Historic, Sociological and Ethical Perspectives on the smart city phenomenon

Since human civilization kicked off, we have been witnessing a boom in urbanization worldwide. This growth has become somewhat exponential as of lately, with the turning of the 21^st century and the emergence of the 4^th industrial revolution. Smart city phenomenon is now a hot topic, and individuals are debating to understand where ‘urbanism’ is going, where urban innovation agendas are going or should be going, and why. All cities should be included into the debate of smart city planning. For the purpose of this paper, I shall be hypothetically acting as a Chief Innovation Officer (CIO) to one of the cities where I spent a good portion of my life. My city of choice is Bucharest, located in Romania, Eastern Europe. The city is set to become a great hub for innovation and development in the emerging region. The first part of the essay will cover the general tendencies of urbanism and how a paradigm shift in smart city thinking couples together with digital transformation in order to drive modern solutions for “old-fashioned” cities like Bucharest. It is however imperative to understand why such a smart city phenomena is happening. As such, the second part of the paper tackles the whys and ethical issues associated to the paradigm shift. Finally but not least, I will wrap up the topic of urbanism by combining both modern solutions and social problems associated to this trend, and consider the various forms of agendas cities like Bucharest are adoption and should adopt for the future. This last part will hence open up to what the future prospects of smart city planning may look like in our age.

Let us begin by analyzing where urbanism is headed and what it is. First and foremost, we must acknowledge the fact that societies today are faced with a paradigm shift (in its network) into what constitutes the smart city mindset and urbanism as a whole. This shift opens new pathways to opportunities we may find in order to solve societal and economic problems faced by urbanization. As such, a CIO and his team responsible for a city must understand the notions of smart city thinking and its digital transformation context.

Indeed, let us quickly recall ourselves about the complexity in defining urbanization and the need to apply a unique perspective about what and how a “smart city” should be. There is no single definition of what a smart city is, because there world is extremely diverse and so perspectives differ, region from region, culture to culture. Young CIOs and their affiliates can look up at the various definitions in books such as Bas Boorsma’s “A New Digital Deal” or Jonathan Reichental’s “Smart Cities for dummies”. Attempting at simplifying as much as possible the definition of a “smart city”, the latter is a city which adapts to the needs and wants of all its citizens and communities, ensuring they are kept safe and that they have a sustainable lifestyle with the help of innovation. However, one must first appreciate the uniqueness of what constitutes their own city they are managing. Let us look into Bucharest as I personally think it fits more the description of a smart-social city. It is an Eastern European city, strategically positioned at the cross-roads of western and eastern civilizations. It is full of history. It was nicknamed the “Little Paris” during the interwar period (1918-1939) as its architecture resembled that of Paris, and francophone cultural influence spread vastly across the Romanian Kingdom. Then WW2 happened and communism took over, and imposed a severe dictatorship similar to that of North Korean and Libyan regimes we have witnessed during the Cold War. Consequently, the city changed in its appearance and so traditions became mixed with a need for reinvention. This is just a very short summary of what Bucharest feels like, and it comes to no surprise as to the sheer complexity of finding its own identity, especially during the 4^th industrial revolution and the smart city phenomenon. I remember the former CIO for the city of Rome stating how important it is to allow a shift of mentality from the conservative standpoint of doing things in urbanized areas in order to solve 20^th century problems with 21^st century solutions. One needs to transition and innovate the mindset. To this extent, Bucharest is very similar to Rome’s cultural and so traditional focus of leading urbanization. As a consequence, our first problem we have to tackle is the mindset of the leadership and governance for driving smart city thinking in the city of Bucharest. Just as Raphael Pietro Garadi pointed out, they could not solve the excess of garbage being dumped into the streets of Rome without having first to handle how waste management was organized and how different departments would coordinate in order to find new solutions that they are not used to explore in the first place. The same problem applies to Bucharest.

