“Smart Cities” have all the trappings of modernist urban renewal, so why are urbanists jumping on the bandwagon?

The “Smart Cities” movement has received almost universal praise by urbanists and technologists, thanks to its promise to deliver cities from the grips of congestion, pollution and crime through technological solutions such as self-driving cars or limitless municipal data collection. Proponents of Smart Cities (and the larger ubiquitous-computing movement) have proclaimed that we are on the precipice of the Fourth Industrial Revolution—the idea posited by the German economist Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum—where rapidly expanding mobile computerization will fundamentally alter our way of life.

Le Corbusier’s Radiant City plan to redevelop Paris
Le Corbusier’s Radiant City plan to redevelop Paris

Perhaps the most developed critique is the aptly titled book Against Smart Cities by urbanist and information systems expert Adam Greenfield. The concise document soberly deconstructs key early examples of Smart Cities (Masdar City, Living PlanIT, etc.) which have failed to deliver on the lofty promises of their corporate and state sponsors. One of his most damning criticisms is not of the technology itself but of the way its creators have deployed it.

....

University of Texas Professor Robert Young, an expert in sustainable economic development and urban ecology. In his words, Smart Cities merely “help good cities do dumb things faster.” Young instead advocates for “Wise Cities,” which are informed by a variety of disciplines and historical precedents to foster a high functioning, low-maintenance urban form that is accessible to all segments of the population.

....

Young and Greenfield bring up a laundry list of other arguments against Smart Cities, each of which could stand alone as reason to be skeptical. For instance, there is the issue of what Greenfield describes as the system’s “brittleness.” If we invest billions in imbedded “smart” hardware across the urban landscape, what happens when that hardware is broken, hacked, outdated or no longer affordable to service? Or, when it comes to the jobs economy, where will all the service industry workers go when their jobs are taken over by self-driving cars, self-serving restaurants, and self-cleaning buildings? And finally, thinking globally, how will poor cities in developing countries keep pace with the rich techno-utopias of the West if they cannot afford Smart City technology?

Despite the unresolved questions of efficacy, Smart Cities have already become mainstream urban policy. The U.S. federal government officially jumped on the Smart Cities bandwagon in 2015, when President Obama introduced a $160 million “Smart Cities Initiative” to bolster research and investment for Smart City technology, with an eye towards supporting IT infrastructure and increased collaboration between cities and private sector entrepreneurs. In September 2016, the White House added another $60 million to the initiative; however, it seems likely that the funding will be axed by the Trump administration.

Looking forward, the Trump administration’s stance on Smart Cities—if they even have one—remains to be seen.