The Smart City Transition as a Niche Experiment - A Case Study of Copenhagen's Technological Transition

(1)

Urban Studies Two-year Master

THE SMART CITY TRANSITION AS A

NICHE EXPERIMENT

A CASE STUDY OF COPENHAGEN’S TECHNOLOGICAL

TRANSITION

PETER MELBYE ANDERSEN

(2)

and governable through place-based interventions in the Danish Capital, Copenhagen. In this way, I seek to demonstrate the complexity of the smart city concept and the ways these policies are implemented in an existing city, instead of grounding the critique in universally idealized but often unrealized grand visions.

Recent research into smart urbanism largely highlights the smart city agenda for being overly driven by corporate interests, who are using it to capture urban management functions as new market opportunities (Kitchin, et al., 2016). This view however, seems to neglect that smart city interventions are integrated into existing urban settings, and is therefore always the outcome of social and spatial constellations of urban politics and the built environment. Therefore, rather than depicting the smart city as utopian or dystopian, I point towards a more situated understanding that moves beyond the corporate-driven smart city version, and directs attention to the urban scale where these policies are taking root.

The theoretical apparatus is based on research in technological transitions, and is further supported by a relational view on urbanism to situate the analysis at the urban scale. The thesis is composed through a qualitative case study design, where document analysis and interview figures as the key methods for data collection. The empirical materials have been collected from the municipality and their smart city unit, Copenhagen Solutions Lab, and the primary data source is political documents.

The thesis concludes that the smart transition in Copenhagen is governed through an experimental approach where the technological possibilities are being adapted to the local context. In this way, Copenhagen Solutions Lab endeavor to ensure that only the solutions that fit the urban context are implemented. And it is therefore only specific, and more convenient solutions that are being integrated into the city. The thesis concludes further that the experimental smart-city-approach applied by CSL, contains the potential to contest corporate interests, in the sense that this approach gives rise to new explicit learning processes and efforts that holds the potential to compete with the corporate-driven smart city model.

Keywords: Smart city, transitions, experimental urbanism, technology and urban management

(3)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

What is a smart city? - I often find it complicated to answer this question.

Over the past decades, a range of frequently overlapping city conceptualizations has been set in orbit around our urbanized planet. A significant factor shared among these urban ideals, is that they put forward alternative ways for reacting to the demographic pressure from an increasing urban population, and the associated twin crises of rapidly changing climate and persisting economic instability. In other words, they come into appearance as a novel set of urban restructuring models with associated policy recipes, presented worldwide as extremely paramount for cities in responding to the challenges of the 21st_{century. Not surprisingly, such} a proliferation of new strategies for urban governance and management appears to be highly seductive. Especially in the present condition of the urban age, where cities have to do more with less to accommodate rapidly changing demands of an increasing urban population. As an effect, supported with possibly the most quoted assertion in modern urban studies - that more

than half of the global population now dwells in urban areas – cities are not only being

perceived as the universal form of human settlement. But also diagnosed as the front line in which global challenges are experienced most dramatically. It is therefore safe to say that the city is ‘re-emerging’ as the key site in which it is assumed that potential solutions and responses to the global challenges will pioneer (Brenner & Schmid, 2015). Most interestingly, cities have become strategically geographic targets for different kinds of policy experiments, brought forward by this contemporary bombardment of modern city discourses. And what we see today is therefore a variety of urban imaginaries with accompanying policy recommendations, which just like earlier urban ideals, triggers both utopian and dystopian perceptions. It is however equally important, to recognize that the currents of hope, hype and fear with regard to the urban conditions of the future, often tend to obscure the more nuanced and subtle urban change, currently underway. I therefore find it much more constructive to scrutinize an actually existing and tangible example of how a contemporary urban ideal is being implemented in a particular city. Instead of grounding the critique in universally idealized, but often unrealized, urban visions.

One of the more noteworthy examples is the concept of the smart city. A somewhat blurred idea, which in essence endeavors to render urban management more efficient, by applying vast collections of digital data to rationalize decision-making (Shelton, et al. 2014). The

(5)

underlying assumption is basically that unprecedented opportunities to solve pressing urban challenges will be released by transforming cities into synergistic environments, where the real and the digital world are interconnected. Here, the degree of smartness is assumed evolving in line with the extent of urban management leveraging digital information. Whether it is collected through wireless sensors networks embedded in the urban fabric, or even extracted from already existing sources, such as social media platforms (Ibid.). To put it bluntly, digital data is seemingly pointed out as a higher form of intelligence that enables objective and accurate decision-making based on insights, which until recently has been impossible to comprehend. In this context, the idea of the smart city therefore emerges as a conceptual manifestation of a contemporary techno-scientific urbanism. In which the urban environment with all its complexities, is seen as a network of interconnected systems that are perfectly accessible and understandable, through the means of advanced technology (ibid). Such considerations have led scholars like Greenfield (2013), to argue that the idea of the smart city clearly reflects a noteworthy philosophical position of positivism. In particular, since it strongly presume that all the dimensions of the urban world are capable of being encoded in computational systems, where the proper inputs to the algorithm will generate qualified solutions that can be transformed into efficient public policies, without the risk of bias or distortion (Greenfield, 2013). What is left tacit in this technological belief, but often indirectly hinted, specifically in the corporate-oriented vision of smartness, is the presumption that the urban world in principle, is perfectly knowable, and that any policies that have been developed algorithmically are strongly transparent and thus applied in a manner free from politics (Ibid.). However, while numerous aspects of this techno-utopian belief remain problematic, especially as the idea of ‘perfect knowledge’ appears to be highly incompatible with the messy reality of the urban world, it remains equally important to notice that a sizeable amount of contemporary criticism in line with Greenfield's interpretation rests on the promotional language of multinational corporations, as well as on the first wave of tabula rasa constructed smart cities, such as Masdar City in the UAE and New Songdo in South Korea. This scholarship is not necessarily mistaken or without relevance, but it highlights a significant need to reify the smart city narrative by paying closer attention to the ways in which the smart development is realized in already existing cities.

