Smart as (un)democratic? The making of a smart city imaginary in Kolkata, India

Abstract

‘Smart’ imaginaries have been enthusiastically embraced by urban planners and policymakers around the world. Indians are no exception. Between 2015–2018, following national government guidelines to use participatory and inclusive processes, many cities developed proposals for a smart city challenge. Successful proposals received financial and technical support from the national government. We examine the making of the smart city proposal submitted by New Town Kolkata (NTK). We ask how (un)democratic was the making of the proposal, along three aspects: distributive, participatory, and responsive. Based on an analysis of documents and interviews with policymakers and citizens, we find that NTK’s smart city imaginary largely failed to be distributive. It rarely accounted for the specific needs of poorer and vulnerable citizens. City officials invested considerable effort in using participatory techniques, but citizen participation was tightly controlled through top-down design and practice of the techniques. The latter often facilitated one-way flow of information from the city administration to the citizens. The proposal was responsive to some citizens’ voices, but only those belonging to the more affluent classes. A messy diversity of citizens’ voices was thus closed down, as the city officials filtered and cherry-picked citizens’ voices that were well-aligned with the official technocratic vision of ‘global’ smart urbanism. The paper shows how democracy can be put in the service of technocracy, within a rhetoric of citizen participation and social inclusion that embodies smart urbanism.

Revisiting the Green City Concept in the Tropical and Global South Cities Context: The Case of Indonesia

“…Recent discussion of green cities has paid great attention to the environmental "justice" issue, which also resonates with the "distributive" aspect of democratic urban governance (Anguelovski et al, 2018;Ghosh and Arora, 2021). The practice of FKH, and of green city governance in general, hardly took this distributive aspect into consideration.…”

Decolonising transitions in the Global South: Towards more epistemic diversity in transitions research

“…Power relations in the Global South are often more complex and nuanced and better tackled by relational approaches, instead of technocratic, goal-oriented developmental approaches. For instance, while pursuing urban transition, smart city projects in Brazil or in India follows missions and strategies copied from the West, and hide social exclusions and deep structural inequalities in their local contexts (Tambelli, 2019;Ghosh and Arora, 2021). Decolonising epistemology of smart urban transitions research in the South demands shifting away from the grand urban sustainability narrative through smart technologies developed in the North, and focus on citizens' empowerment and well-being (Ghosh and Arora, 2021).…”

“…For instance, while pursuing urban transition, smart city projects in Brazil or in India follows missions and strategies copied from the West, and hide social exclusions and deep structural inequalities in their local contexts (Tambelli, 2019;Ghosh and Arora, 2021). Decolonising epistemology of smart urban transitions research in the South demands shifting away from the grand urban sustainability narrative through smart technologies developed in the North, and focus on citizens' empowerment and well-being (Ghosh and Arora, 2021). Epistemic colonialism hides inequality as integral to Southern regimes, where power issues may be central to whether sustainability transitions will entail social and environmental justice (Kumar et al, 2021).…”

Urban platform approach in Covid-19 pandemic management (case of Semarang and Yogyakarta, Indonesia)

“…Recent development on technology generates inclusive and plural city management [1]. One of the city disruptions experienced by almost all cities in the world is Covid-19 pandemics.…”