Accounting and smart cities: New evidence for governmentality and politics

Abstract

The concept of a smart city has attracted the attention of many scholars and policymakers in many countries worldwide. The role of accounting as a tool of governance in smart city politics, however, has so far been largely overlooked, especially in less developed countries (LDCs). This paper sets off to fill this research gap and hitherto unexplored linkages between accounting and smart cities. Drawing on the concept of governmentality, the authors conducted a case study based on document analysis, meetings observation, and 42 semi-structured interviews at a branch of a hybrid electricity company owned by New Cairo City in Egypt, during 2018. Findings show that the case company has implemented smart distribution networks of electricity in which new management accounting technology (enterprise resource planning (ERP) system) is used to trace costs, revenues, client complaints and feedback in a timely manner. The new network (of infrastructure and technologies) has represented timely accounting information as a major political power to influence accurate governance decision-making, such as smart electricity pricing and control, and to challenge governance decisions that are not sound. This paper is one of the first studies to explore the socio-political dynamics of accounting in smart city governance in the context of LDCs.

Performance measurement in smart city governance: a case study of an Egyptian city council

“…The in-depth insights obtained from that data are utilised to effectively operate public benefits, resources and services and to efficiently develop daily operations and reports in the city. This empirical view by the interviewees does not differ much from the concepts theorised by many smart city governance studies (Westerdahl, 2020; Alsaid and Mutiganda, 2020; Argento et al , 2019; Brorström et al , 2018; Grossi and Pianezzi, 2017). After the 2011 political revolution in Egypt, the state government adopted sustainable urban development projects (recommended by the World Bank and the European Union to revive the Egyptian economy).…”

“…Therefore, the theoretical frameworks used so far in this relationship are relatively limited, which are represented only in Foucault theory (specifically, the notion of “governmentality”) and the institutional perspective of mediating instruments (specifically, the concept of “technological mediation”). The utilisation of the concept of governmentality has appeared in some previous case studies that have examined the relationship between performance measurement systems and smart cities (Westerdahl, 2020; Alsaid and Mutiganda, 2020; Argento et al , 2019; Brorström et al , 2018; Grossi and Pianezzi, 2017). Meanwhile, other management accounting case studies have applied the institutional perspective of mediating instruments to interpret this relationship (Stafford et al , 2020; Herscovici, 2018; Brorström, 2018; Lapsley et al , 2010; Miller and O'Leary, 2007).…”

“…Some seminal scholars have examined this potential relationship from the perspective of accounting for cities (Westerdahl, 2020; Malmmose and Fouladi, 2019; Brorström, 2018; Lapsley et al , 2010). Others have addressed this potential relationship from the perspective of accounting (performance measurement) and smart cities (Stafford et al , 2020; Alsaid and Mutiganda, 2020; Argento et al , 2019; Brorström et al , 2018). Last but not least, another set of previous studies have examined this trendy topic from the perspective of the alleged relationship between smart cities, neoliberalism and socio-political urban developments (Tan and Taeihagh, 2020; Raucci and Tarquinio, 2020; Grossi and Pianezzi, 2017; Meijer et al , 2017; Hollands, 2008).…”

“…Last but not least, another set of previous studies have examined this trendy topic from the perspective of the alleged relationship between smart cities, neoliberalism and socio-political urban developments (Tan and Taeihagh, 2020; Raucci and Tarquinio, 2020; Grossi and Pianezzi, 2017; Meijer et al , 2017; Hollands, 2008). However, despite these valuable efforts and attempts to provide different theoretical and empirical perspectives on the potential relationship between performance measurement and smart city governance, these research endeavours have indicated that smart city governance requires complex decisions to be made with attention to economic, social and environmental performance (Tan and Taeihagh, 2020; Raucci and Tarquinio, 2020; Grossi et al , 2020), but with not enough attention to also “political intervention” (Steccolini et al , 2020; Meijer et al , 2017), “military engagement” (Alawattage and Alsaid, 2018; Noguchi et al , 2015) and “public-private collaboration” (Mutiganda et al , 2020; Alsaid and Mutiganda, 2020) in place. Although these angles have been widely theorised in public sector management accounting research, especially in neoliberalism and its various forms of privatisation, modernisation and state budget reforms (see, e.g.…”

“…This study utilises the Dillard et al .’s (2004) multi-level institutional framework to trace the “cascading institutionalisation process” that connects micro-organisational performance measurement systems at the city council level with smart urban transformations at the state/city level. Previous management accounting literature has theorised and analysed the potential relationship between performance measurement systems and smart city governance, using the concept of “governmentality” (Westerdahl, 2020; Alsaid and Mutiganda, 2020; Argento et al , 2019; Brorström et al , 2018; Grossi and Pianezzi, 2017) and the institutional perspective of “mediating instruments” (Stafford et al , 2020; Herscovici, 2018; Brorström, 2018; Lapsley et al , 2010; Miller and O'Leary, 2007). Although these frameworks and studies have enriched previous literature with valuable theoretical and empirical contributions, most of them have not included the political angle in their theoretical analyses.…”