(6)

1.1 PROBLEMFIELD & THEORETICAL GAP

The idea of the technological enhanced city is increasingly affecting present debates about the future of urban development. Likewise, is the second wave of smart cities currently accelerating, and a considerably number of existing cities has already been designated as smart. In fact, the story of the technological silver-bullet has achieved so much traction that even regions and nations determinedly adopt the smart label. In Rio de Janeiro, a city operation center was constructed in close collaboration with IBM, intended to render the city's service provision more efficient, and place Rio ahead of every city in the world with regard to smart urban management (Singer, 2012). While a team of researchers, architects and engineers currently experiment with a more human-centric city model of technological smartness in order to develop what they refer to, as 'Smart Social Cities' in Mexico (Smart Social City, n.d.). Along the same lines, the US is moving full speed ahead with a range of smart urban initiatives. Especially, the city of Chicago is currently taking a huge step towards their vision of becoming the most data-driven government in the world by the initiation of their ‘Array of Things’ project (Array of Things, n.d.). . An urban project that utilizes real-time data from around 500 sensor nodes embedded in the urban fabric to inform city planning and support longer-term research (Ibid.) In the Canadian Capital Toronto, the Alphabet subsidiary, Sidewalk Labs consisting of urbanists from the New York City’s post-9/11 comeback-project and Google technologists, is currently experimenting with how new technologies can transform the eastern waterfront Quayside, into one of the most innovative neighborhoods in the world (Sidewalk Toronto, n.d.). And meanwhile, Singapore continues with their whole-of-nation smart movement to improve urban living, whilst raising the nation’s economical competitiveness by stimulating ecosystems for technological innovations (Smart Nation Singapore, n.d.). Many more examples of smart cities and smart initiatives currently abound in every part of the globe and it is therefore clear that the discourse of smartness will continue to proliferate. Most noteworthy, this handful of examples further suggests that the concept of the smart city contains a diverse set of ideas, which creates certain definitional difficulties when discussing smart urbanism. In some cases, probably the most prominent ones, the idea of the smart city is almost exclusively seen as technological means to improve urban governance and public service distribution. While other examples emphasizes a greater importance in terms of reducing energy consumption and carbon emission through smart interventions. In addition, the envisioned smart city ideal is

(7)

frequently underpinned with arguments about economical competitiveness, and mobilized through the same line of thought as the creative city (Florida, 2012). Ultimately, a smart city therefore encompasses everything from advanced technology and innovation, urban management and service provision, industry, business and economical growth, environment and resources, housing, buildings, neighborhoods, transportation, people and urban lifestyle etc. (Hollands, 2016). In other words, it clearly holds a certain definitional impreciseness and may therefore mean “different things for different cities” (Hollands, 2008:310). To put it succinctly, the diverse set of interpretations is especially apparent in terms of the scale and type of smart interventions being realized in cities worldwide. And even more important, if we take a closer look into the actual existing examples, the development of smart initiatives in some of these cities are perhaps slower realized than anticipated to begin with, while others may not even fulfill their initial aim after completion. The smart developments in many of these cities are therefore better explained as specific and varied projects, rather than universal and highly advanced top-down schemes, and they all require further exploration. This paper therefore seeks to apply a conceptual theoretical framework capable of exploring what an actually existing smart city really shows us.

Let us pause for a moment on this consideration, and briefly reflect on the relevance of the existing literature. What we already know about the smart paradigm is partly based upon empirical studies that investigate the role of multinational corporations in establishing the smart market. Along this line of academia, Söderström, Paasche and Klauser (2014) accentuate in their studies, how multinational technology corporations create the content that often dominates the current understanding of smart cities. More specific, they argue that a small number of corporations have worked to channel urban management and development through technocratic fictions. And thereby positioned themselves as ‘obligatory passage points’ in smart transitions (Söderström et al., 2014). IBM is for example frequently mentioned in the literature as one of the leading actors that make use of seductive rhetoric and bombastic marketing campaigns to position itself as an unavoidable conduit between technocratic solutions, urban governments and the respective cities (ibid.). This has led urban scholars to argue that the current smart city paradigm is exceedingly propelled by the tale of a techno-scientific panacea for all urban difficulties, which can only be successfully delivered through certain public-private partnerships. And it is therefore highly important to be cognizant of how corporations such as IBM and Google compete in developing each their

(8)

'smart city in a box', capable of being sold as an universal fix to embattle dumb planning and management processes in municipal and regional governments etc. (Greenfield, 2013:Townsend, 2013:Söderström et al., 2014:Brenner & Schmid, 2015).

In the main, this corporate-driven smart city model further consolidates with entrepreneurial strategies for urban triumphalism, as I have tried to illustrate in the smart city examples mentioned above. This means that while data is articulated as both the engine for the smart city, as well as the formula for the very implementation of smart urban interventions, the existing smart city is basically conceived as a means for territorial competitiveness and economic prosperity (Shelton, et al. 2014; Brenner & Schmid, 2015). This has led scholars to argue that the adjective ‘smart’ is a rather self-imposed label for city branding that inadvertently merge together various aspects of urbanism, which do not necessarily belong together (Hollands, 2016). Ultimately, the idealized smart city version may appear much more as a distraction from attending to longstanding and serious urban problems, and is therefore not necessarily corresponding with the urban improvements it claims to guarantee (Ibid.) In the end, the abovementioned considerations basically suggests that the critical scholarship around smart urbanism provides a more varied understanding of the smart city as opposed to the highly idealized and utopian version that often infiltrates current debates. In other words, this scholarship encourages us to understand the smart city as a discursive form of high-tech entrepreneurialism anchored in neoliberal rationalities. Nevertheless, it somehow also tends to paint a picture of a rather dystopian imagined urban future. And is therefore failing to provide us with empirical-based insights into how smart interventions are taking root in already existing cities. Admittedly, their criticism of the idealized smart city remains relevant, especially for understanding the prominent actors and global patterns that influences both its emergence and mobilization. But I find it equally important to look beyond the corporate smart city model, and actively seek a more nuanced and situated understanding of how the smart transitions in existing cities are influenced by social and spatial constellations of urban governance and the built environment, rather than solely realized according to centralized plans of technology corporations. In other words, the continued critique of the smart city paradigm must as Shelton and his co-authors accentuates, "be mediated through examinations

of how the policies are assembled, adapted and implemented" (Shelton et al., 2015:259), in

existing cities.

