#BlockSidewalk to Barcelona: Technological sovereignty and the social license to operate smart cities

This article explores technological sovereignty as a way to respond to anxieties of control in digital urban contexts, and argues that this may promise a more meaningful social license to operate smart cities. First, we present an overview of smart city developments with a critical focus on corporatization and platform urbanism. We critique Alphabet's Sidewalk Labs development in Toronto, which faces public backlash from the #BlockSidewalk campaign in response to concerns over not just privacy, but also lack of community consultation, the prospect of the city losing its civic ability to self-govern, and its repossession of public land and infrastructure. Second, we explore what a more responsible smart city could look like, underpinned by technological sovereignty, which is a way to use technologies to promote individual and collective autonomy and empowerment via ownership, control, and self-governance of data and technologies. To this end, we juxtapose the Sidewalk Labs development in Toronto with the Barcelona Digital City plan. We illustrate the merits (and limits) of technological sovereignty moving toward a fairer and more equitable digital society.

[1]  Martin Tomitsch,et al.  The City as Perpetual Beta: Fostering Systemic Urban Acupuncture , 2017, The Hackable City.

[2]  Shannon Mattern.  Post-It Note City , 2020 .

[3]  N. Brenner,et al.  Towards a new epistemology of the urban? , 2015 .

[4]  Pam Carter,et al.  The social licence for research: why care.data ran into trouble , 2015, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[5]  Liesbet van Zoonen,et al.  Privacy concerns in smart cities , 2016, Gov. Inf. Q..

[6]  A. Vanolo.  Smartmentality: The Smart City as Disciplinary Strategy , 2014 .

[7]  Tan Yigitcanlar,et al.  Towards Post-Anthropocentric Cities: Reconceptualizing Smart Cities to Evade Urban Ecocide , 2018, Smart Cities and Innovative Urban Technologies.

[8]  George Kozmetsky,et al.  The Technopolis Phenomenon: Smart Cities, Fast Systems, Global Networks , 1992 .

[9]  Urban Data and the Platform City , 2018 .

[10]  Timo Ojala,et al.  UbiOpticon: Participatory Sousveillance with Urban Screens and Mobile Phone Cameras , 2014, PerDis.

[11]  R. Boutilier.  Frequently asked questions about the social licence to operate , 2014 .

[12]  P. Cardullo.  Smart Commons or a “Smart Approach” to the Commons? , 2019, The Right to the Smart City.

[13]  Christopher Gaffney,et al.  Smarter than Smart: Rio de Janeiro's Flawed Emergence as a Smart City , 2018 .

[14]  Mariana Valverde,et al.  Planning on the Waterfront: Setting the Agenda for Toronto’s ‘smart city’ Project , 2019, Planning Theory & Practice.

[15]  Deanna Kemp,et al.  Social licence and mining: A critical perspective , 2013 .

[16]  M. Angelidou.  Smart cities: A conjuncture of four forces , 2015 .

[17]  Casey R. Lynch.  Contesting Digital Futures: Urban Politics, Alternative Economies, and the Movement for Technological Sovereignty in Barcelona , 2020, Antipode.

[18]  R. Hollands.  Critical interventions into the corporate smart city , 2015 .

[19]  S. Graham.  Software-sorted geographies , 2005 .

[20]  Bruno Carballa Smichowski.  Alternative Data Governance Models: Moving Beyond One-Size-Fits-All Solutions , 2019, Intereconomics. Review of European Economic Policy.

[21]  Vanessa Watson,et al.  African urban fantasies: dreams or nightmares? , 2014 .

[22]  R. Dagger.  Metropolis, Memory, and Citizenship , 1981 .

[23]  Kieren Moffat,et al.  The social licence to operate: a critical review , 2016 .

[24]  Marcus Foth,et al.  Participatory urban informatics: towards citizen-ability , 2018 .

[25]  S. Barns.  Platform Urbanism , 2020 .

[26]  Glenda Amayo Caldwell,et al.  DIY media architecture: open and participatory approaches to community engagement , 2014, MAB '14.

[27]  Fiorella De Cindio,et al.  Hybrid Participatory Budgeting: Local Democratic Practices in the Digital Era , 2015 .

[28]  M. Slavova,et al.  African Smart Cities Strategies for Agenda 2063 , 2016 .

[29]  Gemma Galdon-Clavell.  (Not so) smart cities?: The drivers, impact and risks of surveillance-enabled smart environments , 2013 .

[30]  F. Vanclay,et al.  Community engagement and social licence to operate , 2014 .

[31]  Agnieszka Leszczynski,et al.  Spatial big data and anxieties of control , 2015 .

[32]  M. Schuilenburg,et al.  Fear and Fantasy in the Smart City , 2020, Critical Criminology.

[33]  R. Bauböck.  Reinventing Urban Citizenship , 2003 .

[34]  Marco Peres Useche,et al.  Medellin (Colombia): a case of smart city , 2013, ICEGOV.

[35]  A. Nuyen.  Confucianism and the Idea of Citizenship , 2002 .

[36]  Agnieszka Leszczynski,et al.  Glitchy vignettes of platform urbanism , 2020, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space.

[37]  Gerhard P. Hancke,et al.  The Role of Advanced Sensing in Smart Cities , 2012, Sensors.

[38]  Shannon Mattern.  Databodies in Codespace , 2018 .

[39]  Tan Yigitcanlar,et al.  Korean ubiquitous-eco-city: A smart-sustainable urban form or a branding hoax? , 2013 .

[40]  Stephen Viller,et al.  Street Computing: Towards an Integrated Open Data Application Programming Interface (API) for Cities , 2012 .

[41]  Seeta Peña Gangadharan,et al.  Decentering technology in discourse on discrimination* , 2019, Information, Communication & Society.

[42]  Matthew Zook,et al.  The 'Actually Existing Smart City' , 2015 .

[43]  Ari-Veikko Anttiroiko,et al.  U-cities reshaping our future: reflections on ubiquitous infrastructure as an enabler of smart urban development , 2013, AI & SOCIETY.

[44]  Ellen P. Goodman,et al.  Urbanism Under Google: Lessons from Sidewalk Toronto , 2019, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[45]  R. Kitchin,et al.  Making sense of smart cities: addressing present shortcomings , 2015 .

[47]  Christopher Frauenberger,et al.  On scale, dialectics, and affect: pathways for proliferating participatory design , 2018, PDC.

[48]  Kieren Moffat,et al.  Constructing the Meaning of Social Licence , 2014 .

[49]  Data-driven urbanism , 2017 .

[50]  R. Geenens.  E pluribus unum? The Manifold Meanings of Sovereignty , 2016 .

[51]  S. Elwood,et al.  Privacy, reconsidered: New representations, data practices, and the geoweb , 2011 .

[52]  Stephane Couture,et al.  What does the notion of “sovereignty” mean when referring to the digital? , 2019, New Media Soc..

[53]  Timo Ojala,et al.  Citizen’s Right to the Digital City: Urban Interfaces, Activism, and Placemaking , 2015 .

[54]  Alan Wiig.  The empty rhetoric of the smart city: from digital inclusion to economic promotion in Philadelphia , 2016 .

[55]  Tan Yigitcanlar,et al.  Can cities become smart without being sustainable? A systematic review of the literature , 2019, Sustainable Cities and Society.

[56]  George Kozmetsky,et al.  Creating the technopolis: High-technology development in Austin, Texas☆ , 1989 .