According to the Smart City Index Report, publicized by IMD and the Singapore University for technology and design in 2020, Bucharest ranked only 85th out of 102 cities (see below reference 1). As such, Bucharest is fairly new at exploring what constitutes smart city. The city desires to bridge the gap between its past and digital transformation. It wants to transition from the outdatedness of a centralized network to a distributed system within the paradigm shift of urbanization. For example, Bucharest is modernizing its public transportation processes by implementing apps such as a public transport online by card called B-Pay for reaching a destination with more ease or by installing a system called Traffic Alert Bucharest. On a positive side, we notice Bucharest wishes to solve congestion issues. Paradoxically, the city is considered to be one of the most congested cities in the world (4^th in Europe and 14^th in the World)¹. However, where a solution is found through digitalization, a new problem arises. In Bucharest, basic infrastructure such as asphalt, paved roads and sidewalks still represent big challenges as maintenance for these are being held back by parties, people of influence, corruption and the such. In a world of digital transformation, a sense of digital tribalism appears, where some communities are being advantaged by urbanization and others not. Coupled to this, younger generations in Bucharest want to demonstrate the effectiveness of utilizing apps. But those still in power seem reluctant to change because of this fear of losing grip of power. Even more, there is a lack of trust in the citizens of Bucharest towards public institutions, government and private in some cases. Because people don’t trust the system, they do not trust the modernization of the infrastructure (healthcare and education for that matter), and so they would rather rely on acquiring their own car, regardless of the extreme congestion. Thus, there is a vicious cycle happening here where we go deeper into the rabbit hole. Here therefore, as CIO in Bucharest, I identify the problem of trust between state and citizens.

These are just a few indications as to how complicated Bucharest may sound. It is therefore imperative to understand why we must urbanize in the first place. Who are we doing this for? What is the point of digital transformation if a community benefits to the detriment of others? As CIO in cities like Bucharest, making sure to pass from a zero-sum to positive-sum outcomes is paramount.

The history of urbanization is known to have brought not only positive change in the needs and wants in societies, but also its unpleasantries. Unfortunately, we see too many trends following similar patterns as to those we have witnessed during previous industrial revolutions and societal shifts in civilization.

Let us reminisce first at the turn of the 20^th century and in the interwar era. The second industrial revolution, already incorporated well into western societies gave way to new mindsets. Visionaries started to appear imagining what a perfect city would look like. Architects like Le Corbusier or the idea of green cities had great influence on urbanization and city planning. Nevertheless, they left out the most vital aspect as to why we urbanize in the first place: to meet the needs and wants of all communities living in the targeted city. We need to look beyond the aesthetics and the gentrification of cities, physically speaking, in order to adapt for the people. That is the whole purpose of urbanization. I concur with what Jane Jacobs’ “The Death and Life of Great American Cities” stated about how we have lost our ways about what city planning is meant to be and how leaders were daydreaming utopian landscapes, rather than anchoring back into the realities citizens faced during the mid-20^th century. Those ideas, instead of improve lifestyles, on the contrary alienated a number of communities. Bucharest is a city suffering the same consequences as those “great American cities” Jane Jacobs mentioned in her book. Bucharest is utilizing EU funds in order to beautify the city, and so gentrify the historical sites, which were left over by Ceausescu’s regime. The problem is gentrification in Bucharest happens only around the old center. What is left behind (or more accurately put, most of it) are the now-decadent communist-era apartment blocks, which are indeed becoming a nuisance for the city planners and its dwellers. By investing those EU funds into the city touristic center, the planners hope to attract more foreign direct investment (FDIs) and so increase tourism. However, they are doing this just as an image; a façade so-to-speak. Yes, I personally enjoy walking the old Bucharest center, with its beautiful architecture renovated and nice pedestrian walkways and invigorating urban life, grabbing lunch or drinking a coffee at a terrace. Regrettably, those areas were specially designed to attract the outside world. As soon as you drive further away, or even walk 20min past those focal points towards to margins of the city, the repulsive, earthquake-endangered blocks make the marginalized communities look deplorable. More frighteningly, the locals’ behaviors are just about the same as the physical appearances of those neighborhoods they are living in. For instance, it is unadvisable to wonder around the fifth sector in Rahova and Ferentari². These communities are usually frequented by sidelined poor gypsy communities due to petty crime rates like pickpocketing or vandalism.