(9)

In summary, cities are currently facing the challenge of transforming the imagined version of the technological enhanced city into efficient policies and meaningful interventions, adapted to the urban context. It is therefore hardly surprising that what we see today is a mixture of different ways in which the smart transition is realized in cities throughout the world. Yet, far too little attention has been paid to the role of cities in shaping these socio-technical transitions. And I therefore argue that a case study approach to existing cities are highly important, since it can provide us with a nuanced insight into how differences between cities affect the outcome of smart interventions. And thus, reveal more cautious ways for realizing smart city interventions in cooperation between city governments, citizens and private businesses (Hollands, 2016). On this basis, the main purpose of the thesis is to develop an understanding of how smart city policies are implemented in an existing city. To do this, I will take a closer look at the way in which Copenhagen is beginning to shape their transition to data-driven urban management. And more specifically, conduct a case study of the municipality’s smart city unit, Copenhagen Solutions Lab (CSL) that in many ways can be seen as the city’s transition managers. In short, CSL is established within the Technical and Environmental Administration, and works across municipal departments as well as in close collaboration with private companies and universities to test and develop data-driven solutions anchored in the needs of the city. CSL is therefore an appropriate case through which the smart city development in Copenhagen can be explored. And by drawing on research in technological transitions (TT), combined with a relational view on urbanism, this thesis elaborately demonstrates how the smart city narrative is made operational and governable through particular forms of interventions in the city of Copenhagen. 1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS • What are the overall visions for the smart transformation of Copenhagen? • How are these visions translated into practice as smart solutions?

• And how can we understand the role of Copenhagen Solutions Lab in the smart transition?

(10)

1.3 MOTIVATION In October last year, I attended the SmarterCitiesNow conference in Copenhagen. The conference was an initiation of a Nordic, Baltic and UK collaboration for leading actors within the field of smart cities and sustainable urban development. But, what I did not know when I told the lady behind the registration desk my name in order to get the shiny badge that allowed me to participate in the conference, was that I later the same day would find myself in a remarkably contrasting situation.

Everywhere in the room, you were constantly reminded about the organizers of the event. Mainly through posters, brochures and screens that showed their logo together with a rather utopian illustration of a future city, which most of all, made me think of how much I prefer the old Star Wars movies. Basically, there was no chance avoiding advertising or marketing visuals that re-calibrated your attention towards Tech Nordic Advocates, and further on to their sister-organization Tech London Advocates. Even if you went outside to get some air, hundreds of black-mirror-windows, which in combination gave form to Copenhagen’s flagship construction BLOX, would continue reflecting all the techno-utopists behind you. Now, at least, I am completely certain about who they are.

These two organizations are part of a bigger network of the Global Tech Advocates, represented worldwide by organizations in places such as Singapore, Shanghai, Spain, and Bogotá to name just a few. Their organizational purpose is to stimulate collaboration between startups, companies and cities across national borders. And Tech Nordic Advocates is therefore primarily created to attract international buyers, investors, and partners by raising attention to all the technological possibilities that the Nordic and Baltic countries can offer. In addition, the Nordic department serves as a gateway into an impressive network of global technology leaders and innovative hubs. Wherein, all the members surely can define the meaning of smart.

After a short presentation about Greater Copenhagen as the Nordic home of smart city solutions, I sat next to one of the founders and chair members of the Tech Nordic Advocates. The presentation was followed by a networking exercise that urged people next to each other to start a conversation, and since she was one of the organizers she immediately decided to

(11)

introduce herself. As I expected, the exercise quickly turned into a situation that I rather wanted to avoid. I briefly presented myself as a representative for the Capital Region, where I worked as a student employee in the Technology and Mobility Unit, while I tried to finish a master degree in Urban Studies at Malmö University. Suddenly, she lost her interest and our conversation stopped immediately hereafter, as she mentally began to map out all the other participants in the room. She probably tried to locate a potential 'LinkedIn-candidate' to connect with. Most Likely, a tech-leader that was capable of providing her with smarter cities now!

Nevertheless, the conference continued and according to the program, the next presentation would open a debate of how to amplify ‘well-being’ in cities with social innovation. And by extension, discuss the importance of placing people at the center of smart and sustainable cities. City council members from Oslo, Helsinki, Belfast, Medway and a few mayors from municipalities outside Copenhagen were gathered to discuss the challenges they had encountered in their smart city projects. Whether their smart city transition was reflecting the needs of the citizens, and how cities can develop, test and share smart city solutions. During the discussion and the whole event in general, I came to notice that the conversations and presentations were highly focused around the imagined potential of the smart city. Words such as sustainability, globalization, economic growth, technological innovation and entrepreneurship were frequently used to signify the potential and value of 'smartness'. And the majority of the participants were seemingly seduced by these evocative explanations, and therefore also eager to learn more. This meant that not much emphasis was assigned to particular solutions, and the effects from specific projects were only briefly discussed. In fact, the idea of placing the needs of citizens first was somehow lost in the techno-utopian mist of grand visions.

The contrasting situation that I will like to highlight from this experience took place a few hours after I left the conference. My colleague and I were in the process of conducting a series of interviews with municipalities outside Copenhagen to figure out how the Capital Region could support their smart city transitions. Since the only thing left at the conference was a

'smart solution speed-dating & matchmaking session', we decided to leave the event, and

instead visit a small municipality office outside Copenhagen to talk with the people that were in charge of the municipality's smart city development.

(12)

When we arrived, we were met with another perception in contradiction to the grand version hinged to the smart atmosphere at the conference. To our surprise the team in charge of the smart city transition only consisted of one person. And his enthusiasm did definitely not share many similarities with what we had just experienced a few hours earlier. He was not completely rejecting the smart city potential, but he was not seduced by it either. Nevertheless, he shared a common interest with the majority of the participants at the conference, which was an interest in contributing to the overall vision for the region's smarter transition. Still, there was something worrying in his thoughts.

