Urban Digital Twins and metaverses towards city multiplicities: uniting or dividing urban experiences?

IF 3.4 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Ethics and Information Technology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-23 DOI:10.1007/s10676-024-09812-3
Javier Argota Sánchez-Vaquerizo
{"title":"Urban Digital Twins and metaverses towards city multiplicities: uniting or dividing urban experiences?","authors":"Javier Argota Sánchez-Vaquerizo","doi":"10.1007/s10676-024-09812-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Urban Digital Twins (UDTs) have become the new buzzword for researchers, planners, policymakers, and industry experts when it comes to designing, planning, and managing sustainable and efficient cities. It encapsulates the last iteration of the technocratic and ultra-efficient, post-modernist vision of smart cities. However, while more applications branded as UDTs appear around the world, its conceptualization remains ambiguous. Beyond being technically prescriptive about what UDTs are, this article focuses on their aspects of interaction and operationalization in connection to people in cities, and how enhanced by metaverse ideas they can deepen societal divides by offering divergent urban experiences based on different stakeholder preferences. Therefore, firstly this article repositions the term UDTs by comparing existing concrete and located applications that have a focus on interaction and participation, including some that may be closer to the concept of UDT than is commonly assumed. Based on the components found separately in the different studied cases, it is possible to hypothesize about possible future, more advanced realizations of UDTs. This enables us to contrast their positive and negative societal impacts. While the development of new immersive interactive digital worlds can improve planning using collective knowledge for more inclusive and diverse cities, they pose significant risks not only the common ones regarding privacy, transparency, or fairness, but also social fragmentation based on urban digital multiplicities. The potential benefits and challenges of integrating this multiplicity of UDTs into participatory urban governance emphasize the need for human-centric approaches to promote socio-technical frameworks able to mitigate risks as social division.</p>","PeriodicalId":51495,"journal":{"name":"Ethics and Information Technology","volume":"27 1","pages":"4"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11584446/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics and Information Technology","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09812-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Urban Digital Twins (UDTs) have become the new buzzword for researchers, planners, policymakers, and industry experts when it comes to designing, planning, and managing sustainable and efficient cities. It encapsulates the last iteration of the technocratic and ultra-efficient, post-modernist vision of smart cities. However, while more applications branded as UDTs appear around the world, its conceptualization remains ambiguous. Beyond being technically prescriptive about what UDTs are, this article focuses on their aspects of interaction and operationalization in connection to people in cities, and how enhanced by metaverse ideas they can deepen societal divides by offering divergent urban experiences based on different stakeholder preferences. Therefore, firstly this article repositions the term UDTs by comparing existing concrete and located applications that have a focus on interaction and participation, including some that may be closer to the concept of UDT than is commonly assumed. Based on the components found separately in the different studied cases, it is possible to hypothesize about possible future, more advanced realizations of UDTs. This enables us to contrast their positive and negative societal impacts. While the development of new immersive interactive digital worlds can improve planning using collective knowledge for more inclusive and diverse cities, they pose significant risks not only the common ones regarding privacy, transparency, or fairness, but also social fragmentation based on urban digital multiplicities. The potential benefits and challenges of integrating this multiplicity of UDTs into participatory urban governance emphasize the need for human-centric approaches to promote socio-technical frameworks able to mitigate risks as social division.

城市数字双胞胎和迈向城市多重性的元verses:联合还是分割城市经验?
城市数字双胞胎(UDTs)已成为研究人员、规划人员、决策者和行业专家在设计、规划和管理可持续高效城市时的新流行语。它概括了技术官僚、超高效、后现代主义的智慧城市愿景的最后一次迭代。然而,尽管世界各地出现了越来越多打着 UDT 标签的应用,但其概念仍然模糊不清。除了在技术上规定什么是 UDTs 之外,本文重点关注的是 UDTs 与城市中人的互动和操作方面,以及它们如何在元宇宙思想的推动下,根据不同利益相关者的偏好提供不同的城市体验,从而加深社会分化。因此,本文首先通过比较现有的以互动和参与为重点的具体应用和定位应用,包括一些可能比通常认为的更接近 UDT 概念的应用,对 UDT 一词进行了重新定位。根据在不同研究案例中分别发现的组成部分,我们可以对未来可能出现的更先进的 UDT 进行假设。这使我们能够对比它们对社会的积极和消极影响。虽然开发新的沉浸式互动数字世界可以利用集体知识改善规划,使城市更具包容性和多样性,但它们也带来了巨大的风险,不仅是隐私、透明度或公平性方面的常见风险,还有基于城市数字多元性的社会分裂风险。在参与式城市治理中融入这种多元 UDT 的潜在益处和挑战,强调了以人为本的方法的必要性,以促进能够减轻社会分裂风险的社会技术框架。
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
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Ethics and Information Technology is a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to advancing the dialogue between moral philosophy and the field of information and communication technology (ICT). The journal aims to foster and promote reflection and analysis which is intended to make a constructive contribution to answering the ethical, social and political questions associated with the adoption, use, and development of ICT. Within the scope of the journal are also conceptual analysis and discussion of ethical ICT issues which arise in the context of technology assessment, cultural studies, public policy analysis and public administration, cognitive science, social and anthropological studies in technology, mass-communication, and legal studies.
×
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