To reflect further, urbanization today needs to consider all ethnicities and so ethical decision must be undertaken. This is how we get to as close to that Zero Marginal Cost, as Jeremy Rifkin underlined in his writings, ergo the positive-sum outcomes I noted earlier. The author delivers an important lesson of history by depicting the events of 16^th century; the Century of Enlighten. In those times, social revolutions were forwarding change in European societies, but as Max Weber pointed out, the replacement of spiritual values from the conservative Christian mentality to a materialist world changed society forever. A sudden focus on the value of individuals and the right to property ownerships provoked a clash of societies in those times. This clash eventually resulted into a new era, that of the market economy. One specific innovation during the 16^th century was the scaling up of the printing machine and cryptography practices. Catholics and Protestants (who were adversaries) both utilized these inventions in order to compete against each other, and so survive. Today worryingly, such trends have not disappeared. Digital transformation raises the question of cybersecurity in cities, being exposed to hackers, or to agencies applying CCTVs in order to surveil the population. Because we are exposed to nearly free information, everything has become accessible and the growth in data is somewhat exponential. In order to get to zero marginal cost, we need to ensure our creation for more opportunities to people by sharing information is not compromised by the negative repercussions, like a surveillance state could bring to a smart city. Bucharest today has geo-strategic capabilities in that it’s uniquely positioned in Eastern Europe, as a NATO ally but also as an EU member, which adheres to the GDPR principles. Hence, as CIO for Bucharest it is important to be aware of such movements. Handling flow of information transparently but also respecting privacy are becoming one of the core challenges in the fourth industrial revolution. As CIO, maintaining security and safety in cities like Bucharest in essence form pillars for setting out sustainable building blocks in smart city planning. Several readings indicate such prerequisites like the “New Digital Deal” or Mazzucato’s “Mission Economy”, wherefrom the levels of trust and security are being outlaid clearly.

To add up, Bucharest’s (and Romania’s, as a greater extent) public healthcare and education system is archaic to the models we used to prior to the 1989 revolution. Although the private sector has managed to modernize some aspects of these in the last 3 decades, citizens who cannot afford premium prices in the private sector still do not get the full benefits from the public domain. This debacle has become so politicized over the last decades that people have lost faith to any advances for future generations. Ironically and sadly speaking altogether, the Romanian society has come to accept this harsh reality. Communities have even turned its own misfortunes into sarcastic humor to say the least in order to ease the pain. But as CIO, these debates can only create more friction and impede the delivery on the promises of change. We need to switch this status quo by demonstrating face-front for example how we can utilize intelligent technology to replace conventional workforces for more efficient productivity in the public sector. At the same time, those lost jobs can transition into newer, more attractive workplaces, and so create balance between past and future, to meet the present requirements. This is something I see as an addition to Jeremy Riskin’s Zero Marginal Cost concept.

Moreover, if there is one factor I appreciate in Riskin’s work is the emphasis put upon infrastructure categorized as being public goods. Bucharest should urbanize not in the way economic success is solely possible through entrepreneurial and capitalist practices, as it has so aspired since emancipation after 1989. This is I am afraid a common fallacy of thinking in which we have come to accept in our societies, especially in emerging regions like Eastern Europe. As a substitute, I go back to the importance of balancing out traditional practices, as Bucharest has done so in its past, but at the same time counter the gaps with modern processes. Digital transformation should not necessarily eliminate tradition (the term is meant as a positive aspect) but rather complement it. That is where urbanism should be going, and why smart city planning should exist. It is an extension for improvement of existing communities in the urban lifestyle.

Consequently, how do we reconcile digital transformation with society for driving positive change in the urbanization process, and not trade-off past with the future? Urbanism must have a clear agenda, with a mission and a specific purpose in mind to render for its people and the city itself.

As CIO of Bucharest, it will be paramount to put into place a coherent and transparent agenda in order to drive the necessary changes for tackling the city’s current social and urban problems. More specifically, I believe the city of Bucharest is in dire need of an agenda revolving around the stakeholders; all the entities responsible for urbanism. As the “New Digital Deal” indicates in Chapters 5 and 6, I reiterate that the core building blocks the city needs a lot of work on is in leadership and governance. I have already talked about leadership previously and how trusts needs to be revived in Bucharest between the citizens, the private and the public sectors. Regarding governance, there is an issue of corruption and tendencies which drive nepotism in cities like Bucharest. Politicians seem to be holding too much on centralized power. The healthcare system for example is at a breaking point now due to the pandemic because outdated centralized managerial models still hold ground to this day. Besides modernization of the hospitals, I believe it is vital to install a new methodology for managing the public healthcare system. Utilizing personalized platforms which protect patients’ privacies need to be considered. Coordinating with the private companies and the public healthcare departments for reaching affordable deals for their own employees (such as healthcare benefits) could become extremely valuable as this will nurture trust and reliance in a modernized system. Hence, employees in the services sector will not have to rely on expensive medical treatments and the such, when they usually end up in private clinics, where they hold the monopoly, knowing that the public hospitals are areas people tend to avoid given its poor conditions. In a way, we could say that digitalizing the way we coordinate with other stakeholders in Bucharest will allow us a horizontal integrative governance system. Ergo, there will not be a silo effect. I believe such a practice would boost embracing a culture of innovation from all sides and solve current problems in Bucharest.