First of all, he emphasized a general lack of competencies and sincere interest for technological possibilities among both municipal colleagues and private companies. Not necessarily technological skills, but simply a lack of curiosity in cross-departmental collaboration, which according to him, was highly essential in order to break down silos and potentially develop holistic smart city solutions. Secondly, he was concerned with the technological principles driving smart city development. He expressed a need for defining the meaning of smart. The idea that technological solutions based on ‘Big-data’ and sensor-traffic, would reinvent cities and make them more inclusive and livable, did not seem to fit the urban challenges he had to deal with in his city. For him, smart cities were more than just providing efficient digital services to citizens and stimulating ecosystems for start-ups. And should therefore not necessarily be defined by technological solutions as the means to reach ambitious results. On the contrary, he argued that the effect that urban interventions have on citizens and their city as a whole, should determine whether or not the city reaches the smart orbit. He therefore longed for a more citizen-driven approach as well as alternative ways to make sure that urban initiatives would actually benefit the city and its citizens. Although, this would often require to push the technological thinking out of the early phase, and instead turn to the local scale to identify central challenges and develop key solutions aligned with the needs of the citizens.

My motivation for writing this thesis derives from the discrepancy between these contradictory experiences or diverse perceptions of the smart city. It was somehow very clear that the story of the technological silver bullet is largely restricted to larger cities and particular circles of people who seemed to be highly captivated by the technological

(13)

possibilities. And although the general aspiration among these technocrats seemingly was to share the smart solutions with other cities and position the Nordic countries in the forefront of the global market, they did not really focus on the practicalities of actually realizing smart city policies. Nor did they think about what it takes to scale solutions to more ordinary cities, or for that matter, the risk that too much sharing and standardization of a particular smart city tool is generic and will eventually lead to the creation of a smart city template. Basically, their focus was only directed on marketing, innovation and economic prosperity in larger cities, which led me to think about the risk that those cities that are not involved in smart city developments and that lack the governance capacity and the financial resources for crafting their own solutions, will fall behind. However, to understand how the more ordinary cities, those that seems less qualified for adapting to smart city policies, can develop technological solutions anchored to their needs, I will have to know how the smart solutions actually unfold in practice. It is precisely this that I am trying to do with this thesis, which in many ways can be seen as the start of a broader ambition to understand the potential in the smart city concept.

1.4 READING GUIDE & THESIS STRUCTURE

Chapter two presents the methodological foundation regarding the design of the case study and the primary and secondary empirical data, as well as the scientific constraints around these. In chapter three, the theoretical apparatus is composed. Here I introduce conventional literature around transitions studies followed by theoretical considerations that situates cities in transitions through a relational view on urbanism. Chapter four is the analysis, which comprise two analytical sections. First, the emergent visions, aspirations and strategies for the smart city effort in Copenhagen, and subsequently, the current conditions that shows through elaborate examples, how the smart city concept are grounded in the city. Lastly, chapter five presents the concluding reflections and observations, and ends with a few topics for further analysis.

2.0 METHODOLOGY

In a qualitative research, there are many factors that influence the direction and whether the analytical process remains on track. Therefore, to ensure that the research is in line with the intended purpose, the methodology must be determined and clearly articulated.

(14)

This is not only necessary for the researcher, but also particularly important in order to increase transparency and provide the reader with the opportunity to get an adequate insight into how the study is composed. The following section therefore intends to do just that. In short, I will describe the applied case study design and the empirical data sources I have used in the research.

According to Brinkmann and Tanggaard, no commonly accepted or universal definition of qualitative research exists. Nor is it written in stone, what kind of qualitative methods there actually are. However, when conducting a qualitative study, the central interest is often directed towards "how things are done, said, experienced, appear or developed" (Bringmann & Tanggard, 2010:17). And it is exactly in this context that qualitative methods such as interview and observations, becomes convenient. More specifically, such methods enable the researcher to reveal experiences, meanings and values from the perspective of the actors under study. Therefore, I find that the application of a qualitative case design, as opposed to the quantitative, is appropriate for assisting an exploration of how the smart city paradigm is experienced and interpreted by the municipality of Copenhagen. And thus, seek a more nuanced understanding of the very realization of smart city policies.

The thesis is accordingly, established around a qualitative case study design where Copenhagen, including Copenhagen Solutions Lab is the object of study. The primary empirical data are extracted from political reports, both the overall municipal strategies, as well as reports and documents describing Copenhagen's smart city strategy and the specific purpose and role of CSL in the smart transformation. This data is then supported with secondary data from an interview with a Senior Consultant from CSL, and a previously conducted research around smart development in Copenhagen.

2.1 WHY COPENHAGEN?

I have searched a variety of opportunities in order to find a fitting case that could provide me with insights into how the implementation of smart city policies is realized in existing cities. In this process, I came across a range of smart urban interventions that all would have been appropriate for further research, but Copenhagen appeared to be particularly interesting. Chiefly, because it turned out that Copenhagen is the only city in the region that has established a separate municipal unit for smart city development, namely,

(15)

Copenhagen Solutions Lab (CSL). Moreover, I noticed through my work for the Capital Region that other municipalities around Copenhagen often expressed the aspiration or need for establishing something similar in their city, so CSL therefore came into appearance as an interesting case for my thesis. Additionally, I find that CSL is an appropriate case through which I can get access to the smart city field in a Danish context. Especially because they are part of the Technical and Environmental Administration in the municipality of Copenhagen, and is therefore directly involved in urban management and political processes. In addition, they have already initiated a range of smart city projects in collaboration with several private companies where they test and develop technological and data-driven solutions in the city. This means that the advantage of choosing CSL and Copenhagen as a case of study, largely relates to the accessibility of empirical data in the form of both written material and spokespersons. Ultimately, the case study of CSL will therefore contextualize the smart city paradigm at the urban scale, and thereby provide considerably insights into how social and spatial constellations of urban politics and the built environment influences the smart city transition in Copenhagen. These points will be elaborated with scientific considerations in the following.

2.2 CASE-STUDY DESIGN & SCIENTIFIC DELIMITATIONS

The analysis that I provide in this thesis is rooted in a qualitative case study design, intended to situate the smart city paradigm in a particular urban context. For the sake of clarity, the following case study is therefore not a universal description of how smart city policies are implemented in existing cities. Nor is it an attempt to clarify all the socio-spatial factors that affect its practical realization. But simply endeavoring to achieve in-depth knowledge about how the Copenhagen Municipality is shaping the smart city transition. To put it bluntly, the analysis represents the case, rather than the world (Stake, 1994). More specific, it is a single case study of smart development in Copenhagen, where I will achieve familiarity with the field through the work of Copenhagen Solutions Lab.

