Rapid technological progress over the past 20-30 years has made us very dependent on the computers that are in our backpacks, pockets and even wrists. As humans got more used to using technology in everyday life, some of the humans came up with the idea of a Smart Cities that are built upon technologies that we love so much. But, what exactly is a smart city and what role do humans play in it, if any at all.
There are couple of Smart City projects around the world: Masdar City in the oil-rich United Arab Emirates or the Korean New Songdo. Adam Greenfield, in his book “Against the Smart City” describes the developers of these cities in a following way: It’s that their developers appear to lack any feel for the ways in which cities actually generate value for the people who live in them[1]. And it is hard to disagree with Greenfield. I came across this video featuring Masdar City – an empty city populated solely by robots.
After watching this video, I asked myself a question: Would I want to live in a city like Masdar? where everything is automated and there is nothing for humans to do except for enjoy the ultimate lifestyle and work experience[2]. Cities like Masdar or New Songdo will probably not be populated by anyone who is alive today, because such a drastic change of lifestyle is hard. However, there are ways in which technology can be applied to existing cities without sucking sole out of them and converting them to dense settlements[3], where only robots can hear you scream.
1. Buses That Arrive On Time
Availability, reliability and performance of public transportation is crucial to the city and its performance.
2. More & Better Parks
During a two hour walk in Portland, I only noticed 3 or 4 parks and most of them were decrepit, had benches in awkward places and grass was not cut evenly. This creates a very uninviting and repelling atmosphere. Location of the park also matters;
3. Maps, Schedules, Everything – Digital & Easily Accessible
This a photo of a smart bus stop in Tbilisi, Georgia. The screen displays bus ETA, air temperature and time in Georgian and English which really makes it easier for tourists to get around. The screen also acts as a wifi hotspot. As there are bus stops all around the city, it automatically became covered by a publicly available wifi network. Portland could also implement this kind of system; an app that provides access to schedules and city maps could also be developed.
4. More, Easily Available Public Spaces
Anything from stairs in front of the building to the communal tennis court can count as a public space, so there is no photo for this one. It is extremely important for city dwellers to have places to take a break from the rhythm of the city. Developing such areas will create basis for a happier and healthier population.
5. Data Collection For A Good Cause
Data collection does not necessarily involve CCTV cameras and sensors that feed data to a closed, centralized system. Data collection can be a process open to the public. In fact, Open Data is even better because it creates opportunities for innovation and entrepreneurship. I think Portland could really benefit from an open-source crowdsourced data collection platform, where citizens could upload photos and geolocations of places that need fixing or renovation.
Some of the ideas above have to seem no connection with each other; however, there is one thing uniting them: all of them can be implemented using the same technology that powers smart cities like Masdar or New Songdo without devaluing humans in the city ecosystem.
The best thing about these ideas is that implementing any one of them will spark the development of the other by rising public demand. A more reliable public transportation system will encourage people to leave their cars at home and go for walks (knowing they will not have to walk all the way back – they will be able to take a bus!). More people going for walks will encourage development and growth of public spaces which will create opportunities for outdoor performances and street artists.
However, implementing a crowdsourced open data collection platform excites me the most. This data could be used to figure out where to place parks and where to put bus lines; tracking the location of people in parks would enable planners to place benches in relevant places. The openness of this data, would enable 3rd party developers to create even better apps to power the city life through applications that could be targeted at people living in specific locations or of a specific demographic.
Opportunities are limitless, we just need to implement technology without removing life from the city.
————————————————————————————-
Citations
1. Greenfield, Adam (2013-12-20). Against the smart city (The city is here for you to use) (Kindle Locations 306-307). Do projects. Kindle Edition.
2. Greenfield, Adam (2013-12-20). Against the smart city (The city is here for you to use) (Kindle Location 86). Do projects. Kindle Edition.
3. Greenfield, Adam (2013-12-20). Against the smart city (The city is here for you to use) (Kindle Location 47). Do projects. Kindle Edition.
The best metropolitan transportation systems I have ridden on are ones that run on time and provide real-time schedule updates. Screens communicating how long until the next train or bus arrives and the destination of the train/bus, help increase the system’s efficiency and provide people with better information. I agree that Portland would benefit from such improvements, however, its first step is to expand its public transportation network. As it expands, it should consider the benefits of installing bus stops with information screens. I also agree that Portland should invest in open-source crowd sourced data. It would provide a platform for residents to have their concerns heard, troubleshooting problems with the city’s infrastructure (i.e. potholes), etc. The city would no longer have to spend time and money locating problems that need solutions, rather, the public would bring the problems to them. This would dramatically improve the system’s efficiency. Portland also needs to invest money in revamping its parks. The state of some of them, Lincoln Park in particular, are quite sad and depressing – definitely not spaces that attract public life.
I like your suggestion of implementing technological infrastructure without devaluing the human ecosystem that already exists in the city. The video of Masdar does not seem to occupy this same realm, but rather looks like a city in existence without humans. I think your suggestion about improved public transportation can have lasting impacts throughout Portland. Like Emma suggested, before if becomes smart is has to expand, but I definitely agree with your idea that as buses etc. become more reliable, people will be encouraged to take them. It makes sense to combine this idea with previous mentions of a phone app so that you can see if the bus you are planning on taking is going to be on time before you even walk to the station. Although this seems to play to the idea of American laziness, the more convenient public space is to Americans the more it will be utilized. This expansion of public transportation and app will be very beneficial in Portland.
I really like the visuals and especially the video in this blog. I agree that Portland needs a more reliable and accessible public transportation system. Although Portland is not a particularly large city, a more efficient and reliable transportation method is definitely needed especially given the growing population. I think more data collection would be helpful in creating an efficient bus route. Additionally, smart bus stops and more accessible schedules would help everything run more efficiently.
