On Wednesday 31st of May, Marlon Kruizinga, ginger coons and Sylvia Bergh attended the Smart@Sea event’s evening show, organized by the municipality of Den Haag, the province Zuid-Holland and hosted by Living Lab Scheveningen. This show included several expert panels on smart cities, the relation of citizens to technological developments and the important role of data and algorithms. During this event it was interesting to observe the different actors, such as a philosopher from TU Delft and the Chief Privacy Officer of the municipality Den Haag, discussing the ethical, legal and societal aspects of smart city technologies, as well as how to integrate such considerations for sustainable design/deployment.
From the kick-off, philosopher Hans Schnitzler made a plea for keeping in mind human dignity in the design and use of technological tools, emphasizing that such technologies are never value-neutral. He stressed that values are for instance enclosed already in the systems of digital technologies themselves, and that in general we must check the values enclosed and expressed by our technologies against our societal values.
A person from the Foundation Digital Child Rights explained their approach to constructing youth panels to get at the experiences of youths of a digital society. Here interesting insights were given about methods for engaging young people. Apparently the youth panel participants were still quite used to having things simply explained to them, and not so used to being asked their opinion or experience. Some prodding was needed to spark their interest in the role of technology in their lives and to push them to consider this more deeply. One method mentioned was to bring in an elderly family member to talk about their relationships with older and newer technologies. This might then help young persons not take for granted the roles of certain technologies in their lives, considering their newness and their particular impact on day-to-day experience.
A participation advisor from ‘Haags Samenspel’, an initiative wherein citizens can participate in municipality decision-making, described how in their line of work people could be actively engaged in shaping smart city technologies. They noted that involving citizens already at the design stage of technologies is wise, because in letting citizens decide what technologies to develop and why there is a greater chance of developing real solutions to real problems. This of course then aids in the sustainability of technological advancements. It may also, interestingly, be used to prevent ‘function-creep’ in the undesirable sense, by allowing decisionmakers to go back to what was decided with citizens about the function and the values behind a certain tool. In theory, then, one could decide that (re-)using that same tool in a different context would be inappropriate, because it goes outside or against the mutually agreed-upon intended purpose.
These points all fall very much in line with a more general point that was made later, namely about the meaning of “smart” in a “smart city”. It was suggested that the goal of a smart city should not so much be intelligently thinking infrastructure and highly efficient automation, but more centrally speaking should involve ‘smart citizens’ who know how to make their way more happily, safely and efficiently through life in the city. Carlien Roodink, Manager Digitale Innovatie & Smart City at the municipality Den Haag, confirmed this commitment by emphasizing that the development and deployment of technological tools should be based on genuine problems encountered by citizens. She also mentioned such central principles as privacy by design, trying to take also the safety of citizens into account from the outset.
Of course there were also more critical considerations, such as the question of whether really anyone in society has the speedy developments in digital technology firmly in hand. It was also warned that “smart” could become somewhat of a buzzword, and that it should not lead us to uncritically place automated efficiency and algorithmic accuracy over well-considered decisions, which sometimes actually need time to be ruminated on by people. Having a “grip” on technology could similarly be used as a framing device and marketing tactic instead of a policy goal, since those companies which have the appearance of control can attract investment more easily. It is clear, then, that despite the great opportunities of smart cities and the responsible innovation initiatives on display, we must always keep a critical eye.
Overall the Smart@Sea evening show was then a highly intellectually stimulating event, also from an interdisciplinary perspective. We at AI MAPS are continuing to watch the developments at Living Lab Scheveningen with keen interest.
- Related content
- Related links
- Overview blogposts | AI Maps