The case study approach often raises critical questions regarding the generalization of the knowledge that is being generated. In particularly, the view that one cannot generalize based on individual cases often appears to be very devastating for qualitative research. This perception is however, according to Flyvbjerg (2014), highly misguided, and depends entirely

(16)

on the case in question, and how it has been selected (Flyvbjerg, 2004). I have therefore selected the specific case in this research based on considerations of generalizability, which I will elaborate in the following.

First of all, I have selected the case of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Solutions Lab, based on the expectation that it will provide me with as much information as possible around smart urban development in a Danish context. This gives me the opportunity to employ an instrumental case study approach and thereby gain insight into the transition towards data-driven urban management in the municipality, while I achieve a more nuanced understanding of how the smart city paradigm may unfold in an existing city or region (Stake, 1995).

Secondly, I adopt the idea that the case study is well suited for finding 'Black Swans' (Flyvbjerg, 2004). An idea that is based on Karl Popper's now famous example which is: If we assume that 'all swans are white' then only one "observation of a single black swan would

falsify this proposition and in this way have general significance and stimulate further investigations and theory-building" (Flyvbjerg 2004:126). Along the same lines, the scientific

proposition that will be subjected to falsification in this research is that large technology corporations define the content of smart urban development. My aspiration is that this falsification will support the assertion that the idealized version of smart cities is highly incompatible with the messy reality of the urban world. And any attempt to conceptualize the smart city shall therefore be balanced with the urban context in which the smart policies are implemented. In the end, the case study is particularly representative, as it shows an example of an actual existing smart city, which can reveal complexities for further investigation, and be compared to other cities to help establish the limitations of generalizability around the smart city narrative (Stake, 1994). 2.3 INTERVIEW As the smart concept holds a certain definitional impreciseness, I have decided to perform qualitative a research interview to gain a more explanatory and elaborate understanding of smart city development in Copenhagen. To put it succinctly, I have found it highly important to create a cohesive basis for my research questions and the theoretical apparatus, contextualized by CSL’s perception of smart urbanism. And I therefore initiated the whole research process with a visit to Copenhagen Solutions Lab. Here, I had a meeting with

(17)

one of their senior consultants, who provided me with insights into their work that helped to establish the point of departure in my research.

The interview was loosely structured, and mainly conducted to cover the work of CSL within the field of smart development. A research theme had therefore not been established in advance other than my interest in smart urbanism. The interview was basically just a face-to-face conversation without an overly strict controlling frame to steer the dialogue, which made it possible to pursue the topics that were introduced along the way. And although, it appeared to be difficult to steer the direction in the conversation, the meeting particularly resulted in one major advantage that have been indispensable in the following research process.

Essentially, this meeting challenged me to thoroughly consider the theoretical approach I would apply in the study. In addition, I realized that the theoretical understanding of smart urbanism, which I have acquired through reading existing research literature, was very difficult to translate into practice. In other words, this knowledge appeared to be much more applicable as a critical basis for my own understanding and analysis, rather than as a rhetorical toolset for the conversation. Actually, it was obvious that my thesis would benefit from a theoretical approach, which was both intriguing for my own interest in smart cities, but also adapted to a more practical view on urban management. And it was therefore precisely in this situation that the analytical starting point of the case study was established, and I decided to draw on transitions studies in the theoretical apparatus.

2.4 WRITTEN MATERIAL

Document analysis is perhaps the most used method within the field of social science. In the sense that documents are often used as the starting point or the empirical source from where the first research question or the particular focus arise. According to Lynggaard, a document can in general terms be described as “language fixed in text and time” (Lynggaard, 2010:138). This means that since documents consists of language that are written down and maintained as such at a given time, it is important to consider the temporal context of the documents applied in the research. Moreover, a scientific research will often require an analysis of several documents that cover a certain period of time in order to direct the focus on to the development of a particular phenomenon, and in this way identify stability or change in the process (Ibid.).

(18)

The main written material that I have selected in this thesis are a compilation of strategically reports, political articles and CSL's website. In addition, it was also a necessity to draw on knowledge from a previously conducted case study of Copenhagen, as well as an analysis of Copenhagen's smart city strategy. A master student from Lund University has conducted the former, while the latter is a product of a private consultancy company called Ramböll. This was particularly essential, since Copenhagen's smart city strategy has been changed over the last couple of years, and the initial strategy for turning the city smart, is therefore not applicable in the same way as it was planned to. The reports that are central to the analysis are briefly presented in the following section.

Copenhagen Connecting: This is the first formulated political strategy or the ‘smart plan’ for

Copenhagen’s technological transition. The strategy have been established through a partnership between the Municipality, Technical University of Denmark (DTU), Copenhagen University (KU), IT University of Copenhagen (ITU) and Aalborg University (AU). And proposes an ambitious smart city model of the future of Copenhagen, where the primary aim is a digital infrastructure, i.e., Copenhagen Smart Grid, which is planned to cover the entire city and push the rest of the smart initiatives. It was released in public the year of 2013, but was quickly met with resistance and therefore not initiated as expected. The municipality has now removed it from public, but the smart city transition in Copenhagen is however still largely in line with the vision presented in the strategy. It is only the way in which the vision is being realized that has been subjected to change (Copenhagen Connecting, 2013).

Pre-feasibility Analysis: This paper is written by the private consultancy company, Ramböll,

and contains an analysis of the socio-economic values and benefits that can be gained from implementing the smart city plan proposed in the Copenhagen Connecting strategy. The analysis was conducted in 2013, and offers a more elaborate description on the technical aspects behind the smart plan and several planned use-cases. Because of the highly hypothetical character of the analysis, this report is not employed as a reference for socio-economic aspects, but merely as a backdrop for technicalities (Ramböll, 2013).

(19)

Status on the Smart City effort in the City of Copenhagen:

This is a political paper that provides an update on the work of Copenhagen Solutions Lab. The paper has been published by CSL, November the 10th 2017, through the municipality's website. It contains a thorough description of the municipal unit; budgets; a status on specific smart city projects; partners involved in the process and future prospects (Copenhagen Municipality, 2017).

CPH 2025 Climate Plan – A Green, Smart & CO2-neutral City:

This is the general strategy of Copenhagen’s efforts in becoming a carbon-neutral smart city by 2025. It highlights the city's specific climate and energy goals and provides a brief explanation of how smart technology will assist in realizing some of these goals. The smart city field is quite limited and some times hidden between the lines, but the strategy is appropriate for analysis, as an empirical source of the broader visions and challenges that drive the smart development in Copenhagen (KBH 2025; 2012).

