The Smart Enough City

1. Tech goggles distort urban challenges into technology problems

Through a process that I call the "tech goggles cycle," tech goggles warp behaviors, priorities, and policies according to the logic of technology.

Tech goggles create tunnel vision. This perspective causes people to perceive every urban issue as a technology problem with a technological solution. It leads to the development and adoption of "smart" technologies aimed at making cities more efficient, while overlooking alternative goals and visions not grounded in technology. As municipalities and residents adopt these technologies, their behaviors and policies are shaped by the assumptions embedded in them, further reinforcing the tech goggles perspective. This cyclical process entrenches a technocentric worldview that becomes harder to challenge over time.

Dangers of tech-centric thinking:

• Oversimplifies complex social and political issues
• Ignores non-technological solutions and reforms
• Embeds potentially biased assumptions into urban systems
• Prioritizes efficiency over other important values
• Reduces democratic input on urban priorities

2. Smart city solutions often oversimplify complex urban issues

Simplistic conceptions of social and political challenges always accompany tech goggles.

Reductionist approaches fail. Smart city proponents often present technological solutions as simple fixes to complex urban problems. However, this overlooks the intricate social, political, and economic factors at play. For example, self-driving cars are touted as a cure for traffic congestion, but this ignores induced demand, land use patterns, and the needs of pedestrians and public transit. Similarly, predictive policing algorithms claim to objectively prevent crime, but fail to address underlying socioeconomic causes or potential racial biases in the data.

Pitfalls of oversimplification:

• Neglects root causes of urban challenges
• Produces unintended negative consequences
• Diverts resources from more holistic solutions
• Exacerbates existing inequalities
• Creates a false sense of progress

3. Civic engagement requires more than just efficient technology

Viewing democracy through tech goggles, people overestimate the impact of technology and ignore the complex social and political factors that shape civic engagement.

Technology alone can't fix democracy. Many smart city initiatives aim to increase civic participation through apps, online platforms, and efficient service delivery. However, true engagement requires more than just lowering technological barriers. Meaningful civic involvement stems from community organizing, coalition building, and developing people's capacity for activism and leadership. Simply making it easier to report potholes or vote online does not address core issues of political power imbalances or citizen apathy.

Keys to meaningful civic engagement:

• Focus on transformational organizing, not just transactional interactions
• Build community relationships and social capital
• Develop citizens' political efficacy and leadership skills
• Address systemic barriers to participation (e.g. poverty, discrimination)
• Create opportunities for substantive input on policy decisions

4. Predictive policing algorithms can perpetuate racial biases

Thus, even if a machine learning algorithm is not hard-coded to exhibit racial bias, the data from which it learns reflects social and institutional biases.

Algorithms absorb societal prejudices. Predictive policing tools claim to objectively identify crime hot spots, but they often rely on historically biased policing data. This can lead to over-policing of minority neighborhoods and under-policing of white areas, perpetuating existing racial disparities in the criminal justice system. Moreover, focusing solely on prediction ignores root causes of crime and alternative approaches to public safety.

Problems with predictive policing:

• Reinforces discriminatory practices
• Lacks transparency and accountability
• Ignores socioeconomic factors contributing to crime
• Diverts resources from community-based solutions
• Creates self-fulfilling prophecies of criminality

5. Data collection in smart cities threatens privacy and equity

Smart city technologies make it easier than ever for municipalities to identify and track individuals.

Pervasive surveillance raises concerns. The proliferation of sensors, cameras, and tracking technologies in smart cities enables unprecedented data collection on residents' movements and behaviors. This creates risks of privacy violations, data breaches, and algorithmic discrimination. Low-income and minority communities often bear the brunt of surveillance while having the least ability to opt out. The data collected can be used to make consequential decisions about individuals without their knowledge or consent.

Risks of ubiquitous urban data collection:

• Erosion of privacy in public spaces
• Potential for abuse by government or corporations
• Chilling effect on free expression and association
• Exacerbation of existing inequalities
• Lack of meaningful consent or opt-out options

6. Municipal innovation stems from policy reform, not just technology

Smart Enough Cities create their most significant impacts through policy and process reforms that thoughtfully address local needs. Technology can make these reforms more effective, but it is never the driving force.

