The Smart City and its citizens: governance and citizen participation
in Amsterdam Smart CityCarlo Capra
IHS – Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies
Erasmus University Rotterdam
Picture: Waag Society 2013
Outline
o research overviewo research questiono main theories appliedo the caseo findingso conclusions o recommendations
Research Overview
Problem:o Smart city as a popular urban development model.o Attracting interest of large technology and infrastructure providers.o Cities seeking to attract external investments.o Role of technology and human capital widely analyzed.o Less attention to role of governance.o Limited interest in the active role of citizens in smart city programs.
Research Objectives:o Identify citizen participation typologies in smart city projects.o Identify governance characteristics of participatory smart city
initiatives.o Link governance characteristics to citizen participation typologies.
Research Questions
Main Research Question:Which governance characteristics are contributing to citizen participation in the development of projects within the Amsterdam Smart City initiative?
Sub-research questions:What is the governance model of Amsterdam Smart City initiative?
Which typologies of citizen participation are being realized within Amsterdam Smart City projects?
Smart City
o 3 Dimensions: Nam and Pardo (2011)
o 6 Characteristics: Giffinger et. al. (2007)
TECHNOLOGICAL
HUMANINSTITUTIONAL
“[...] investments in human and social capital and traditional (transport) and modern (ICT) communication infrastructure fuel sustainable economic growth and a high quality of life, with a wise management of natural resources, through participatory governance.” (Caragliu et al., 2011)
Governance
o Interdependence between organizationso Resource-sharing o Game-like interactions based on trust and negotiated
ruleso Self-organization
Network Governance (Koppenjan and Klijn):o Actorso Networkso Games
Citizen Participation
Information One-way flow
Bishop and Davis (2002)
Consultation Evaluate reactions
PartnershipInvolvement in decisionmaking
StandingInvitation in legal review process
Consumer Choice Choice of products
Control Delegation of choices
Social InnovationCollective action to satisfy needs outside market and state
Moulaert and Swyngedouw (2010)
Amsterdam Smart City overview
Pro
ject
Lev
elP
rogr
am L
evel
Amsterdam Smart City Platform
Living Working MobilityPublic
FacilitiesOpen Data
16 Projects 7 Projects 11 Projects 6 Projects14 Projects
4 Founding Partners
Governance Model
154 Project Partners
Governance ModelCitizen Participation
Amsterdam Smart City Governance
Actors:o 4 Founding partners: Liander, Amsterdam Economic Board, Amsterdam
Municipality, KPN.o Sharing of financial resources and staff.o Different resources: technical know how, networking, political sponsoring.o Further actors currently involved on specific projects.
Games:o ASC office as an arena for different stakeholders to meet and interact.o Further interactions with partners organized around founding partners. Key role of
Liander.o Presence of un-linked or weakly linked projects.
Networks:o Partnerships between diverse set of actors.o Collaboration and information exchange between organizations facilitated by co-
working.
Project governance and participation
1. Serious Gaming
2. CitySDK3. Smart Citizen
Kit4. Ring-Ring
Act
ors International Actors
Subset of AEB, Liander, C+L
23 International Partners.Waag Society and Geemente
Waag Society, AEB, Participants, Environmental Agencies
Initiator, Technology expert, Consultants, Stadsteel
Gam
es
International ArenaLocal Arena
International ArenaLocal Arena
Local arena, workshops, meetings
Neighborhood-levelarena
Ne
two
rks Legal frameworks
Division of TasksEx-ante evaluation criteriaCo-working
Legal frameworkVirtual information exchangeDivision of tasks
Lightweight contractDiversity of actorsFlexible evaluation
No legal frameworkDirectacquaintancesTrial and error
Cit
. Par
tici
p.
Mono-directional flow:INFORMATION
Mono-directional flow: INFORMATIONCo-production:PARTNERSHIP
Co-production:PARTNERSHIPBi-directional flow:CONSULTATION
Originated by citizens, outside market and state:SOCIAL INNOVATION
Project complexity and participation
No. of partnersContractsBudgetTechnologySpace
ParticipationMin
Max
Max
Co
mp
lexi
ty
Information -> Consultation -> Partnership -> Social Innovation
1
4
3
2
Conclusions
o Co-existence of different governance models.o Allows experimentation of partnership models.o Different typologies of citizen participation.o Complex projects with large heterogeneous sets of actors,
international components and external funding have more formalized rules and ex-ante evaluation schemes. Linked to Information typology of citizen participation.
o Smaller projects, based on strong interpersonal relationships, have less stringent legal requirements and flexible evaluations. Linked to Partnership typology of citizen participation.
o Localized project favour mutual knowledge and information exchange through informal channels not requiring legal frameworks: linked to Social Innovation.
Recomendations
o Citizen participation theory needs to be adapted to new settings of decision making.
o Network governance theory explains the playing ground for citizen participation.
o Intermediary organizations add a further layer to citizen participation and need further investigation.
o Technology and human capital are not the only ingredients for a smart city program. Urban managers should be attentive to the governance setting.
o Governance of smart city programs should adapt to local “culture”
Thank you
Carlo CapraIHS – Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies
Erasmus University Rotterdam
[email protected] - @carlofcap
www.ihs.nl - @ihsrotterdam
Picture: Waag Society 2013
Top Related