Admittedly, there might be some reluctance to this change, but as Mariana Mazzucato pointed out in her “Mission Economy”, innovation equals taking risk. However, the long term prospects are worth the effort. Such was the case with the Apollo Mission the author based her writings on. The government in the 60s were willing to take risks in order to innovate and synchronize itself with private companies. The agenda here had a clear message: a purpose for this mission which was to land a man on the moon and compete against the USSR. This got the job done. Similarly, Bucharest requires a clear purpose with a vision in order to effectively drive innovative agendas for urbanism. Fortuitously, since Romania is part of the EU, Bucharest has had tremendous support with EU non-reimbursable funds in order to achieve the EU’s targeted metrics and goals for a cohesiveness and resilience to its member states. The EU agenda on smart cities includes Bucharest. For example, Romania is experimenting with a project called „Targeted Support to Smart Specialization in Romania”. This is a platform tool launched in collaboration by the Join Research Center (JRC). Its purpose is to support the Smart Specialization Strategies (S3) in Romania covering both national and regional levels. This project is similar to a think tank, where the capital region Bucharest-Ilfov began its S3 strategy in 2019 with JRC support³. It was completed last year in December 2020. I believe this system will help us discover what may be missing in terms of workforce and societal needs. This agenda should be therefrom reinforced by a Smart Nation Structure, such as we have seen in Singapore or Reykjavik. This form of effective governance will only ease our launch for smart city planning, but most importantly will sustain it on the longer run. Indeed, this is something most agencies in Bucharest failed over the last few decades; it is to start a project and later in the middle of the terms, lose itself in the process or even worse, never have it finalized, leaving a legal mess and ending up a the judicial courts.

To continue, the Smart Nation Structure will involve a multiple stakeholder ecosystem for resilience and expanded governance, distributed over all the sectors in Bucharest. Let us take the example of the waste management system and the energy sector lacking affordable warn water and gas during seasonal peaks. For years these challenges have yet to be solved because none of the involved parties have had a concrete plan set in motion in which they all agree. Points of views are being clashed together, suggesting there is more a sense of direct competition and monopolization rather than integrated horizontal collaboration. As CIO for Bucharest, I could start surveying the neighbors and talking directly to the citizen’s representatives in order to find out whether the water and gas providers possess a true monopoly for increasing prices. Access is another issue, so one would have to assess who is in charge for maintaining and building a reliant pipeline system underneath the city. Some 4IR instruments can help us achieve these diagnostics such as IoT (strategically positioning sensors in order to detect which areas of the city require a redirection of the gas or water when overstressed), or Machine learning (ML) in order to optimize the system without resulting in the use of extended manpower, where the error rate risks outputting disaster.