When I interviewed people in Portland for the mental maps, the most commonly mentioned problem with Portland was the accessibility. I was told that the buses have a very limited schedule, often run late (sometimes they don’t even come), and are just generally unreliable. In addition to creating a system that runs better, public wifi on the transportation system itself could also be beneficial (such as Wi-Fi in buses and taxis).
I like the focus on incorporating technology but not at a level independent from human interaction. Technology can be beneficial when used correctly and can even make a system better if it makes it run more efficiently (such as the transportation in Portland).
Kote,
I am really excited about the real-time bus schedule/ public Wi-Fi combo. Not only does this make Wi-Fi consistently and recognizably available– whenever you wait for the bus– it repurposes existing infrastructure in a way that brings the city up to date with people’s needs and lifestyles. For Portland, I think an innovation like this could seriously revamp the city’s abysmal public transportation system. Wi-Fi would make the buses and bus stops more noticeable, as well; at this point public transport has been nearly invisible to me even after I began looking out for it on repeated visits to the city. The revamped bus system would in turn help to solve the parking problem downtown and in Old Port, and perhaps even to encourage tourists to venture off the waterfront streets. It would also obviously be a useful development for residents of the city.
-Eva
I like your comment that cities can still be “smart” without losing its human aspects. Technology should be focused on convenience and quality of life and not about automation or depersonalization. Your suggestions about increased transportation and digital schedules are very important. When we visited Portland, we saw very few bus lines. This should be improved to help make the switch towards a more walkable city. I also appreciate your comment about open data. Smart data collection should not be a closed surveillance system, but rather be made available to the public and encourage innovation.
I have been waiting for someone to explore what the human relationship to technology should be, and I like the comical point of only robots hearings your screams. In the coming decades there will be a constant grapple between technology and humanity. Yes, we invite the current role that technology plays, which is efficiency and connectivity in the virtual realm. Value cannot be divorced from technology, even if it laces the under-layer of our “smart” cities. But in the future, humans may be divorced from their environments because we did not have the understanding that tech is value-neutral. We might shift from integrated tech to replacement tech that produces “human” infrastructure. A complacent reliance on technology drains vitality from the city in insidious ways unlike various types of “flight”, gentrification or disaggregation. You make an excellent point that we may not even play a role in smart cities, at its current definition. It seems like technology satisfies some of our necessities but on top of that engenders an entirely new set of values and needs that we need to be mindful about allowing.
I think you were hinting at strategic placement of wifi, such as at bus stations and in the buses themselves. I’m wondering what your thoughts on park wifi are, then. Should all parks in all of their surface areas have wifi? Or should we first (or only) focus on the instances in which wifi meets the needs of convenience instead of drastically reshaping use of public space? Are parks not spaces for retreating from the rhythm of the city, or are they being turned into hotspots of connection at the price of disconnection to the real world?
I agree that Open Data about cities is super huge. I think the implications go even further though than the apps that app makers will make. Having access to that kind of data is empowering, even more so if it is attached to the idea of using the data to make something. Opening up access to this previously secret information is an invitation to everyone to learn about how the city works and to come up with ways to make it how they want.
Although each of these ideas are distinct, most of them are connected through the idea of a central app or wifi that has the capacity to provide information about a lot of aspects of different aspects of the city. I particularly enjoyed your emphasis and discussion about a human’s role in a smart city – this is a very realistic and serious issue that surrounds the development of new smart cities as, like you said, smart cities like New Songdo or Masdar probably will not be populated by anyone who is alive today because “such a drastic change of lifestyle is hard”. This made me think more about “people as infrastructure” from the Jiminez discussion because we need to evolve the way that people think within a city to change their interactions with technology in order for a fully smart city to work.
I think in terms of speeding up a city’s evolution to smart city status, free and open data is the most promising and important idea. With the right amount of data submissions and processing, free and open data would allow cities to be perfectly tailored to the largest possible portion of their population. That being said, we are not at the point where cities could contribute or process this much data yet – so perhaps we could implement other simpler smart technologies to slowly break residents into the smart city open data idea. A city could start with the digital and easily accessible transportation app with maps, schedules, and delay information as you also discussed above and then ease into the more open data concept.
Your signage idea is really cool especially how many different boxes it checks all at once. I wonder if it would be possible to get local businesses to sponsor the signs as a way to pay for them. For example, the wifi network could be called “publicwifi sponsored by 4street” or something. Obviously, the biggest barrier to these signs is that they are expensive so if you could find a way to push some of the cost away from the city, it might be easier to have them put up.
These signs could also be placed near your better parks. That will allow those parks to benefit from the wifi that is everywhere. If you couple that with seating and public parks should become much more popular.
I enjoy the idea of efficiently letting the public sector know of any issues within the city. I think this could greatly benefit the city with quick fixes. I worry that it would impede in privacy issues, on top of that the information might be too powerful that could incentivize 3rd party users to take advantage of it. What costs would be created if a collection of data this precise were open to the public? I do believe it would be very useful for developers to create some helpful apps.
The best part of writing in two groups is getting the feedback and support of both, eh? Well, you certainly pitched a series of comprehensive ideas here and any of them, dug into deeply, would make a really profound contribution to the city. Given your exceptionally thoughtful and critical eye toward suggestions that affect the entire scale of the city–and remember to use that wisely and fairly–what do you have in store for Portland? Your trash data gathering was insightful and could help to think through a cleaner and more environmentally friendly city, but will this integrate with new tech on the buses? I look forward to finding out.