Actually Existing Smart Dublin

Rob Kitchin, Claudio Coletta, Liam Heaphy
{"title":"Actually Existing Smart Dublin","authors":"Rob Kitchin, Claudio Coletta, Liam Heaphy","doi":"10.4324/9781351166201-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Initial empirical research concerning the development of smart urbanism focused largely on smart city rhetoric, the marketing materials of companies promoting smart city products and services, and the policy and visioning documents of lobbying bodies and city administrations (e.g., Söderström et al., 2014, McNeill 2015). This was accompanied by academic critique concerning the underlying political economy of the smart city that countered its supposedly pragmatic, nonideological, commonsensical vision for future city-making (e.g., Greenfield 2013, Kitchin 2014, Vanolo 2014, Datta 2015). However, as Kitchin (2015) and Shelton et al. (2015) detail, until recently few in-depth studies had been directed towards how the smart city was unfolding on the ground in actually existing initiatives, both in terms of locally grounded rhetoric and materially manifested technological deployments (cf. Cugurullo 2017, Wiig 2018, Trencher and Karvonen forthcoming). As this book attests, this situation has been rectified to some degree in the last couple of years, with researchers starting to unpack and analyse specific initiatives and the socio-economic contingencies and consequences of smart urbanism in particular locales. Our contribution to understanding the ‘actually existing smart city’ (Shelton et al. 2015) has been to focus attention on the unfolding of the idea of the smart city and its supporting administration and initiatives in Dublin, Ireland and Boston, United States, conducted as part of the Programmable City project.1 This large project has involved several hundred interviews and ethnographic fieldwork over a five-year period; producing smart city technologies (e.g., the Dublin Dashboard); and active involvement in smart city initiatives (for example, conducting the smart lighting scoping study, running ‘challenge’ workshops and being a member of the Smart Dublin steering group). 6","PeriodicalId":331452,"journal":{"name":"Inside Smart Cities","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inside Smart Cities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351166201-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Initial empirical research concerning the development of smart urbanism focused largely on smart city rhetoric, the marketing materials of companies promoting smart city products and services, and the policy and visioning documents of lobbying bodies and city administrations (e.g., Söderström et al., 2014, McNeill 2015). This was accompanied by academic critique concerning the underlying political economy of the smart city that countered its supposedly pragmatic, nonideological, commonsensical vision for future city-making (e.g., Greenfield 2013, Kitchin 2014, Vanolo 2014, Datta 2015). However, as Kitchin (2015) and Shelton et al. (2015) detail, until recently few in-depth studies had been directed towards how the smart city was unfolding on the ground in actually existing initiatives, both in terms of locally grounded rhetoric and materially manifested technological deployments (cf. Cugurullo 2017, Wiig 2018, Trencher and Karvonen forthcoming). As this book attests, this situation has been rectified to some degree in the last couple of years, with researchers starting to unpack and analyse specific initiatives and the socio-economic contingencies and consequences of smart urbanism in particular locales. Our contribution to understanding the ‘actually existing smart city’ (Shelton et al. 2015) has been to focus attention on the unfolding of the idea of the smart city and its supporting administration and initiatives in Dublin, Ireland and Boston, United States, conducted as part of the Programmable City project.1 This large project has involved several hundred interviews and ethnographic fieldwork over a five-year period; producing smart city technologies (e.g., the Dublin Dashboard); and active involvement in smart city initiatives (for example, conducting the smart lighting scoping study, running ‘challenge’ workshops and being a member of the Smart Dublin steering group). 6
实际存在的智慧都柏林
关于智慧城市主义发展的初步实证研究主要集中在智慧城市修辞,推广智慧城市产品和服务的公司的营销材料,以及游说机构和城市管理部门的政策和愿景文件(例如Söderström等人,2014年,McNeill 2015年)。这伴随着关于智慧城市潜在政治经济学的学术批评,这些批评反驳了其对未来城市建设的实用主义,非意识形态,常识性愿景(例如,Greenfield 2013, Kitchin 2014, Vanolo 2014, Datta 2015)。然而,正如Kitchin(2015)和Shelton等人(2015)所详述的那样,直到最近,很少有深入的研究是针对智慧城市如何在实际现有的倡议中展开的,无论是基于当地的言论还是实质性的技术部署(参见Cugurullo 2017, Wiig 2018, Trencher和Karvonen即将出版)。正如本书所证明的那样,这种情况在过去几年中已经在一定程度上得到了纠正,研究人员开始解析和分析具体的倡议,以及特定地区智能城市化的社会经济偶然性和后果。我们对理解“实际存在的智慧城市”(Shelton et al. 2015)的贡献是将注意力集中在作为可编程城市项目的一部分,在爱尔兰都柏林和美国波士顿展开的智慧城市概念及其支持管理和倡议这个大型项目在五年的时间里进行了数百次访谈和人种学田野调查;生产智慧城市技术(例如,都柏林仪表板);积极参与智慧城市倡议(例如,开展智能照明范围研究,举办“挑战”研讨会,并成为智慧都柏林指导小组的成员)。6
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信