Dear all,
<br>
<br>We (Nicole Foster and ginger coons of the Digital Cultures Research
<br>Centre at the University of the West of England) welcome submissions to
<br>EASST 2018 panel A10: Commoning the Smart City. Submissions can be made
<br>through the EASST website
<br>https://nomadit.co.uk/easst/easst2018/conferencesuite.php/panels/6199
<br>
<br>*Short abstract*
<br>Smart cities construct inhabitants as consumers. They aggregate and
<br>exploit individual preferences and behaviors to create rational,
<br>efficient cities. Hackability could subvert 'smart' initiatives. This
<br>panel explores tensions between the smart and the hackable in the
<br>context of the digital commons.
<br>
<br>*Long abstract*
<br>Engineers, planners and policymakers espouse faith in technocratic
<br>solutions to urban ills. 'Smart city' narratives suggest that positive
<br>outcomes can be achieved by creating personalized experiences of the
<br>city. Instead of a generalized conception of the public, city
<br>inhabitants are constructed as diverse consumers representing market
<br>sectors. Interactions with public services and spaces can be tailored to
<br>produce efficient behavior and pleasurable, engaging experiences, making
<br>concerns regarding surveillance and social engineering more difficult to
<br>identify and contest. Because the 'smart city' is based on aggregating
<br>and exploiting individual preferences and behaviors, realizing the ideal
<br>of an urban commons becomes even more elusive.
<br>
<br>The 'hackable city' (frequently constituted as bottom-up organizing)
<br>could provide a subversive corrective to 'smart city' (top-down,
<br>centrally-managed) initiatives. However, the radical potential of these
<br>practices remains uncertain. While do-it-yourself urbanists and civic
<br>hackers can be seen as challenging these narratives through the
<br>appropriation of technologies and spaces by encouraging unsanctioned
<br>uses of public spaces, such projects are not subject to participatory
<br>planning processes and may reflect elite consumption preferences.
<br>'Hackable city' interventions could prove to be exclusionary.
<br>
<br>We invite contributions which critically explore the tensions
<br>underpinning smart and hackable city technologies, public space and its
<br>relationship to the commons. How might engagement with
<br>technically-mediated public spaces undermine or constitute a commons? Do
<br>hackable city interventions empower public space users to become
<br>producers? We especially seek work that complicates implicit dichotomies
<br>like bottom-up and top down, or hackable versus smart, engaging with the
<br>grey space between extremes.
<br>
<br>
<br>We look forward to your submissions!
<br>
<br>-ginger coons and Nicole Foster
<br>_______________________________________________
<br>EASST's Eurograd mailing list
<br>Eurograd (at) lists.easst.net
<br>Unsubscribe or edit subscription options: http://lists.easst.net/listinfo.cgi/eurograd-easst.net
<br>
<br>Meet us via https://twitter.com/STSeasst
<br>
<br>Report abuses of this list to Eurograd-owner@lists.easst.net
view formatted text