Finally but not least, we can reconcile citizens with digital transformation by following the policies, SDGs and climate focus targets created by the international institutions such as the UNGC. Again, “Mission Economy” explicitly lays out the vision and mission for a better future. Bucharest could take great advantage of these as it will relieve ambiguity for building its own agenda, by designing a “mission map framework” for waste management, water and gas, healthcare, education and infrastructure. Let us take Infrastructure as a case for our mission map: This is The Grand Challenge. Breaking down this complex endeavor could be stated with: Solve congestion in Bucharest by 2030. This would be our mission. From there, we could segment the mission in several sectors such as mobility, IoT, drivers’ behavior during rush hours or smart traffic lights. To facilitate coordination and so cross-sectoral development for reaching our mission, mission projects could be designed. One of them could be for instance: How do we analyze the behavior of drivers during rush hours and where are they forced to park when there cannot find any space? Bottom-up experimenting with drone flying over the traffic jams could also give us good clues about what’s exactly happening down there. This would also require the involvement of legal entities such as the police and firefighter departments, as they would benefit immensely from such assessments. Private firms could also contribute as they may come with innovative suggestions on how to redirect the flow of traffic. I state this because several modern business buildings in the northern part of Bucharest possess numerous underground parking spaces, these most of the time not being utilized efficiently because most people do not access to them. Incentivizing these companies and property owners may bring aid to solving congestion issues. Changing the working hours for a portion of their employees on a cyclical basis could for example allow only a portion of the cars to leave the garage after work, whereas the other portion of employees remain to work, hence relaxing congestion for a few hours. As CIO, I believe this could be feasible in the shorter notice as we ensure all stakeholders are involved in the agenda for making Bucharest an even better city to live in.

To summarize, I firstly realized as CIO how complex the historical and geographical context matters for the city of Bucharest and affects its unique perspective from a plethora of different notions for what urbanism and smart cities are. Given its background, I evaluate Bucharest has great potential for becoming a social city, proud of its heritage. I then emphasized on the need to drive organizational culture within the realm of the paradigm shift we are experiencing today in urbanization. Secondly, we dived into a more in-depth analysis of why and for what reasons we should urbanize in the first place. We must think ethically and safely, transparently, and nurture communities of trust within cities like Bucharest. Thirdly and lastly, we can couple together Bucharest’s traditions with digital transformation by considering proper agendas through cohesive coordination on the longer run. As a final point, a CIO’s overall strategy revolves back to one singularity; a variable constantly changing; people. It all comes back to the citizens and their needs. As CIO of Bucharest, we need to do better in addressing the communities’ needs and wants. Envisioning this stakeholder collaborative Smart Nation Structure could be the solution for solving recurring and ad hoc problems in the present but also those which may arise in our future. Instead of being reactive and chaotic, a CIO and its team for cities like Bucharest need to think proactively and sustainably. I end my paper by opening up a further reflection on how Bucharest could integrate its surrounding region more interconnectedly. As we drive change, one must not leave behind the countryside and nature, which is core to Romanian tradition and culture. For urban citizens, most of our relatives still live in impoverished villages and small towns in Romania. How can Bucharest contribute to a smart regional metropolitan-countryside?

References:

1. Mihai Cristea – BR Cover Story: “Bucharest Embraces Its Smart City Future”, (08/2020), Last accessed: October 12 2021, URL: https://business-review.eu/br-exclusive/br-cover-story-bucharest-embraces-its-smart-city-future-212423.

2. Boorsma, Bas – “Chapter 3: Entering the Digitalized Society. On organizational Design, Disruption and Economic Impact”, “Chapter 4: The Impact of Digitalization on Societal Domains. From Mobility to Education, from Healthcare to Journalism”, “Chapter 5: Origins of Community Digitalization and the “Smart City Legacy” and “Chapter 6: The 20 Building blocks of Community Digitalization”, A New Digital Deal. Beyond Smart Cities. How to Best Leverage Digitalization for the Benefit of our Communities (Revised 2020 Edition, Community Nova/ BoekXpress).

3. Mariana Mazzucato – “Part 1 A Mission Grounded”, “Part 2: A Mission Possible” and “Part 3: Mission in Action”, Mission Economy: A Moonshot Guide to Changing Capitalism (2021, Harper Business).

4. Reichental, Jonathan – “Part 1: Making Cities Our Home”, “Part 2: Building a Smarter City” and “Part 5: The Part of Tens”,  Smart Cities for dummies (2020, Wiley).

5. Jacobs, Jane – “Part One: The Peculiar Nature of Cities”, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, (1961 – 2021).

6. Bucharest Apartments – “What Are The Safest Areas Of Bucharest”, Last date accessed: October 13 2021, URL: https://bucharestapartment.net/what-are-the-safest-areas-of-bucharest.

7. Eremia – “The Smart City Concept in the 21^st Century”, URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877705817309402 (Links to an external site.).

8. Saskia Sanssen – “The Global City: Introducing a Concept” (Winter/Spring 2005), URL: http://www.saskiasassen.com/pdfs/publications/the-global-city-brown.pdf.