fear and fantasy in the smart city. Critical Criminology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-019-09447-7.

  • Peeters, R., & Schuilenburg, M. (2018). Machine justice: Governing security through the bureaucracy of algorithms. Information Polity. An International Journal of Government and Democracy in the Information Age, 23)3, 267–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell, M. (2002). Excavating Lefebvre: The right to the city and its urban politics of the inhabitant. GeoJournal, 58, 99–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purcell, M. (2003). Citizenship and the right to the global city: Reimagining the capitalist world order. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(3), 564–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadowski, J., & Bendor, R. (2019). Selling smartness: Corporate narratives and the Smart City as a sociotechnical imaginary. Science, Technology & Human Values, 44(3), 540–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadowski, J., & Pasquale, F. (2015). The spectrum of control: A social theory of the smart city. http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/5903/4660. Accessed 5 Aug 2020.

  • Schuilenburg, M., & Pali, B. (2021). Smart city imaginaries: Looking beyond the techno-utopian vision. In M. Schuilenburg & R. Peeters (Eds.), The algorithmic society. Technology, power, and knowledge. London/New York: Routledge. (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuilenburg, M., & Peeters, R. (2018). Smart cities and the architecture of security: Pastoral power and the scripted design of public space. City, Territory and Architecture, 5(13), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sennett, R. (1992). The uses of disorder: Personal identity and city life. New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, J., & Graham, M. (2017). An informational right to the city? Code, content, control, and the urbanization of information. Antipode, 49(4), 907–927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G. J. D., Bennett Moses, L., & Chan, J. (2017). The challenges of doing criminology in the big data era: Towards a digital and data-driven approach. The British Journal of Criminology, 57(2), 259–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swyngedouw, E. (2004). Globalisation or ‘glocalisation’? Networks, territories and rescaling. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 17(1), 25–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thatcher, J., O’Sullivan, D., & Mahmoudi, D. (2016). Data colonialism through accumulation by dispossession: New metaphors for daily data. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 34(6), 990–1006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toli, A. M., & Murtagh, N. (2020). The concept of sustainability in smart city definitions. Frontiers in Built Environment, 6, 77), 1–77),10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanolo, A. (2014). Smartmentality: The smart city as disciplinary strategy. Urban Studies, 51(5), 883–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, B. (2018). Ethics as an escape from regulation. From “ethics-washing” to ethics-shopping? In E. Bayamlioğlu, I. Baraliuc, L. Janssens, et al. (Eds.), Being profiled: Cogitas ergo sum. 10 years of ‘profiling the European citizen’ (pp. 84–88). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc Schuilenburg .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Galič, M., Schuilenburg, M. (2020). Reclaiming the Smart City: Toward a New Right to the City. In: Augusto, J.C. (eds) Handbook of Smart Cities. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15145-4_59-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15145-4_59-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-15145-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-15145-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Computer SciencesReference Module Computer Science and Engineering

Publish with us

Policies and ethics