“The Citizen” as a Ghost Subject in Co-Producing Smart Sustainable Cities: An Intersectional Approach

IF 1.7 Q3 URBAN STUDIES
Urban Planning Pub Date : 2023-11-28 DOI:10.17645/up.7259
Leika Aruga, Hilde Refstie, Hilde Nymoen Rørtveit
{"title":"“The Citizen” as a Ghost Subject in Co-Producing Smart Sustainable Cities: An Intersectional Approach","authors":"Leika Aruga, Hilde Refstie, Hilde Nymoen Rørtveit","doi":"10.17645/up.7259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The importance and benefits of engaging citizens as co-producers of urban transformation have been increasingly recognised. However, the mere implementation of citizen co-production does not guarantee more legitimate or inclusive policy decisions and outcomes, especially when power inequalities that shape local decision-making remain unaddressed. This article examines the transformative potential of citizen co-production in smart sustainable city initiatives using two successive citizen panels in Trondheim, Norway, as cases. The study aimed to understand the role of citizen co-production in these panels, and the notion of “the citizen” within their frameworks. Three challenges with co-production were identified. Firstly, the ad-hoc nature of citizen engagement emphasised individual participation rather than facilitating collective spaces from which political agency could emerge. Secondly, citizens’ viewpoints were perceived as uninformed preferences that could be transformed through professional guidance. This, coupled with the closed nature of the initiatives, raises questions about the transformative potential of the processes, particularly in challenging the underlying premises of citizen co-production shaped by a neoliberal discourse of smart sustainable cities. The article concludes with a call to analyse citizen co-production spaces through an intersectional lens that attends to relational understandings of power dynamics and identities. This analysis should not only consider who participates, but also how “the citizen” as a subject is conceptualised and mobilised, how citizens’ interests and knowledge are taken into account, and the political significance of their involvement.","PeriodicalId":51735,"journal":{"name":"Urban Planning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Planning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17645/up.7259","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The importance and benefits of engaging citizens as co-producers of urban transformation have been increasingly recognised. However, the mere implementation of citizen co-production does not guarantee more legitimate or inclusive policy decisions and outcomes, especially when power inequalities that shape local decision-making remain unaddressed. This article examines the transformative potential of citizen co-production in smart sustainable city initiatives using two successive citizen panels in Trondheim, Norway, as cases. The study aimed to understand the role of citizen co-production in these panels, and the notion of “the citizen” within their frameworks. Three challenges with co-production were identified. Firstly, the ad-hoc nature of citizen engagement emphasised individual participation rather than facilitating collective spaces from which political agency could emerge. Secondly, citizens’ viewpoints were perceived as uninformed preferences that could be transformed through professional guidance. This, coupled with the closed nature of the initiatives, raises questions about the transformative potential of the processes, particularly in challenging the underlying premises of citizen co-production shaped by a neoliberal discourse of smart sustainable cities. The article concludes with a call to analyse citizen co-production spaces through an intersectional lens that attends to relational understandings of power dynamics and identities. This analysis should not only consider who participates, but also how “the citizen” as a subject is conceptualised and mobilised, how citizens’ interests and knowledge are taken into account, and the political significance of their involvement.
共同建设智能型可持续城市中作为幽灵主体的 "市民":交叉方法
越来越多的人认识到,让市民作为城市转型的共同生产者参与其中的重要性和好处。然而,仅仅实施公民共同生产并不能保证政策决策和结果更加合法或更具包容性,尤其是在影响地方决策的权力不平等问题仍未得到解决的情况下。本文以挪威特隆赫姆的两个相继成立的市民小组为案例,探讨了市民共同制作在智能可持续城市倡议中的变革潜力。研究旨在了解公民共同生产在这些小组中的作用,以及在其框架中的 "公民 "概念。研究发现了共同制作面临的三个挑战。首先,公民参与的临时性质强调的是个人参与,而不是促进集体空间,从而产生政治机构。其次,公民的观点被视为不知情的偏好,可以通过专业指导加以改变。这一点,再加上这些倡议的封闭性,使人们对这些进程的变革潜力产生了疑问,尤其是在挑战新自由主义关于智能可持续城市的论述所形成的公民共同生产的基本前提方面。文章最后呼吁通过关注权力动态和身份关系理解的交叉视角分析公民共同生产空间。这种分析不仅要考虑谁参与其中,还要考虑 "市民 "作为一个主体是如何被概念化和动员起来的,市民的利益和知识是如何被考虑到的,以及他们参与其中的政治意义。
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
Urban Planning
Urban Planning URBAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
124
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Urban Planning is a new international peer-reviewed open access journal of urban studies aimed at advancing understandings and ideas of humankind’s habitats – villages, towns, cities, megacities – in order to promote progress and quality of life. The journal brings urban science and urban planning together with other cross-disciplinary fields such as sociology, ecology, psychology, technology, politics, philosophy, geography, environmental science, economics, maths and computer science, to understand processes influencing urban forms and structures, their relations with environment and life quality, with the final aim to identify patterns towards progress and quality of life.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信