Why do some smart cities fail?
This article is also available here in Spanish.

Why do some smart cities fail?

My list

Author | Jaime Ramos

Why do many smart cities fail to take off? We have associated smart cities with a combination of almost Utopian promises of wellbeing. What obstacles stop us from reaching the established expectations?

What is considered a successful smart city or a failed project?

Measuring the success of a smart city is not a simple task. On the whole, we have inherited a series of tools from the sciences of demography and sociology that help us to establish parameters that go beyond borders.

Smart cities considered to have failed share a drop in per capita income, in the price of housing and, ultimately, in the population itself. The first parameter is a classic clue regarding the average degree of social wellbeing; the second constitutes a warning of economic decline and that the abandonment seen in the third is likely to occur.

The fundamental mission of smart cities is to encourage the opposite route via numerous instruments. In doing so, the educational arena acts as a particular glue and lubricant that connects social and economic dynamics.

The dream of a smart city that never happened

smart cities fail 2

The problem is that many of the instruments that give smart cities an identity can be considered double-edged swords. That is, beyond the aforementioned parameters, the success of a smart city tends to be confused with the actual technological means that seek that ideal.

Smart cities that never take off tend to elevate their ambitions through mistaken approaches, like those they follow.

Errors when identifying challenges and problems

Detroit or Manchester are normally cited as major  examples of urban cities that were unable to identify the immediate social and economic challenges and insisted on models that ended up leading to their industrial decline.

Ordos, China’s ghost city, is a modern example of how the advantages of a macro-smart city project can end up being a fiasco as a result of mistakes made at the time of determining local requirements. Today, only around 100,000 people live there, very different from the million people it should have housed according to the targets of an initiative that cost $200 billion dollars in 2001.

Immature technology

The promises and expectations generated are also cut short as a result of embracing incomplete technological solutions. The investment and efforts required by technologies such as autonomous driving or urban air mobility, entail risks related to innovations that still have years of development before them.

Imperfect technologies that jeopardize, discriminate or pollute

smart cities fail 3

The most perverse side of technological advancements in cities stems constitutes the ideal premise of any science fiction author. There are countless examples, such as CCTV surveillance systems in public places, Big Data and Artificial Intelligence that promise greater security and administrative efficiency and end up as repressive or discriminatory instruments; monetized technologies to generate class privileges or technological solutions that increase the energy and sustainability issue.

A study by Lux Research that appeared in Forbes highlighted the supply problems due to the inability to deliver millions of batteries that power the sensors associated with Big Data, not to mention the harmful emissions in the production of that energy.

Another example analyzed in numerous forums is the Rio de Janeiro and IBM partnership. The agreement led to the development of a series of software products for smart cities, which increased the gap between more and less privileged citizens.

Lack of urban leadership

smart cities fail 4

Given these distortions, it is essential to achieve a balance between policies that support the public strategies of what intend to be considered smart cities (particularly, in interferences of private interests). This is nothing new.

The Canadian researcher, Jane Jacobs already hinted at it in 1961 in her book ‘The Death and Life of Great American Cities’: "private investment shapes cities, but social ideas (and laws) shape private investment. First comes the idea of what we want, then, the mechanism must be adapted to achieve that image".

Images | Freepik/wirestock, Freepik/rawpixel.com, Freepik/jcomp, Freepik/onlyyouqj

Related content

Recommended profiles for you

AG
Adriano Greco da Fonseca
Adriano Greco da Fonseca
IR Consultant & Public Translator. Gain soft power by transforming know how into show how.
MM
MARDIANA MOHD ZAINI
PENANG STATE SECRETARY OFFICE
SENIOR ASSISTANT SECRETARY
PG
Pilar Galindo Giralt
Moviment Ethos
Presidente de la Asociacion
AP
Ana PASTOR
URV
PHD student
VM
Vitor Moreira
Tribunais
Escrivão Adjunto
JT
Jo Thompson
World Trade Centre Accra
DR
Dewar Rico Bautista
UFPSO
Researcher. Professor of systems and computer science
SA
Stanciu Andrei
Miele
CV
Cristian Verdaguer
BABLE
DS
david sepahi
PwC
Smart City Advisor
NB
Nabil Baladi
Canal cartagena tv
Director of news
RO
Ricardo Ortiz
Ayuntamiento de Salamanca
Concejal de Transformación Digital
RA
Rashed Alhamdan
Gulf Skills
MF
Martín Ferrer Escobar
i2CAT
Junior Consultant
IT
Ismael Torres
Prodevelop
Project Manager
HG
Héctor Garcia
Camerfirma
The president of the company for Colombia and the region
FF
Fraj Fraj
Ministère
UK
Umut Emrah Kolay
Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality
GIS
AB
Ava Belair
IF
Ingimar Fridriksson
Kopavogur
CIO

Are we building the cities we really need?

Explore Cartography of Our Urban Future —a bold rethink of ‘smart’ cities and what we must change by 2030.