Publications

In this article, we survey a growing body of literature within geography and other intersecting fields that trains attention on what inclusive smart cities are, or what they could be. In doing so, we build on debates around smart citizens, smart public participation, and grassroots and bottom-up smart cities that are concerned with making smart cities more inclusive. The growing critical scholarship on such dis- courses, however, alerts us to the knowledge politics that are involved in, and the urban inequalities that are deeply rooted within, the urban. Technological interventions con- tribute to these politics and inequalities in various ways. Accordingly, we discuss limitations of the current discourses around inclusive smart cities and suggest a need for a nuanced definition of ‘inclusiveness’. We also discuss the necessity to further engage with critical data studies in order to ‘know’ what we are critiquing.

Quantifying the economic benefits of built heritage facilitates the formulation and assessment of conservation policies and programs. There is however a lack of empirical research about the economic value of built heritage in Asian cities. This lack is problematic, given the rapid pace of demolition and redevelopment of historic landscapes in Asian cities. This study seeks to reduce the current gap in built heritage research by examining whether real estate premiums are generated by the designation of buildings as ‘conserved’ in Singapore, a city-state in South East Asia. Using 20 years of housing transaction data, and controlling for building, neighborhood and year fixed effects, we found that conservation designation had a positive impact on average sale prices per square meter of built area that was largest at residential locations between 800 m to 1.6 km from the conserved site. Findings also suggest that lower-cost public housing resale units gained a substantially smaller premium compared to private housing units. While our findings suggest an economic justification for building conservation programs in Asian cities, they also raise questions about such programs potential impact on neighborhood gentrification, and the need for appropriate taxation policies to ensure horizontal equity between property owners.

This paper argues that the divergent logics of “smartness” and “sustainability” can lead to parallel regimes of sustainability. Whilst sustainability is often used to justify the need for smart cities, smart cities are often undermined by the neoliberal logics of digital governance. Moreover, because the intersection of digital technologies and society is a negotiated one, smart solutions often fail to provide adequate solutions to social problems. This is especially true when smart solutions are used to augment or replace hitherto human-centred processes, like caregiving.Parallel regimes of sustainability are a response to these failures. Drawing on an analysis of a trial of in-home smart eldercare technologies in Singapore, four binary pairings – public-private, individual-community, remote-proximate and passive-active – are used to define the parallel regimes of sustainable eldercare that emerged in response to smart technologies. To conclude, the need for urban paradigms to evolve in conversation with society is emphasised.

Around the world, smart technologies are being embraced as a cost-efficient means of enabling the elderly to be cared for in new, more non-proximate ways. They can facilitate ageing-in-place, and have the potential to relieve pressure on the providers of care. Yet, the fact is that the interface of technology and society is a negotiated one. These negotiations are most acutely felt when technology is used to supplement the hitherto human-centred process of caregiving, especially amongst “marginalised” societal cohorts, like the elderly. With this, there is a need to better understand the ways in which smart eldercare technologies are used, misused, or not used by those that they are designed to benefit. Drawing on qualitative data derived from triallists of three smart eldercare technologies in Singapore, this paper explores how the lived experience of smart eldercare can cause agentic and apathetic behaviours towards technology to manifest. Specifically, we identify four expectations – of understanding, response, compliance and appreciation – that undermine the potential beneficence of smart eldercare. To conclude, we emphasise the need for more collaborative, and more contextually-sensitive, approaches to the design, development and implementation of smart eldercare solutions.