InVisibilities: Developing Spaces for Theory in Smart Cities

1. Introduction

In light of emerging relationships between visibilities and invisibilities (as presented in Chapters 1 and 2) and the associated dimensions of transparency, translucence, and the ambient (as presented in Chapters 3 and 4) in smart cities and regions, this chapter explores the potential for developing spaces for theory in accommodating the ambient as a key element. That urban theory is said to be underdeveloped (Batty, 2013; Roy, 2009) and “in want of a good theoretical base” (Harrison and Donnelly (2011), gives rise to the need for urban theory development in relation to smart cities and more particularly, in support of the dimensions of visibilities and invisibilities. Indeed, while pointing to the many definitions of smart cities (Praharaj and Han, 2019; UN Habitat III, 2015) researchers lament the absence of a unique (Neirotti, De Marco, Cagliano, Mangano, and Scorrano, 2004) or agreed upon definition (Kuru and Ansell, 2020), contributing to “fuzziness” that “hinders our understanding” (Lara, Da Costa, Furlani, and Yigitcanlar, 2016) while Ramaprasad, Sánchez-Ortiz, and Syn (2017) claim the term has “more than thirty-six definitions” giving rise to the need for a unified definition which they provide through proposing an ontology for the domain. Guiding the investigation in this chapter is the use of an exploratory case study along with an explanatory correlational design where data are collected through the use of multiple methods including survey and in-depth interviews. This work is significant in that it argues for understanding smart cities through the lens of visibilities and invisibilities. In terms of contributions, this chapter a) extends the research literature for invisibilities and visibilities in smart cities from a theoretical perspective; b) evolves theory for smart cities and regions; and c) formulates a conceptual framework for InVisibilities and the ambient in developing new spaces for theory in smart cities. This chapter also contributes to the development potential for ambient theory, offering a novel perspective that accommodates characteristics such adaptability, awareness, and complexity, to name a few, in possibly extending existing urban theory. As such, the objective of this chapter is described below.

Objective: The objective of this chapter is to explore theories of cities, the urban, and smart cities pertaining to visibilities and invisibilities as InVisibilities, in further conceptualizing ambient theory for smart cities. As such, the key research question posed is – Why does ambient theory matter for cities, the urban, and smart cities?

2. Background And Overview

Roy (2009) articulated the need for ‘new geographies’ in terms of “imagination and epistemology in the production of urban and regional theory” to accommodate 21^st century cities. Batty, Hudson-Smith, Hugel, and Roumpani (2015) claim that, “no good theories of the smart city in the short- or long-term exist.” Brenner and Schmid (2015) advance the need for “a new epistemology of the urban” enabling a moving beyond “conceptions of the urban as a fixed, bounded and universally generalizable settlement type.” The combination of theory, experiment, and simulation are said by Schmitt (2015) to be needed “to better understand the city.” Wise and Shaffer (2015) note the importance of theory in assisting to determine “what variables a researcher should attend to” as well as “how to interpret a multitude of micro-results and make them actionable.” Farina, Kotsopoulos, and Casalegno (2018) highlight the need “for the integration of a digital, immaterial dimension introducing new variables and expertise” in “hybrid connected spaces” between the physical and digital. With such variables in mind, it is worth considering the concerns posed by Stephanidis et al. (2019) where human activities in the form of “location, postures, emotions, habits, intentions, culture and thoughts” become “candidate input commands to a variety of visible and invisible technological artifacts embedded in the environment.”