The Future of Cities in the Internet Era
Yokohama, Japan at night. Credit: Photo: Toshihiro Oimatsu
Ever since humans began to organize themselves in cities, people have been wondering what the cities of the future would look like. In recent history, the cities of tomorrow predicted by scholars and popular culture all seemed to promise a few major developments – namely a sea of skyscrapers, flying cars, and instant communication via tiny devices and omnipresent digital displays.
While flying cars remain a fantasy, and most of us still don’t live in skyscrapers (except for maybe in Shanghai), the predicted future has indeed become reality in one aspect – communication. It’s all here. Devices driven by powerful microprocessors that fit in the palm of your hand? Check. Wireless communication with almost anyone in the world? Check. Touchscreens? Check. And these new forms of digital interaction are transforming almost every aspect of our society – including cities.
The last great technological advancement that reshaped cities was the automobile (some might argue it was the elevator). In both cases, these technologies reshaped the physical aspects of living in cities – how far a person could travel or how high a building could climb. But the fundamentals of how cities worked remained the same. What’s different about the information age that has been ushered in by personal computers, mobile phones and the Internet is its ability to reshape the social organization of cities and empower everyday citizens with the knowledge and tools to actively participate in the policy, planning and management of cities.
Many urban advocates and policy makers are now recognizing the extraordinary potential to use these new communication tools to engage citizens and ultimately improve the way cities work. Next American City, with generous support from the Rockefeller Foundation, has been a leader in this emerging field. This past October, NAC brought together over 75 top thinkers and practitioners in urban policy and new media to participate in its Open Cities conference, which provided a one-of-a-kind venue for detailed discussions about issues ranging from the best ways to build an engaged urban citizenry to how cities can open municipal data to third-party application developers.
Over the course of this year, this column will serve to continue and expand the discussions that began this past October at the Open Cities conference. Best practices will be highlighted, new ideas will be showcased, and the extent to which new media can improve (or destroy) cities will certainly be debated. You are encouraged to add your comments and provide your own insight on any of the issues that are discussed. A lively online discourse is only fitting for a column about using the Internet to connect people more effectively with their community.
Ultimately, the most important outcome of this continuing dialogue on Open Cities will be to broaden the number of cities and communities who are using new media in new and innovative ways to inform citizens, develop plans, manage municipal operations, and create policies.
Stay tuned. The future is now.
Christian Madera writes the Open Cities column for Next American City. He is a former managing editor of Planetizen, and has spent the last decade working in the fields of urban planning policy and web technology.
The Movement To Reboot Government
We’ve Got Facebook. Who Needs Cars?
When Technology Doesn’t Work
Blast from the Past: Urban Inclusiveness for International Migrants
Matt in Minneapolis on Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 8:20am
I still think this conversation needs to be broadened and address those communities without the capital to take advantage of our communication revolution. We are still missing key populations, the elderly and poor, when it comes to the debate of planning, engagement, and technology, In the Twin Cities we have some great things happening but I feel that we still overlook the populations that don’t have access to a computer other than a free time at your local library. As we become more based in communicating via the internet, these groups then get more marginalized. We need a solution that can combine the new and older communication styles to that we make sure the public is getting the information that we want them to.
Yes, a great discussion and topic that needs to really be thought out.
Christian Madera on Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 1:59am
Matt—great point, and one I hope to address in future posts. One thing to remember is that these technologies aren’t being billed as replacements for traditional sorts of public engagement. That said, traditional public meetings aren’t always easy for many folks to attend either (be they low-income, mobility-impaired, or just plain busy raising their kids or what have you). With new media engagement strategies, people who couldn’t otherwise take part in a meeting or public hearing have another way to get their opinion heard. While that might involve a visit to the public library for some, my feeling and experience is that most people would still prefer to have the option.
Jen in VA, USA on Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:36pm
Both previous points are extremely valid. There are currently many people in the urban development industry thinking along these lines. Recently, I was a part of an Emerging Leaders in Architecture Honors Academy from the Virginia Society American Institute of Architects. In that group, we took on a project that attempted to find an identity for the west end of Alexandria, VA. To us, connecting to the people of the area to the local government, as well as each other, was vital to providing the area with an identity. In our research, we found that MIT had developed something similar to an iphone on a bus stop, called the EyeStop. Placing this technology in multiple types of housing units, from kiosks to bus stops, so to locate the access points in multiple types of areas. This allows people of all income brackets access to the network. Along with public education and other options, this technology can be accessible to most people. Of course the technology will be available to the cities that can afford them. Over the years, as more of this smart technology is in place, the cost will come down. It will be available to more cities with less capital. It have great potential. I am extremely excited to hear about this project.
andres in Amsterdam,NL on Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 3:16pm
Hi all.
Is really interesting to find that you have such a discussion, since at least here in the Netherlands the subject has been intensively debated throughout the last eighteen months or so. Local government, joined by prestigious institutes such as MIT-medialab, and even civil-society-driven organizations such as mobile city ( mobilecity.nl) and the waag society (waag.org) amongst others have been elaborating discourses and encouraging practices which might lead to incentive civic engagement and localize efficiently infrastructure through city ’ sensing’’ technologies. Thus, even Social media tools have been applied towards city planning and spatial strategy research, supported by the local SM consultancy firm Oxyme BV. Indeed, exciting opportunities derived from the use of such technologies are in the way to come. Hopefully, we as urban professionals will apply and experience the use of such technologies, in sync with the shift made from the ‘modernistic’ view of the urban into a ‘communicational’ perspective that empowers all of the city’s stakeholders.