People + data: the power of connectivity

The future planning of digital cities certainly qualifies as the making of big plans. Technological advances are laying the foundational elements needed for digital and smart cities. Internet of Things (IoT)-connected devices worldwide are projected to triple from 8.74 billion in 2020 to more than 25.4 billion in 2030.1 The promise and potential of this increased connectivity are future cities where data is easily available, transparent, and informs public decision-making; cities where real time monitoring can be used to proactively and predictively adjust services and maintain infrastructure to better meet people’s needs; and cities where widespread access to information democratizes decision-making and supports more equitable societies.

However, technology and digital solutions are only tools to achieving these more positive outcomes. In the absence of a people-centric approach, and without understanding and integrating the complex social, physical and digital factors that create a truly ‘digital’ city, these big plans may only reinforce and reproduce the myriad small — and big — inequities in today’s society.

Bring data and people together

Delivering on the promise of digital cities will require a people-centric approach that focuses on those key outcomes that cities care to achieve, recognizes the vital role that people play in articulating needs and cocreating solutions, and uses digital approaches to complement and overcome any challenges related to people-centric approaches.

It is critical therefore for cities to first define why digital and smart solutions are being pursued, what benefits they can bring, and how they can help overcome existing challenges.

The following key considerations can help to prioritize a people-centric approach to achieve more equitable digital city outcomes:

- Measure who you’re trying to serve

Accounting historian H. Thomas Johnson notes, “Perhaps what you measure is what you get. More likely, what you measure is all you’ll get.

What you don’t (or can’t) measure is lost.” For much of the history of cities, who and what was measured, planned for, and delivered only partially represented a city’s population.

Take for example, a typical approach to travel analysis in the United States, which is used to baseline existing demand, project future transport needs, and make decisions about where and how to provide mobility services. It focuses on the analysis of AM and PM peak period commute trips. However, although women’s labor force participation has been steadily increasing in the U.S., labor force participation is still higher for men, and employed women are more highly represented in industries that have non-traditional work hours, resulting in off-peak commute times. Measuring peak period commute trips is one example of how infrastructure planning and design methodologies are not neutral, overrepresenting men’s trips and underrepresenting women’s trips that may be taking place during off-peak hours.

- Recognize people as an asset

Entering the ranks of the city-building industries — architects, planners, engineers — often requires an advanced degree and high level of technical training and experience. While these specialists are necessary to help cities address complex challenges, the real experts on what it’s like to move through, live in, and learn in a city are its people. This is why it is important to combine the expertise of city-building professionals with the experience of the city’s residents.

For decades, public agencies and others responsible for the built environment and infrastructure have sought different methods to inform, consult and partner with citizens on projects at varying levels on what academic and public policy guru Sherry Arnstein described as the “Ladder of Citizen Participation.”2 Under this model, citizen participation can occur along a continuum from nonparticipation, to tokenism, and finally to degrees of citizen power, with citizen control representing the highest level. Digital city solutions offer the opportunity to substantially reshape and democratize the work of building and managing cities, putting people at the center of this equation and moving from consultation to co-creation and citizen control.

For example, the North Central Texas Communications District uses crowdsourced data from the Waze app to improve emergency response times, while Tarrant County, which sits in the district, also uses the Waze app to crowdsource reports and automatically generate work orders. These methods enable citizens to partner with public agencies to accurately identify issues and share data for them to be addressed.

Other approaches transfer control directly to citizens. For instance, participatory budgeting has been used in New York City since 2011, giving citizens decision-making power over how at least US$35 million of capital funding is spent annually. The process is supported by a number of digital tools, including an interactive web-based map that enables anyone to submit ideas, which are later translated into proposals for a ballot and voted on through a community-wide vote.

- Engage people to integrate data

Back in 2017, The Economist asserted that data is the new oil, spawning a “lucrative, fast-growing industry.”6 Today, IoT-connected devices that people use globally generate vast amounts of data. Smartwatches and other wearable devices are estimated to record at least 250,000 measurements per day.7 This data could provide useful insights for multiple fields, including public health, building performance, as well as public space planning and programming.

However, the sheer quantity of data could easily distract, consume, and overwhelm those attempting to make informed decisions about cities, and raises issues of privacy and protection of personal identifiable information. Public infrastructure owners and operators historically have not employed data scientists and ethicists, yet the ability to understand and use this valuable resource, while protecting privacy and ensuring equity, is critical to achieving digital city ambitions.

The smart city puzzle cannot be completed without unlocking data’s value. This is where a multidisciplinary team of practitioners can work across market sectors to support projects with services such as digital transformation and strategy, generative and parametric design, augmented and virtual reality data analytics, artificial intelligence, and machine learning.

Through this collaborative approach, it is possible to integrate digital and smart solutions into infrastructure and building design, planning and engineering. Recognizing this need within the industry, the relatively new field of urban science has emerged to improve the understanding of urban issues through the use of previously unavailable data and digital methods and tools. Data scientists and ethicists in the field of urban science are needed to understand the big picture of what a city and its people are trying to achieve, and work with people in the public and private sectors and the communities, to integrate data, systems, infrastructure and services to realize these results.

Conclusion

Through the co-created, people-centric model, digital solutions and data can be leveraged to improve infrastructure and service provision and achieve more equitable access and outcomes. And while the promise of digital and smart solutions rightfully inspires big plans for the future of cities, it is critical to continue to prioritize those whom cities seek to serve — their people.