Knowledge politics in the smart city: A case study of strategic urban planning in Cambridge, UK

IF 1.8 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Data & policy Pub Date : 2021-11-17 DOI:10.1017/dap.2021.28
T. Nochta, N. Wahby, J. Schooling
{"title":"Knowledge politics in the smart city: A case study of strategic urban planning in Cambridge, UK","authors":"T. Nochta, N. Wahby, J. Schooling","doi":"10.1017/dap.2021.28","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper highlights the need and opportunities for constructively combining different types of (analogue and data-driven) knowledges in evidence-informed policy decision-making in future smart cities. Problematizing the assumed universality and objectivity of data-driven knowledge, we call attention to notions of “positionality” and “situatedness” in knowledge production relating to the urban present and possible futures. In order to illustrate our arguments, we draw on a case study of strategic urban (spatial) planning in the Cambridge city region in the United Kingdom. Tracing diverse knowledge production processes, including top-down data-driven knowledges derived from urban modeling, and bottom-up analogue community-based knowledges, allows us to identify locationally specific knowledge politics around evidence for policy. The findings highlight how evidence-informed urban policy can benefit from political processes of competition, contestation, negotiation, and complementarity that arise from interactions between diverse “digital” and “analogue” knowledges. We argue that studying such processes can help in assembling a more multifaceted, diverse and inclusive knowledge-base on which to base policy decisions, as well as to raise awareness and improve active participation in the ongoing “smartification” of cities.","PeriodicalId":93427,"journal":{"name":"Data & policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Data & policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/dap.2021.28","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Abstract This paper highlights the need and opportunities for constructively combining different types of (analogue and data-driven) knowledges in evidence-informed policy decision-making in future smart cities. Problematizing the assumed universality and objectivity of data-driven knowledge, we call attention to notions of “positionality” and “situatedness” in knowledge production relating to the urban present and possible futures. In order to illustrate our arguments, we draw on a case study of strategic urban (spatial) planning in the Cambridge city region in the United Kingdom. Tracing diverse knowledge production processes, including top-down data-driven knowledges derived from urban modeling, and bottom-up analogue community-based knowledges, allows us to identify locationally specific knowledge politics around evidence for policy. The findings highlight how evidence-informed urban policy can benefit from political processes of competition, contestation, negotiation, and complementarity that arise from interactions between diverse “digital” and “analogue” knowledges. We argue that studying such processes can help in assembling a more multifaceted, diverse and inclusive knowledge-base on which to base policy decisions, as well as to raise awareness and improve active participation in the ongoing “smartification” of cities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
智慧城市中的知识政治:以英国剑桥市战略性城市规划为例
摘要本文强调了在未来智能城市的循证决策中建设性地结合不同类型(模拟和数据驱动)知识的必要性和机会。为了解决数据驱动知识假定的普遍性和客观性问题,我们呼吁注意与城市现在和可能的未来有关的知识生产中的“位置性”和“情境性”概念。为了说明我们的论点,我们引用了英国剑桥城市地区战略城市(空间)规划的案例研究。追踪不同的知识生产过程,包括从城市建模中获得的自上而下的数据驱动知识,以及自下而上的模拟社区知识,使我们能够围绕政策证据确定特定于地点的知识政治。研究结果强调了基于证据的城市政策如何从不同“数字”和“模拟”知识之间的互动所产生的竞争、争论、谈判和互补的政治过程中受益。我们认为,研究这些过程有助于建立一个更加多方面、多样化和包容性的知识库,作为政策决策的基础,并有助于提高人们的认识,提高人们对正在进行的城市“智能化”的积极参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Determinants for university students’ location data sharing with public institutions during COVID-19: The Italian case Bus Rapid Transit: End of trend in Latin America? Accelerating and enhancing the generation of socioeconomic data to inform forced displacement policy and response “That is why users do not understand the maps we make for them”: Cartographic gaps between experts and domestic workers and the Right to the City Analysis of spatial–temporal validation patterns in Fortaleza’s public transport systems: a data mining approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1