Sustainability and Data Collection in the Smart City:

This dissertation is written by a student from Lund University, Arvin Ghasemi and was conducted in 2015. The central content in the report is an analysis of a Wi-Fi and Bluetooth tracking project that was initiated as part of Copenhagen’s transition to become a smart city. All in all, it shows that the city’s smart-city-approach was more focused on climate change, private business partnerships, and the establishment of a digital infrastructure and less concerned with the needs of the citizens. For the sake of clarity, I do not apply the analytical results presented in this report. Instead, I use parts of the empirical material, in the form of an interview as an empirical source to compare with the current state, and thus identify change or stability in the municipality's approach to smart city development (Ghasemi, 2015). 2.5 EMPIRICAL CONSTRAINTS Essentially, it can be objected that I only have one interview and that the extent of supportive empirical data therefore is relatively limited. In particular, when considering that the interview I have conducted, merely represents the municipal department, Copenhagen Solutions Lab. Nevertheless, the intention has not been to clarify all the socio-spatial constellations that influence the smart transition. And the research does not create

(20)

universal laws around smart urbanism, either. But is simply demonstrating how the smart city paradigm is being adapted into an existing city, where I use Copenhagen and CSL as the point of departure for the analysis. The lack of interviews is therefore not considered to be critical but additional interviews with for example, the actors that are involved in partnerships with CSL had been an advantage for extending the research. With regard to a validity assessment of the empirical data that has been provided through the loosely structured interview, it can be argued that additional and more comprehensive interviews could provide increased certainty in the conclusion. Conversely, it is difficult to say whether a more structured interview design would have led to the same constrain. Yet, it is my opinion that the loosely structured interview provided a nuanced insight into the work of CSL, which not necessarily would have been achieved with a more structured interview design. With regard to the primary empirical data, it is important to consider that most of the written materials are produced for the purpose of funding and communication. This means that the materials are written in a somewhat press-related fashion, which, as expected, advocates the smart city project or strategy they describe. Therefore, it is particularly important to take a critical stance and reach the analytical results by supporting the primary data with additional information, which I have endeavored to do with the qualitative interview. This led to a more cohesive basis of the practicalities in CSL’s smart city efforts that enabled a different and more nuanced reading of the written materials.

3.0 THEORETICAL APPARATUS

While urban governments increasingly adopt the smart city concept in their endeavor of creating sustainable futures, it is less clear how they actively implement and shapes such technological transitions. Similarly, conventional research within transition studies has made a considerable contribution in understanding socio-technical transitions, but seemingly ignored where these take place and in what ways they can be governed (Smith et al., 2010:Hodson et al., 2017). By drawing on more recent literature, I therefore seek to structure an urban transition approach, with a more explicit spatial perspective that allows me to analyze city-based transition activities.

For the sake of clarity, I use the smart city transition of Copenhagen as a reference point, to broaden the central themes presented in transitions literature. And the considerations presented in the following section will thus constitute the theoretical apparatus of this thesis.

(21)

3.1 TRANSITIONS STUDIES & THE MULTI-LEVEL PERSPECTIVE

Research in technological transitions (TT) have generated a useful foundation from which a conceptual framework to understand the role of cities in transitions can commence. But it still contain a conceptual ‘gap’ that are important to address before it can be applied to scrutinize urban transitions. To begin with, I will present conceptual key themes developed out of conventional transitions literature.

A transition is briefly defined in the early literature as "a gradual, continuous process of

structural change within a society or culture" (Rotmans et al., 2001:2). Along the same lines,

transition scholars appear to have a certain interest in how we can understand the socio-technical transformations that help to realize essential societal functions more sustainably (Smith et al., 2010). All in all, transitions studies can therefore be seen as a reaction to the complexities and constraints, which confront societies across the world in reconfiguring structural aspects in, among other things, transport, energy, water, waste and health systems, demanded by the overall sustainability target.

More specifically, challenges such as pollution, congestion, insufficient waste management, and shortage in energy or water supply are understood as anchored in broader systems. These systems are, by extension, constituted of a mixture of social, economic, political, cultural and technological relations, both in terms of the operation of a particular system and in any possible transition process. Transitions scholars therefore refer to such complex configurations as socio-technical systems. Equally important, challenges as those mentioned above, become highly complex to solve, as the solution requires involvement of multiple actors in order to provide the systemic realignments that are needed - either by creating new systems or transforming existing structures (Kemp & Loorbach, 2005; Hodson & Marvin, 2009). It is exactly in relation to this that scientific transition approaches are helpful in providing a better understanding. Transitions studies basically, provides a multi-level perspective (MLP) that is applicable in structuring the analysis of such complex or large-scale transformations, and thus, make it easier to comprehend the dynamics and interplay of the different relations involved in the transition process. More specifically, the MLP distinguishes between three synergistic analytical levels. Namely, socio-technical landscapes, regimes and niches (Smith et al., 2010), which I will introduce in following.

(22)

Socio-Technical Landscapes

The concept of landscape operates at the macro-level, and refers to the broader exogenous contexts that pressures for change in socio-technical systems (i.e. regimes), and create windows for novel opportunities and innovations (i.e. niches). In short, landscape processes encompass demographic patterns, climate change, political cultures, economic growth, broader economic trends, scientific paradigms, social movements, cultural shifts and so forth (Geels & Schot, 2007; Smith et al., 2010). The landscape level is therefore important when seeking to comprehend the broader conditions or pressures that urge for societal changes.

Socio-Technical Regimes

Socio-technical regimes represent the societal configurations wherein incumbent technological systems are embedded, and are therefore operating at the meso-level. These are constituted from institutions, infrastructures, technologies, regulatory requirements, investment, markets, user relations, guiding principles, knowledge, practices, skills, and values and so forth (Hoogma et al., 2002; Geels 2004; Smith et al., 2010). Socio-technical regimes basically, comprise the mainstream but highly institutionalized way of realizing particular societal functions (Ibid.). Here, the interconnected institutional and material dependencies that make up these structures or regimes, implies that changes in the socio-technical configurations have a tendency to be path dependent and incremental. Nevertheless, it is this dynamic structure of the socio-technical regimes, which the technological alternatives (i.e. niches) have to overcome "if they are to unsettle the regime and seed a

transition" (Smith et al., 2010:441).

