Social justice implications of smart urban technologies: an intersectional approach

Abstract Techno-optimistic visions around smart buildings, homes, cities, grids, healthcare etc. have become ubiquitous over the past decade. Utilizing variations of machine learning and artificial intelligence, smart urbanism (SU) envisions an efficient, digital society. However, research shows that smart technologies reinscribe inequalities by prioritizing the interests of the free market, technology-centric governance, and data monetization. Although there has been a growing concern over the injustices SU perpetuates, there is a lack of systematic engagement with power systems such as capitalism or heterosexism that underpin SU visions. In this paper, we develop a novel framework which situates intersectional justice at the heart of SU. A mapping of 70 cases of ‘trouble’ with the promises of SU is carried out to address three core research questions: (i) What are the ‘troubles’ with SU? (ii) To what extent are they intersectional? and (iii) What can intersectionality add to the development of a just SU? Our analysis shows how SU politics play out in relation to how users are understood and engaged, how different actors institutionalise SU, and how dominant power systems are challenged. We find that intersectional justice concerns are addressed only marginally - 1 of the 70 cases explicitly mentioned the term intersectionality, 16 did not engage with any intersectional approach, and 31 cases did not address social justice concerns directly. Practice Relevance: (i) citizen-led initiatives against SU should commit to intersectionality’s radical core to dismantle power structures to ensure local smart urban projects do not entrench global business-as-usual neoliberal agendas. Intersectional thinking can create spaces for deliberative dialogues between civil society groups and build alliances across groups that seek to challenge the hegemony of exclusionary urban policies, (ii) urban planners and local governments which are at the forefront of SU applications should decenter technologies and rather focus efforts on working out how smart technologies can work in conjunction with other kinds of urban interventions, such as social, economic and environmental policy changes, collaborative planning, community development, etc to herald more just urban futures and (iii) designers of smart urban technologies should apply intersectional approaches to further challenge homoeconomicus (rational, white, technophilic, able-bodied) as the primary user-type and to replace it with diverse user archetypes that express humanity, justice, and generosity