Filtering by
- Creators: Arizona State University
There is much at stake with the smart city. This urban governance movement is
predicated on infusing information-and-communication technology into nearly all aspects of the built environment, while at the same time transforming how cities are planned and managed. The smart city movement is global in scale with initiatives being rolled out all over the planet, driven by proponents with deep pockets of wealth and influence, and a lucrative opportunity with market projections in the billions or trillions of dollars (over the next five to ten years). However, the smart city label can be nebulous and amorphous, seemingly subsuming unrelated technologies, practices, and policies as necessary. Yet, even with this ambiguity, or perhaps because of it, the smart city vision is still able to colonize urban landscapes and capture the political imaginations of decision makers. In order to know just what the smart city entails I work to bring analytic clarity to the actions, visions, and values of this movement.
In short, the arc of this project moves from diving into the "smart city" discourses; to picking apart the ideologies at its heart; to engaging with the dual logics—control and accumulation—that drive the smart city; and finally to imagining what an alternative techno- politics might look like and how we might achieve it. My goal is that by analyzing the techno- politics of the smart city we will be better equipped to understand these urban transformations— what logics drive them, what they herald, and what our role should be in how they develop.
This study focused on Mexico City, which is celebrated for its agricultural traditions and policies. The study examined: 1) the functions of urban and peri-urban agriculture that the Government of Mexico City (GMC) manages and prioritizes; 2) how the GMC’s policies have framed farmers, and how that framing affects farmers’ identity and purpose; and 3) how the inclusion of agrarian activities and lands in the city’s climate-change adaptation plan has created opportunities and obstacles for farmers. Data was collected through participant observation of agricultural and conservation events, informal and semi-structured interviews with government and agrarian actors, and analysis of government documents and budgets.
Analysis of policy documents revealed that the GMC manages agriculture as an instrument for achieving urban objectives largely unrelated to food: to conserve the city’s watershed and provide environmental services. Current policies negatively frame peri-urban agriculture as unproductive and a source of environmental contamination, but associate urban agriculture with positive outcomes for development and sustainability. Peri-urban farmers have resisted this framing, asserting that the GMC inadequately supports farmers’ watershed conservation efforts, and lacks understanding of and concern for farmers’ needs and interests. The city’s climate plan implicitly considers farmers to be private providers of public adaptation benefits, but the plan’s programs do not sufficiently address the socioeconomic changes responsible for agriculture’s decline, and therefore may undermine the government’s climate adaptation objectives.
The findings illuminate the challenges for urban governance of agriculture. Farms do not become instruments for urban sustainability, development, and food security simply because the government creates policies for them. Urban governments will be more likely to achieve their goals for agriculture by being transparent about their objectives, honestly evaluating how well those objectives fit with farmers’ needs and interests, cultivating genuine partnerships with farmers, and appropriately compensating farmers for the public benefits they provide.
Self-governance From Above: Principles of Polycentric Governance in Large-Scale Water Infrastructure
I use the case of large-scale water infrastructure in Arizona to explore a novel approach to measurement of polycentric decision making contexts. Through semi-structured interviews with water operators in the Arizona water system, this research explores how qualitative and quantitative comparisons can be made between polycentric governance constructs as they are understood by institutional scholars, experienced by actors in polycentric systems, and represented in public policy discourses. I introduce several measures of conditions of polycentricity at a subjective level, including the extents to which actors: experience variety in the work assigned to them; define strong operational priorities; perceive their priorities to be shared by others; identify discrete, critical decisions in the course of their work responsibilities; recall information and action dependencies in their decision making processes; relate communicating their decisions to other dependent decision makers; describe constraints in their process; and evaluate their own independence to make decisions. I use configurational analysis and narrative analysis to show how decision making and governance are understood by operators within the Arizona water system. These results contribute to practical approaches for diagnosis of polycentric systems and theory-building in self governance.