Smarter City Transition and Society

The London School of Economics and Political Science Cities on the Path to ‘Smart’: Information Technology Provider Interactions with Urban Governance through Smart City Projects in Dubuque, Iowa and Portland, Oregon Michelle L. Cullen A thesis submitted to the Department of Sociology of the London School of Economics and Political Science for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, July 2016 1 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil / PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorization does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 99,925 words, excluding the appendices and bibliography. I can confirm that my thesis was copy edited for conventions of language, spelling and grammar by Robbin Warner. 2 Abstract Information and communication technologies are increasingly being infused into city systems and services as part of a growing trend to make cities ‘smart’. Through the design and implementation of these efforts, large information technology (IT) providers are interacting with local government policy and planning processes via: (a) strategy—project objectives, priorities and approaches; (b) engagement—which actors are involved, the roles they play and the interactions between and among them; and (c) representation—how the local government portrays the project through narrative and brand. In the discussion below, I argue that as smart projects multiply, interactions around this proliferation will pave the way for IT providers to more broadly inform urban governance processes. For in effect, IT providers are not just selling smart technologies. Rather, they are propagating a set of assertions about the role, structure, function and relationships of local government. These assertions are informed by neoliberal and entrepreneurial principles, bound up with the concept of smart, and attractively wrapped within the smart city imaginary. This imaginary is largely created by IT providers, and cannot be pursued without them. Within my approach, I view smart initiatives not simply as technical but social and political strategies, for while these projects are about technological innovation, they are also about ‘innovations’ in the relationships, interactions and discourse that surround them. To capture both the discursive and material realities of these projects, my methods of examination included key informant interviews and case study analysis of two cities in the United States, Dubuque, Iowa and Portland, Oregon. I focus specifically on smart projects led by IBM, an influential actor in the smart city market, and use Dubuque as a primary case study with Portland for comparison. My work provides an in-depth view of the IT provider IBM alongside the rise of the corporate entrepreneurial smart city, and sheds light on what these initiatives might mean for municipal administrations and city residents in similar urban environments. 3 Acknowledgments My completion of this dissertation reflects not only my own abilities, but also the tremendous support and encouragement I have received along the way. It began with Lina Abirafeh and Mary Patterson—who together, perhaps conspiratorially, raised the idea of me pursuing a doctoral degree, something that I would not have done otherwise. Nor would this degree have been possible without Ed Bevan, who secured my IBM scholarship, and along with Justin Cook and Reena Jana, provided me the flexibility that I needed to pursue this research while I worked. Amy Loomis, Peter Williams, Colin Harrison, Tom Erickson and Angela Warner all provided insight that helped me through this process. Virginia Tech’s Metropolitan Institute provided me an office in which much of this work was written, with faculty and graduate assistants always there to provide words of encouragement. In both Portland and Dubuque, local government officials and representatives from involved organizations were extremely helpful by providing me with information and granting me (often several) interviews over the years. Without this support, this research would not have been possible. Daiana Beitler provided critical guidance and support that kept me going along the way and got me across the finish line. My family provided a keen ear to listen to my frustrations as I developed this research and worked full-time; and, along with Michelle Munn, never failed in their belief that I could complete it. Throughout all of this, Lunden Blake helped me keep balance between body and mind. Last, but most certainly not least, Fran Tonkiss and Don Slater provided invaluable feedback throughout my research and drafting. To each of you, I give my sincerest thanks for all that you have done to help support me over the years as I have pursued this work. I am deeply grateful. 4 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 11 1.1 Aims, Objectives and Approach ........................................................................................ 12 1.2 Structure of Thesis ............................................................................................................. 16 2 DEBATES AND CONCEPTUAL UNDERPINNINGS ....................................................................... 19 2.1 Technological Precursors to Smart Projects..................................................................... 20 2.2 Unpacking the Concept of Smart ....................................................................................... 23 2.2.1 Taxonomies and Applications of Smart ................................................................................. 25 2.3 Broader Implications for Urban Environments ................................................................. 30 2.3.1 Networked Urbanism ............................................................................................................. 30 2.3.2 Government Vulnerability and Responsibility ....................................................................... 33 2.3.3 Propagating the Smart City .................................................................................................... 35 2.4 Conceptual Grounding for Analysis .................................................................................. 37 2.4.1 The Emergence of Smart: Neoliberal and Urban Entrepreneurial Trends .............................. 37 2.4.2 Alignment with the Concept of Smart .................................................................................... 41 2.5 Framework for Analysis .................................................................................................... 43 2.5.1 Strategic Planning .................................................................................................................. 44 2.5.2 Engagement ............................................................................................................................ 45 2.5.3 Representation ........................................................................................................................ 46 3 METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH ............................................................................................ 51 3.1 Desk Research ................................................................................................................... 53 3.2 Key Informant Interviews .................................................................................................. 54 3.3 City Case Studies ............................................................................................................... 58 3.3.1 Case Study Interviews ............................................................................................................ 62 3.3.2 Participation in Related Activities .......................................................................................... 64 3.3.3 Smart Project Narrative Review ............................................................................................. 67 3.4 An Inside Observer ............................................................................................................ 69 3.4.1 Risks and Limitations ............................................................................................................. 72 4 IT PROVIDER INTERACTIONS WITH URBAN GOVERNANCE AROUND SMART ........................... 74 4.1 Smart as a Lens for Strategy and Approach ...................................................................... 75 4.1.1 Data Centrality ....................................................................................................................... 76 4.1.2 Solutionism ............................................................................................................................ 77 4.1.3 Changing Capabilities and Staff ............................................................................................. 80 4.2 Smart as a Framework, Reason and Tool for Engaging ..................................................

Load more