Rahman Sharifzadeh
Abstract
Introduction
While there is a wealth of research on smart cities, a significant theoretical and intellectual gap persists, particularly from an urbanism perspective. This gap hinders our full comprehension of the phenomena we encounter or will encounter. Common approaches to smart cities, while beneficial, ...
Read More
Introduction
While there is a wealth of research on smart cities, a significant theoretical and intellectual gap persists, particularly from an urbanism perspective. This gap hinders our full comprehension of the phenomena we encounter or will encounter. Common approaches to smart cities, while beneficial, often consider them in isolation from urbanism trends. A thorough examination of smart cities' conceptual, practical, and socio-ethical aspects must include an understanding of the fundamental nature of cities and their relationship with citizens. Current literature tends to sideline the analysis of the city concept, focusing instead on technological, managerial, and systemic aspects. However, understanding the city and its interaction with citizens is crucial for smart city discourse. This article delves into smart cities within the context of contemporary urbanism, emphasizing Henri Lefebvre's and David Harvey's 'right to the city' as a pivotal concept. We aim to delineate and discuss the 'right to the smart city' within this framework.
Methodology
Our methodology involves a conceptual analysis and argumentation, drawing upon existing literature in contemporary urbanism and smart cities. We seek to reinterpret the smart city concept within contemporary urbanism, particularly through the lens of Lefebvre's and Harvey's 'right to the city,' addressing its core questions and elements.
Findings
The 'right to the city' discourse prompts the question: Do citizens desire a smart city? Harvey interprets this right as the ability to construct, reconstruct, and alter the city's form, suggesting that citizens should have a say in the city's smart transformation. Yet, smart city literature seldom addresses this fundamental query, often assuming the inevitability of smart city development and focusing on mitigating its negative socio-ethical impacts. This presumption may stem from technological determinism, urban elitism, or the tenets of liberalism/capitalism. Lefebvre and Harvey argue for a smart city right that awakens citizens to the dominance of their living spaces. Recognizing the 'right to the city' naturally leads to the question of citizen involvement in smart city development. If affirmative, the subsequent inquiry under the 'right to the city' framework is: What kind of smart city is desired? By extrapolating from Lefebvre's and Harvey's ideas, we identify three components of the 'right to the smart city': the power of citizens to collectively decide and shape the smart city, the necessity of genuine participation in urban governance, that is the ability to oversee major urban processes, and finally the ability to space production. Such participation and oversight are only feasible within the 'production of space' as defined by Lefebvre and others. Without this, not only is urban life experience compromised, but there is also no mechanism to enforce collective will in case of governmental deviation.
Conclusion
Lefebvre's and Harvey's 'right to the city' framework redefines our relationship with the smart city. It challenges the perceived inevitability and taken-for-grantedness of smart city development and aims to heighten citizen awareness of their connection to the smart city. This framework differentiates the city from mere habitat and market. A smart city is not a mere habitat or a data-driven market, and any attempt to reduce the smart city to these two will make this concept meaningless.
