Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Division
Browse By Session Type
Search Tips
Personal Schedule
Sign In
X (Twitter)
While top-down corporate "smart city" initiatives are often framed in opposition to bottom up "civic technology" initiatives, in reality, these boundaries between these two modes are blurred, co-evolving and overlapping in a number of interesting ways that are best understood by taking a longitudinal approach to urban technology. In some ways, both of these technocentric modes, could be understood as technologically deterministic and disconnected from social needs. However, on the other hand, they might be also understood as generative and experimental ways of "searching" for an appropriate fit between technology and humanity. While top-down models are often framed as technologies in search of a solution or "if we build it they will come," bottom up models are more likely to engage human-centered design, participatory design, speculative design, or civic hackathons. This paper discusses examples of both top-down and bottom-up urban technology initiatives from New York and Chicago including wireless networks, smart grids, sensor networks and autonomous vehicles. Yet, in the case of Chicago, government and corporate initiatives around innovation and the "smart city" have taken an interest in human-centered and participatory processes as more than a means of "marketing" their technology to relevant communities but, rather, building relationships and identifying "user needs" (sometimes for pre-existing proprietary solutions). While there is fear over "digital redlining" in which disadvantaged communities become even more disconnected due to pilot projects that take place in wealthy communities, the opposite concern is also valid. In some cases, disadvantaged communities are being exploited specifically as testbeds for new technology with little understanding of what benefits this might provide to the community.