Brief and Literature Review

Reading, Review, Present

Our team divided the readings and took the turns to present and discuss the research to form a collective understanding and diverge our thinking of the problem in different directions.

Keywords :
Smart City, Community Resilience, Subjective Behaviour, ICTS, Zero Waste, Social Capital, Bonding, Bridging, Linking, Group Coherence, Urbanisation, Smart People, Rationalistic, Digital Divide, Humanistic Focus, First Responder, Social Change, Transformative

Presenting Research

Literature Review

1 Social capital and community resilience

Disaster management. Forces gov and policy makers towards more strong physical infrastructure but rather community resilience is stronger and needs for disaster management. Through social capital, because of bonds people check on each other’s well being.

Financial, cultural and social capital are parallels.

Why social capital:

• First contributors to check on wellbeing
• Immediate lifesaving assistance through, informational aid, financial aid, emotion and psychological aid and child care aid.
• During an adverse of disaster cultural norms and behaviors are major catalyst for driving behavior change and behavior management.

Defendable spaces came as an outcome of community resilience towards calamities.
Homophily is binding, we know each other.
Social capital is bridging. It goes beyond behaviours and vigilance. It is about trust.
Loose links get activated. Each one of them come with distinct knowledge systems, distinct behaviours and helps them to spread out during disaster to take up role.
Linking, utilizes these capabilities and facilitates in and out of disasters.
The role of governing is more long term than bridging or bonding.
Group cohition also causes discrimination during the face of disaster, like Tamil Nadu.

2. Building community resilience to disasters

How activities are the intrinsic motivator before and after a climatic problem. With NHS, Local public health systems.
Smart planning, cities from all over the world cross connections planning together for disaster planning- Creates an inclusive planning system rather than an exclusive ones.
Vulnerability to capabilities. During calamities and disaster. Stress and trauma, depend on psychological effects as well and incorporated.

4 factors:

• Engagement at the community level, needs to be self sufficient
• Local bodies need to be created at the local level
• Contextual Awareness(some calamities are implicit that they cannot be recogonized)
• Individual and Community readiness

8 levers of community resilience :

• Wellness
• Access (be prepared)
• Education (coping skills, risk communication)
• Engagement(volunteer and social connectedness)
• Self sufficiency (first responder, how do I be responsible to lead)
• Partnership(gov and self, Information and supplies)
• Quality (in policies)
• Efficiency (in policies)

The balance between all-

Compare to the leavers, compared to the activity that you are proposing, Value engagement is important, making a local plan when you don’t have anything else, feasibility, prioritizing

3 Critical interventions into the corporate smart city

At its most basic level, a city is comprised of a government (in some form), people, industry, infrastructure, education and social services.
A smart city thoughtfully and sustainably pursues development with all of these components in mind with the additional foresight of the future needs of the city. (Comstock, 2012)

Key points:

• Interrelated factors- population demographics, role of city as economic drivers, sustainability,
• Demographics have to be capable of adapting to change.
• Hyperurbanisation, urban 75% energy- 80% greenhouse gases
• Future is assumed to be what we all want in everyone’s interest
• Unhappy about smart cities
• Dynamic billboards

Technocracy- built up ideology, govt to handle is not feasible.
Public space- public initiative without funding etc- privatised sector is easy to implement.
High value added activity and high income people.
Lack of concern in the democratic- imposed by other people for the real citizen.
Technological solutions are only viable to solve problems.

How to engage and empower citizens to act on complex urban problems- answer- issues of social learning, reliance and social cooperation

Reduce social risks, while at the same time affording socially useful environmentally enhancing activity much greater recognition and significance

Smart initiative don’t have to be large scale, costly, motivated by capitalists
Open access to education for engaged democratic with intelligent technology
Core- welcoming inclusive city open, forthright with accountability, integrity and fair and honest measures of progress, the cities gets smarter. “the smart city listens and tries to give voice to everyone”

4 How do we understand smart cities and evolutionary perspective

3RC perspective Schools

1. Restrictive — More power to technology and less to human centric. Focus: Maximum efficiency in city environments
2. Reflective — Citizens are not primary beneficiary. But rather, Social good is a by-product.
3. Assessment- Reflect and contribute about the systems. Government taking central role.
4. Rationalistic — It seconds technological advances behind human centricity. It asks for Advances in human centric approaches to bring holistic smart cities. The gap between technology and its usage needs to be reduced. Human interaction is considered a meta factor. Living lab, start with a small concept with citizens to co create with the citizens. Emphasize on innovative partnerships. Tangible resources supports intangible like education etc.
5. Critical — Neither human centric neither technological but rather neo-labral advancement.

Technologically driven method, human driven method. Smart culture by companies. People need to participate in knowledge societies. Economic prosperity, Ecological integrity, and Social equity. Don’t know any actual benefit. Altruism and in the face of adversity. Lifestyle is very father away in the discussion. Does being connective actually reflect being smart? Does it ensure inclusivity? Be Robust not Efficient.

It needs to address deep rooted problems of-

1. Education

2. Employment

3. Exclusion

Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). Human capability to collective project their needs.

5 Conflict and belonging

Conflict and belonging together for community resilience for ‘rurban areas’. Social engagement art which values conflict and dissent as dynamics believe to achieve social change. Social engagement activities - an art practice.

Contested identities- dividing identities based on the new people that are coming into the communities. Old vs new residents. East vs west-geographic divide. Internal vs external like Britishers vs Indians. Conflicting identities create bonds such that people come together to solve conflicts that strengthens bonds. Identities evolves from conflict and dialogue, and over time, new connects and understandings are forged.

“Create an overarching goal that connect two groups that are conflicting.”

Various social identities are born within certain communities are diminishing due to rapid change. Placing human potential at the center of overarching change. Drawing on Conflict: Our findings suggest conflict can be a positive dynamic whereby identities are developed and feelings of belonging and solidarity can arise.

Apply this framework into a set of digital SEA workshops exploring social, cultural and historical narratives as a means to promoting community resilience.

The theme Contested Identities, illustrates the multiple layers of identity present in the community, highlighting the complexity of rural communities consistently with existing research.

6 Information systems for the age of consequences.

Wit, courage neither our wisdom nor our learning. Our gdp system does not take into account ecological dynamics. It is not indicating of wellbeing. New agreements in corporate management and economic policies.

- Build real system to be used by real people

- Build social and human capital and not just technology. When you create complicated systems it enhances and builds gaps between society.

- Focus needs to be brought to social and economical capabilities

7 towards Anthropocene advancements

Government does not understand the human and ecological entanglement. Humans drive change, but we have the wisdom to understand that this will end.

How might we be ready for the need of a post-anthropocentric city planning and look at the cities as a more than human future?

First gen was the intelligent cities- expert focused. No opportunity for the citizens to participate. Second generation, smart cities, who listen, data gathering. Emphasis is more democratic. But still the approach is top down and decisions are in the hands of experts. Transparency. 3rd gen. Responsive cities. Each citizen is the right to be a part of this smart city. Planning, designing and management of the cities to the citizens. 4th gen, past Anthropocene era. Mindful cities. Environment, sustainable, zero waste, educating my city about its ecological entanglements.