直接去数字双城?鹿特丹城市数字孪生中的公民参与和设计限制

IF 6.6 1区 经济学 Q1 URBAN STUDIES
Arthur De Jaeger , Thomas Swerts
{"title":"直接去数字双城?鹿特丹城市数字孪生中的公民参与和设计限制","authors":"Arthur De Jaeger ,&nbsp;Thomas Swerts","doi":"10.1016/j.cities.2025.106498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Digital technologies like Urban digital Twins (UDTs) are propagated by urban designers and administrators to render urban governance processes ‘smarter’. Hailed for their capacity to visualize complex urban redevelopment plans, simulate costs and benefits and offer tools for citizen co-creation, UDTs are the latest buzz in the field of citizen participation. Up to date, the literature on UDTs does little more than echoing this potential and highlighting applications. Building on the literature on smart urbanism, this paper introduces a critical perspective centered around the ‘Right to the Digital Twin City’ (RDTC) to empirically examine UDTs' potential to stimulate citizen power over processes of digital - and physical - urban development processes. Focusing on a case study of a UDT pilot project in Rotterdam, we demonstrate that effective citizen participation was hindered by limits-by-design. We show that urban planners and administrators set out the boundaries of the possible by controlling the UDT's design, failing to integrate it within the municipality's broader decision-making structure and limiting communication during the process. Furthermore, citizen participation in the UDT was hindered by the digital divide, language barriers, and government distrust. These research findings reveal technical and political limits-by-design that prevent the RDTC from being realized.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48405,"journal":{"name":"Cities","volume":"168 ","pages":"Article 106498"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Right to the digital Twin City? citizen participation and limits-by-design in Rotterdam's urban digital twin\",\"authors\":\"Arthur De Jaeger ,&nbsp;Thomas Swerts\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cities.2025.106498\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Digital technologies like Urban digital Twins (UDTs) are propagated by urban designers and administrators to render urban governance processes ‘smarter’. Hailed for their capacity to visualize complex urban redevelopment plans, simulate costs and benefits and offer tools for citizen co-creation, UDTs are the latest buzz in the field of citizen participation. Up to date, the literature on UDTs does little more than echoing this potential and highlighting applications. Building on the literature on smart urbanism, this paper introduces a critical perspective centered around the ‘Right to the Digital Twin City’ (RDTC) to empirically examine UDTs' potential to stimulate citizen power over processes of digital - and physical - urban development processes. Focusing on a case study of a UDT pilot project in Rotterdam, we demonstrate that effective citizen participation was hindered by limits-by-design. We show that urban planners and administrators set out the boundaries of the possible by controlling the UDT's design, failing to integrate it within the municipality's broader decision-making structure and limiting communication during the process. Furthermore, citizen participation in the UDT was hindered by the digital divide, language barriers, and government distrust. These research findings reveal technical and political limits-by-design that prevent the RDTC from being realized.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48405,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cities\",\"volume\":\"168 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106498\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264275125007991\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"URBAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cities","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264275125007991","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

城市设计师和管理者推广城市数字孪生(udt)等数字技术,以使城市治理过程“更智能”。udt以其可视化复杂的城市重建计划、模拟成本和收益以及为公民共同创造提供工具的能力而受到欢迎,是公民参与领域的最新热点。到目前为止,关于udt的文献只是反映了这种潜力并突出了应用程序。在智慧城市主义相关文献的基础上,本文引入了一个以“数字孪生城市权利”(RDTC)为中心的批判性视角,以实证方式检验udt在数字和实体城市发展过程中激发公民权力的潜力。通过对鹿特丹UDT试点项目的案例研究,我们证明了有效的公民参与受到设计限制的阻碍。我们表明,城市规划者和管理者通过控制UDT的设计设定了可能的边界,未能将其整合到市政当局更广泛的决策结构中,并限制了在此过程中的沟通。此外,公民参与UDT受到数字鸿沟、语言障碍和政府不信任的阻碍。这些研究结果揭示了阻碍RDTC实现的技术和政治限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Right to the digital Twin City? citizen participation and limits-by-design in Rotterdam's urban digital twin
Digital technologies like Urban digital Twins (UDTs) are propagated by urban designers and administrators to render urban governance processes ‘smarter’. Hailed for their capacity to visualize complex urban redevelopment plans, simulate costs and benefits and offer tools for citizen co-creation, UDTs are the latest buzz in the field of citizen participation. Up to date, the literature on UDTs does little more than echoing this potential and highlighting applications. Building on the literature on smart urbanism, this paper introduces a critical perspective centered around the ‘Right to the Digital Twin City’ (RDTC) to empirically examine UDTs' potential to stimulate citizen power over processes of digital - and physical - urban development processes. Focusing on a case study of a UDT pilot project in Rotterdam, we demonstrate that effective citizen participation was hindered by limits-by-design. We show that urban planners and administrators set out the boundaries of the possible by controlling the UDT's design, failing to integrate it within the municipality's broader decision-making structure and limiting communication during the process. Furthermore, citizen participation in the UDT was hindered by the digital divide, language barriers, and government distrust. These research findings reveal technical and political limits-by-design that prevent the RDTC from being realized.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cities
Cities URBAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
9.00%
发文量
517
期刊介绍: Cities offers a comprehensive range of articles on all aspects of urban policy. It provides an international and interdisciplinary platform for the exchange of ideas and information between urban planners and policy makers from national and local government, non-government organizations, academia and consultancy. The primary aims of the journal are to analyse and assess past and present urban development and management as a reflection of effective, ineffective and non-existent planning policies; and the promotion of the implementation of appropriate urban policies in both the developed and the developing world.
×
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