True innovation is multifaceted. While smart city initiatives often focus on deploying cutting-edge technologies, the most impactful urban innovations typically stem from policy and institutional reforms. For example, addressing homelessness requires restructuring social services and housing policies, not just better data analytics. Technology can support and enhance these reforms, but it should not be seen as a silver bullet solution to complex urban challenges.

Components of effective municipal innovation:

• Policy changes aligned with community needs and values
• Institutional reforms to improve governance
• Cross-sector collaboration and partnerships
• Capacity building for city staff and residents
• Strategic deployment of technology to support broader goals

7. The "Smart Enough City" balances technology with human needs

Smart Enough Cities must take off their tech goggles and abandon unrealistic and utopian visions of AVs. It is only by recognizing a technology's limits and dangers that we can hope to attain its benefits.

A more holistic urban vision. The Smart Enough City concept advocates for a balanced approach that leverages technology to address genuine urban needs while avoiding techno-utopianism. It recognizes that technology is a tool to support broader social and policy goals, not an end in itself. This approach prioritizes human-centered design, community input, and careful consideration of potential negative impacts.

Principles of the Smart Enough City:

• Focus on solving real problems for real people
• Engage communities in technology decision-making
• Consider social and ethical implications of new technologies
• Prioritize equity and inclusion in smart city initiatives
• Maintain flexibility to adapt as needs and technologies evolve

8. Thoughtful data governance is crucial for responsible smart cities

Municipal implementation of algorithms thus raises grave concerns for urban democracy: cities typically provide the public with little or no insight into how their algorithms were developed or how they work.

Data stewardship is a key responsibility. As cities collect and utilize more data, they must develop robust governance frameworks to ensure responsible use. This includes policies for data privacy, security, transparency, and algorithmic accountability. Cities should engage the public in developing these policies and provide mechanisms for oversight and redress. Without proper governance, smart city technologies risk exacerbating inequalities and eroding public trust.

Elements of responsible data governance:

• Clear policies on data collection, use, and sharing
• Privacy impact assessments for new technologies
• Algorithmic audits for fairness and transparency
• Public engagement in data policy development
• Mechanisms for individual data rights and redress

9. Participatory processes should guide smart city development

Smart Enough Cities should follow what I call the "limited tech test." When considering the use of a new technology, city leaders should ask the following questions: If it were possible to achieve the same outcomes without technology, would it still be innovative? Would the impacts be desirable?

Community input is essential. Smart city initiatives should be guided by participatory processes that engage diverse stakeholders in setting priorities, assessing potential impacts, and making decisions. This helps ensure that technologies address genuine community needs and align with local values. Participatory budgeting, community advisory boards, and public consultations are some ways to incorporate resident input into smart city planning.

Benefits of participatory smart city development:

• Aligns technology with community needs and values
• Builds public trust and buy-in for initiatives
• Identifies potential negative impacts early
• Leverages local knowledge and creativity
• Promotes more equitable distribution of benefits

10. Historical urban planning mistakes offer lessons for smart cities

From prenatal healthcare in Columbus to participatory budgeting in Vallejo to proactive social services in Johnson County to the surveillance ordinance in Seattle to data drills in New York City, we have seen numerous ingredients for creating Smart Enough Cities.

Learn from past errors. The history of urban planning is filled with well-intentioned interventions that produced unintended negative consequences. From the destructive urban renewal projects of the mid-20th century to the car-centric designs that hollowed out city centers, these mistakes offer cautionary tales for smart city development. By studying these historical examples, we can avoid repeating similar errors with new technologies.

Lessons from urban planning history:

• Beware of top-down, one-size-fits-all solutions
• Consider long-term and indirect impacts of interventions
• Prioritize human-scale, livable environments
• Engage communities in planning processes
• Maintain flexibility to adapt to changing needs over time

Last updated: August 20, 2024