Search

Knowledge about how marginalised citizens use urban spaces is hard to access and apply in urban planning and policy. Based on current debates around “smart cities” and “smart governance,” the City of Odense, in Denmark, has tested the integration of “smart engagement” by means of GPS-tracking techniques into the municipality’s cross-sectoral strategy for an “inclusive city.” In a period of austerity, cities have the incentive to optimise public services. Hence, GPS-tracking data was produced by 64 marginalised citizens, resulting in a data inventory covering three weeks of spatial behaviour. First, this article shows how these GPS-tracking data were processed into maps without revealing person-sensitive spatial patterns. Secondly, the article explores whether such maps and the GPS-tracking techniques that underpin them are considered valid, relevant, and applicable to urban planning from the perspectives of marginalised citizens, their representatives, and municipal planners and professionals respectively. The GPS project showed shortcomings as regards the quality of the data inventory and the representativity of the mapped behaviour, which made them inapplicable for optimising dedicated public service. However, the article also finds that the GPS-based maps succeeded in being non-person sensitive and in providing a valuable platform for citizen-centric dialogues with marginalised citizens with the potential for raising awareness and increasing knowledge about this citizen group’s living conditions and urban lives. An important derived effect of the project is that it has ensured ongoing cross-sectoral collaboration among a range of professional stakeholders, imperative for ensuring creating greater equity in urban planning.

The smart city epitomizes a new paradigm shift in urban planning, policy, and cities. Smart cities require and are powered by smart city principles to succeed, including smart technologies, smart infrastructure, and smart governance; however, they also need to engage closely with the citizens who are most affected by the deployment of the smart city and who also embrace the diverse perspectives, experiences, and opportunities of living in smart cities, i.e., smart engagement. What would be forms of collaborative democracy and inclusive citizen participation in smart city planning? To what extent can smart city planning respond and address inequality, justice, and social and digital division? How can we create community-based climate change planning with the smart? What would be a smart community platform that supports smart engagement, and how do cities around the world establish smart city policy and assess the impact on smart engagement? This thematic issue aims to answer these questions by exploring new visions, facets and methods, practices, and tools for enabling smart engagement. Drawing on research from various countries and cities across the world, the contributions bring new prospects of smart engagement and smart urbanism and illuminate how the theory, plan and policy, and practices of smart engagements are binding to the extent of citizen participation and engagement in smart cities.

Knowledge about how marginalised citizens use urban spaces is hard to access and apply in urban planning and policy. Based on current debates around "smart cities" and "smart governance," the City of Odense, in Denmark, has tested the integration of "smart engagement" by means of GPS-tracking techniques into the municipality's cross-sectoral strategy for an "inclusive city." In a period of austerity, cities have the incentive to optimise public services. Hence, GPS-tracking data was produced by 64 marginalised citizens, resulting in a data inventory covering three weeks of spatial behaviour. First, this article shows how these GPS-tracking data were processed into maps without revealing person-sensitive spatial patterns. Secondly, the article explores whether such maps and the GPS-tracking techniques that underpin them are considered valid, relevant, and applicable to urban planning from the perspectives of marginalised citizens, their representatives, and municipal planners and professionals respectively. The GPS project showed shortcomings as regards the quality of the data inventory and the representativity of the mapped behaviour, which made them inapplicable for optimising dedicated public service. However, the article also finds that the GPS-based maps succeeded in being non-person sensitive and in providing a valuable platform for citizen-centric dialogues with marginalised citizens with the potential for raising awareness and increasing knowledge about this citizen group's living conditions and urban lives. An important derived effect of the project is that it has ensured ongoing cross-sectoral collaboration among a range of professional stakeholders, imperative for ensuring creating greater equity in urban planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]