Socio-Technical Niches

Niches operate at the micro-level as 'protective spaces' in which path-breaking technological innovations mature. It is at the niche-level that actors (i.e. developers, investors and users) can learn about novel technologies that may potentially become the source for transformation in the prevailing regime. Technological niches often arise organically in the margins of the mainstream, but can be made operational through 'protective spaces' such as; “public

subsidies for demonstration and learning” (Smith et al., 2010:440), or through bounded test-bed environments where the niches are applied within a societal setting for the first time (Raven, 2007; Bulkeley & Broto, 2012). Furthermore, the actors that are involved in such

(23)

‘protected’ niche experiments often appear relatively more encouraged by the social and environmental qualities held in these niches, as opposed to the actors within extant regimes (Smith et al., 2010). And since niches compete with incumbent regimes to outperform them and take over, their success is deeply dependent on mobilizing prevalent social legitimacy, which is best achieved through involving broader circles of actors. Niches can in this context, be understood as sources for transformation, but their potential is constrained, interpreted and enabled through the interplay with more powerful and incumbent socio-technical configurations at the regime level (Smith et al., 2010:441).

In summary, the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions is helpful in seeking to understand the emergence of new technologies as well as their diffusion and utilization. Furthermore, it identify tensions that emerge within incumbent regimes as the product of changing circumstances in the broader landscape level, acting as the driving force for regime transitions. Particularly, new imperatives, such as policy measures to accommodate rapidly changing climate or increasing demands of an accelerating urban population, obviously have a challenging effect on incumbent regimes. Such exogenous pressures may therefore crack-open a window of opportunities for new socio-technical configurations to replace existing ones (Truffer, 2008). And in so doing, new niches may break through to the mainstream if they show a certain degree of potential in solving bottlenecks (Geels, 2005). In other words, landscape pressures and the following tensions within regimes may create a space in which the smart city version and its proposed data-driven solutions can develop.

It is however equally important, to note that for some niches, especially the more radical ones, it can be difficult to align with the socio-technical configurations in particular regimes, as

"regulations, infrastructure, user practices [and] maintenance networks are aligned to the existing technology" (Geels. 2002a;1258). As such, more radical niches might as well end up

being rejected, or at the very least, only partly break through with particular aspects that appear to be more convenient and easily incorporated (Smith, 2004: Gibbs & O'neil, 2016). We can therefore not assume that any new niche inevitably will seed a transition. In fact, they will often lose their radical character and transformative aspects in the alignment process, wherein niches are transformed by existing socio-technical regimes, rather than vice versa (Ibid.).

(24)

Another important aspect emphasized in MLP, is the composition of actors that work to "get

the new technology on the agenda" (Geels 2002b; 367). These networks of niche actors can be

seen as transition managers “who make compromise and help translate some niche practices

into forms amenable to actors in the regime" (Smith, 2007; 447). More specifically, such

networks are typically composed of actors from private technology companies, governmental institutions, policy-makers, universities and so forth. And is furthermore, considered of particular importance in altering the constraining standards, routines, norms and practices in the regimes, and thus potentially "inculcate in the mainstream some of the principles and

framings held in [niches]" (Smith, 2007:439).

As I have tried to illustrate, the multi-level perspective recognizes that socio-technical transitions, as presented in the smart city ideal, are premised on a step-wise process of reconfiguration rather than on radical regime shifts. In addition, it provides a conceptual toolset, helpful for organizing the complexity of large-scale transitions processes, and understand the nested interrelations of broader landscape conditions, the socio-technical configurations in the rigid regimes, and the innovative possibilities put forward by new niches. But most importantly, where is the urban level in this scrutiny?

3.2 BRINGING THE URBAN LEVEL TO TECHNOLOGICAL TRANSITIONS

The emergence of cities as central arenas, in which it is assumed that potential solutions to the global challenges will pioneer, obviously raises important considerations in terms of how we think about their role in transitions. Cities have more specifically become incubators for sustainable niches and new strategies for urban governance, and can therefore largely be seen as laboratories for learning and innovation. However, little attention has been paid to spatial issues in transitions studies. Actually, conventional case studies conducted through the MLP are de facto national oriented, and spatial aspects are therefore often pre-given or ignored. It is, by extension, only at the niche-level that the spatial dimension appears as some "sort of bounded, experimental local context" (Hodson & Marvin 2009:519). More specifically, the general assumption in transitions studies is that the MLP equate to various spatial scales, in the sense that landscape operates at the global scale, while the regime represents the national scale and niches are rooted at local scales. In other words, such a conceptualization of transitions presumes that regimes merely operate at a national level,

(25)

which does not necessarily correlate with city or regional transitions (Gibbs & O'neil 2014). I therefore find it important to broaden the conceptual framework with a relational view on urbanism, and thus enable the analysis to capture a more adequate understanding of the smart city transition in Copenhagen.

In recent years, theoretical attempts to incorporate the city or regional scale into transitions research have achieved increasing attention among scholars at the intersection of urban geography and socio-technical studies. Although, this branch of scholars has produced an extensive amount of research, responsive to the spatial gap in conventional transitions studies, none of these attempts, however, presumes a complete conceptualization of the geography of transitions. Nevertheless, what is often proposed in the scientific approaches, which have been developed in the last decade, is an appreciation of the relational nature of urbanism as opposed to a bounded city perspective (Smith et al. 2010; Hodson et al. 2017). Which is the first, out of two interrelated prerequisites for an urban approach to transitions that I will to introduce in the following section. A relational view on urbanism

Seeing the city as a discrete place with its own internal politics has become increasingly problematized in the past two decades, due to a growing recognition that socio-spatial relations has transformed in line with globalization. Cities can, to put it bluntly, no longer be seen as solely territorial bounded entities, but are better understood as 'settings' entwined in a network of relations that goes beyond the city itself (Davidson & Martin, 2014). This means that if we are to understand processes occurring within particular cities, we need to be cognizant of the specific relationships informing them. Such relationships span across several scales and involves a variety of political actions, which in the case of this thesis, actively seek to set the frame for the smart city transition in Copenhagen (Hodson & Marvin, 2009: Davidson & Martin, 2014).

