Is technology optimism justified? A discussion towards a comprehensive narrative

Green growth or degrowth? Evaluating the potential of technology for sustainability

“…Likewise, numerical modelling (Nasrollahi et al, 2020) has shown positive relationship between sustainability and technology to further build the case for technological optimism. In contrast, it has been pointed out that technological optimism is not based on explicit conceptual assessment, and the factual role of technology and its beneficiaries are almost never clearly addressed in sustainability discussion (Gonella et al, 2019). Similarly, Keary (2016) posits that the notion that technological change can solve environmental problems is based on a flawed assumption that technological innovations are predictable.…”

“…Hence, an attempt is made here to develop a framework to evaluate the role of technology on environment and society by analysing the interactions among technology, environment, economy and society (see Section 3). The framework seeks to provide a much needed tool (Gonella et al, 2019) to conduct broad and long-term assessments of technological sustainability. The main aim is to create a framework that evaluates technology objectively, precisely and empirically rather than subjectively.…”

On the Systemic Features of Urban Systems. A Look at Material Flows and Cultural Dimensions to Address Post-Growth Resilience and Sustainability

“…Current narratives on urban planning often claim technological solutions that are able to solve the problems of innovation needed to attain the sustainability of a city. This "technology optimism" (Gonella et al, 2019) is actually rarely justified, most of all because it addresses "local" solutions without taking into account the possible feedbacks connected to the rest of the system, as well as the importance of the support region of the city. This is the case, for example, of the smart interconnectedness advocated by the current Smart City narrative (Gonella, 2019), which should allegedly allow people to directly access city services, thus facilitating the creation of "smart business" entrepreneurship.…”

“…First, physical and social limits exist, and current sustaining flows of energy, materials, goods, and labor cannot be taken for granted forever. Second, global urbanization has little to do with the current narrative of smart and sustainable cities and buildings (Albino et al, 2015;Gonella et al, 2019;Joss et al, 2019) and often implies unsafe and unhealthy slums and shelters for desperate job seekers. As a result, the assumed benefits of cities are not equally distributed, and many people have started to call for a "right to metabolism" (Olsen et al, 2018), that is, more equal access to both the sustainable and unsustainable driving flows of megalopoleis.…”

The Smart Narrative of a Smart City

“…The role of people in the current SC narrative is also quite ambiguous. On one hand, people are called on to become smart, creative, connected, healthy, safe, culturally vibrant, and happy (Florida, 2005;Dirks et al, 2010;Winters, 2011;Alawadhi et al, 2012;Lombardi et al, 2012), though no rationale is provided to explain why and how ICT-based urban infrastructures should make people happy. On the other hand, smart hyperconnected people are expected to create smart business (whatever this means), and -following the example of the European Union 8 environment of Small-Medium Enterprises (SMEs) that, by means of smart energy, smart transportation and ICT, assures the competitiveness of the city.…”