A relational view on urbanism or urban politics is therefore particularly important, especially as the responsibility for developing innovative strategies with the purpose of economic prosperity and sustainability, has been devolved from the nation state to the city and regional administrations. In this view, the role of cities in smart transitions is, as Hodson and Marvin accentuate, “linked to their capability to adapt and transform through reconfiguring and

(26)

adjusting urban and regional institutions of governance to technological transitions” (Hodson &

Marvin, 2009:520). We therefore need to acknowledge that cities cannot simply be seen as reactive to broader landscape pressures, nor as convenient places for niche experimentation, but may also strategically act as transition managers working at various political scales (regional, national, supranational) in order to create the socio-technical realignments that are needed for technological transitions. In addition, this further means that transitions or niche activities may appear differently between territorial contexts, as the institutional relations and social networks that particular cities are involved in, tend to vary. In this context, a relational view on urbanism therefore encourages us to see cities as differentially positioned within social, political, economic and ecological relations (Ibid.). More specifically, such a perception is especially relevant, as these relations determine the capacity or capability of cities to provide the conditions required to realize smart city transformations (Ibid.).

The advantage of complementing the multi-level perspective with a relational view on urbanism is therefore, besides placing cities in transitions, that it assists in focusing attention upon the endogenous and exogenous relations informing urban transitions. More specifically, it allows me to connect place-based transition activities to wider social networks and institutional arrangements involved in shaping the smart city transition. And thus, it helps me to understand the role of the municipality in creating the conditions for the smart transition, and furthermore how this process is governed and realized. It is, along this line of thought that I will introduce the next prerequisite, which I find essential for a more critical approach to urban transitions.

The dominance of normative visions

Although transitions studies emphasize the changing landscapes as essential factors that urges for change in regimes, it often fail to problematize the way in which neoliberal rationalities manifest in wider pressures for urban transformations. A concern that is frequently pointed out among scholars within smart urbanism, yet for some strange reason, still neglected or simply ignored in scholarly approaches to transitions. As a response to this lack of critical degree, I find it important to emphasize that broader landscape processes, such as climate change and economic trends, often give rise to technocratic governance for the main purpose of securing place-specific advantages, and thus

(27)

rejuvenate local economies through particular forms of neoliberal competition (Brenner & Schmid, 2015:Kitchin, et al., 2016). In other words, this imply that cities primarily adopt smart policies, often by contracting with large technology corporations, as an attempt to position themselves in the global race for technological progress and economic competitiveness (Hodson & Marvin, 2009).

If we, by extension, consider this in relation to the wider decentralization of responsibility mentioned above, it becomes clear that the role of cities in transitions and their cooperation with both public and private actors, is part of a larger attempt "to reshape the technological

and economic competitiveness of places" (Hodson & Marvin, 2009:521), or an endeavor of

urban triumphalism (Brenner & Schmid, 2015). Such considerations has led several urban scholars to argue that the idealized smart city version is an entrepreneurial governance strategy, developed to sell the city globally by promoting specific public-private partnerships, and learn the city to speak the language of technology companies (Hollands 2016:McNeil 2015). Some even claim that the mobilization and adoption of the technocratic governance discourse tend to distract urban managers and city officials from attending to more serious urban challenges such as poverty, inequality, social justice, and discrimination etc., (Greenfield 2013:Luque et al., 2014). Hence, it is particularly important to be cognizant of the actors involved in developing visions for the smart transition, and equally important, to consider whose views are being excluded from this process.

In summary, I have indicated that the multi-level perspective within transition studies provides an appropriate conceptual starting point to investigate the smart city transition in Copenhagen. Yet, this approach cannot stand-alone, but requires further support from a relational view on urbanism, which helps to contextualize the analysis to the setting of Copenhagen. To put it bluntly, it first and foremost situate the analysis at the urban level, where it enables an investigation of place-specific transition activities, and the relations and social networks, through which landscape pressures, tensions in regimes and alternate niches, are being interpreted and translated into visions and practice. Secondly, it allows me to broaden the analytical scope with issues of urban politics, and is thus supporting a more adequately understanding of the role of the municipality in creating the conditions for the smart city transformation.

(28)

4.0 ANALYSIS

This section presents the analytical findings of the case study and is divided into two parts. The first part of the analysis defines landscape conditions and the prominent visions that have laid the foundation for the adoption of smart city policies in Copenhagen. This part of the analysis is based solely on strategic documents. Subsequently, the analysis focuses on the niche level, and demonstrates the practical realization with a few examples of how Copenhagen governs the smart transition.

4.1 OUTLINING LANDSCAPES & EMERGENT VISIONS

My focus is now on outlining the dominant visions of attempts to re-imagine Copenhagen through the smart city narrative. It is however, important to clarify that the smart city transformation of Copenhagen is an enormously complex and political process, with several step-by-step interventions, as well as a comprehensive mixture of relations and actors, ranging beyond the scale of the city. Therefore, with the limited timeframe and the extent of my thesis, I cannot aspire to provide a thoroughly demonstration of the transition and all its complexities, in the kind of detail that would be convincing. Yet, in spite of the risk of simplification, I confine myself to illustrating central themes, which can be identified, and thus seek to portray aspects of an actual existing smart city as opposed to the idealized and corporate-driven version. Vision 1: Imagine a carbon-neutral smart city In 2009, a year before the smart volcano first erupted and covered several cities across the globe with its ashes of intelligence; the city council in Copenhagen unanimously adopted a new climate plan, which formulated the ambitious goal of becoming the world's first carbon-neutral capital by 2025. The content was later revisited in 2012, but the overall goal retained with the same degree of ambitiousness as it had been envisioned at the beginning (KBH 2025, 2012). More specifically, the climate plan was developed in line with the state's political framework, regarding carbon neutral electricity and heat supply of the whole nation by 2035. And in this regard, it encompasses four target areas, namely, energy consumption, energy production, transport and Copenhagen as a business for green and smart solutions (Ibid.). Most noteworthy, it was from the city’s ambitious sustainability goal that the idea of Copenhagen as a smart city commenced.

The Smart City Transition as a Niche Experiment - A Case Study of Copenhagen&apos;s Technological Transition