GH/DQJH

)LUVW0RQGD\9ROXPH1XPEHU1RYHPEHU

Overthelastfewyears,thetermsmartcitieshasgainedtractioninacademic,industry,andpolicy
debatesaboutthedeploymentofnewmediatechnologiesinurbansettings.Itismostlyusedto
describeandmarkettechnologiesthatmakecityinfrastructuresmoreefficient,andpersonalizethe
experienceofthecity.Here,wewanttoproposethenotionofownershipasalenstotakean
alternativelookattheroleofurbannewmediainthecity.Withthenotionofownershipweseekto
investigatehowdigitalmediaandcultureallowcitizenstoengagewith,organizearoundandact
uponcollectiveissuesandengageincocreatingthesocialfabricandbuiltformofthecity.Taking
ownershipasthepointofdeparture,wewishtobroadenthedebateabouttheroleofnewmedia
technologiesinurbandesignfromaninfrastructuraltoasocialpointofview,orfromcity
managementtocitymaking.
Contents
1.Introduction
2.Recountingtheroleofurbantech:Fromsmartcitytosocialcity
3.Ownership:Engagingcitizenswithnewmedia
4.Promisingdevelopmentsforstrengtheningcitizenownership
5.Implicationsforurbandesign:Newmediaandthebuiltform
6.Conclusion

1.Introduction
Intodayscitiesoureverydaylivesareshapedbydigitalmediatechnologiessuchassmartcards,
surveillancecameras,quasiintelligentsystems,smartphones,socialmedia,locationbased
services,wirelessnetworks,andsoon.Thesetechnologiesareinextricablyboundupwiththecitys
materialform,socialpatterns,andmentalexperiences.Asaconsequence,thecityhasbecomea
hybridofthephysicalandthedigital.Thisisperhapsmostevidentintheglobalnorth,althoughin
emergingcountries,likeIndonesiaandChinamobilephones,wirelessnetworksandCCTVcameras
havealsobecomeadominantfeatureofurbanlife(Castells,etal.,2004Qiu,2007,2009de
Lange,2010).Whatdoesthismeanforurbanlifeandculture?Andwhataretheimplicationsfor
urbandesign,adisciplinethathashithertolargelybeenconcernedwiththecitysbuiltform?
Inthiscontributionwedothreethings.Firstwetakeacloserlookatthenotionofsmartcitiesoften
invokedinpolicyanddesigndiscoursesabouttheroleofnewmediainthecity.Inthisvision,the
cityismainlyunderstoodasaseriesofinfrastructuresthatmustbemanagedasefficientlyas
possible.However,criticsnotethatthesetechnologicalimaginariesofapersonalized,efficientand
frictionfreeurbanismignoresomeofthebasictenetsofwhatitmeanstoliveincities(Crangand
Graham,2007).
Second,wewanttofertilizethedebatesandcontroversiesaboutsmartcitiesbyforwardingthe
notionofownershipasalenstozoominonwhatwebelieveisthekeyquestionlargelyignoredin
smartcityvisions:howtoengageandempowercitizenstoactoncomplexcollectiveurban
problems?Asisexplainedinmoredetailbelow,weuseownershipnottorefertoanexclusive
proprietorshipbuttoaninclusiveformofengagement,responsibilityandstewardship.Atstakeis
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

theissuehowdigitaltechnologiesshapethewaysinwhichpeopleincitiesmanagecoexistencewith
strangerswhoaredifferentandwhooftenhaveconflictinginterests,andatthesametimeformnew
collectivesorpublicsaroundsharedissuesofconcern(see,forinstance,Jacobs,1992Grahamand
Marvin,2001Latour,2005).Ownershipteasesoutanumberofshiftsthattakeplaceintheurban
publicdomaincharacterizedbytensionsbetweenindividualsandcollectives,betweendifferences
andsimilarities,andbetweenconflictandcollaboration.
Third,wediscussanumberofwaysinwhichtheriseofurbanmediatechnologiesaffectsthecitys
builtform.Muchhasbeensaidandwrittenaboutchangingspatialpatternsandsocialbehaviorsin
themediacity.Yetastheeditorsofthisspecialissuenote,lessattentionhasbeenpaidtothe
questionhowurbannewmediashapethebuiltform.Thenotionofownershipallowsustofigurethe
connectionbetweentechnologyandthecityasmoreintricatethandirectlinksofcausalityor
correlation.Therefore,ownershipinourviewprovidesastartingpointforurbandesignprofessionals
andcitizenstoreconsidertheirownroleincitymaking.
Questionsabouttheroleofdigitalmediatechnologiesinshapingthesocialfabricandbuiltformof
urbanlifeareallthemoreurgentinthecontextofchallengesposedbyrapidurbanization,a
worldwidefinancialcrisisthathitsparticularlyhardonthearchitecturalsector,socioculturalshiftsin
therelationshipbetweenprofessionalandamateur,thestatusofexpertknowledge,societiesthat
faceincreasinglycomplexwickedproblems,andgovernmentsretreatingfrompublicservices.
Whengroundsareshifting,urbandesignprofessionalsaswellascitizensneedtoreconsidertheir
ownroleincitymaking.

2.Recountingtheroleofurbantech:Fromsmartcitytosocialcity
2.1.Thepersonalizedandefficientcity
Urbanmediatechnologiesstimulateaprofoundpersonalizationofcitylifeonspatial,social,and
mentallevels[1].Forexample,onthespatiallevelGPSenableddevicesandnavigationsoftware
enablequickfamiliarizationwithunknownterrain.Onlocationbasedplatformsuserscheckinat
particularlocales,quicklygraspwhatisthereandbuilduppersonalrelationshipswithplaces(like
becomingmayor).DevelopmentsofwhatisknownastheInternetofThings,orAmbient
Intelligence,allowtheautomationofphysicalenvironmentstorespondtoindividualpreferences[2].
Onthesociallevel,mobilecommunicationsallowpeopletocontinuallykeepintouchwiththeirin
group(Licoppe,2004Ito,2005),imagineasenseofnearnessandintimacy[3],andsolidify
establishedrelationshipswithfriendsandfamilyattheexpenseofweaktiesandstrangers[4].On
thementallevel,mobiledeviceswiththeirmultimediacapabilitiesallowpeopletocreatehighly
idiosyncraticimagesofthecity[5].Listeningtomusicononesmobiledeviceforexamplegenerates
inthewordsofoneofMichaelBullsrespondentstheillusionofomnipotence[6].Thesemedia
thusfosteranindividualizedsenseofplace,afeelingofbeingpartandincontrolofasituation
(Meyrowitz,1985).
Thepushtowardsanefficientandpersonalizedcityisinstitutionalizedonamuchlargerscalein
smartcitypolicies(Mitchell,1999Mitchell,2006Hollands,2008AllwinkleandCruickshank,2011
RattiandTownsend,2011Chourabi,etal.,2012)[7].Municipalitiesformallianceswithtechnology
companiesandknowledgeinstitutionswiththeaimtoorganizeurbanprocessesefficiently(fora
recentresearch/policyagendaseeBatty,etal.,2012).Sensorandnetworktechnologiesgaugeand
optimizeenergyandwatersupplies,transportandlogistics,airandenvironmentalquality.Thehope
isthatthisimprovesthequalityoflifeandthatithelpstotacklesomeofthebigfuturechallenges
thatcitiesface.CompaniesthatworkonsmartcitystrategiesincludeIBM
(http://www.ibm.com/thesmartercity),CISCO
(http://www.cisco.com/web/strategy/smart_connected_communities.html),GeneralElectric
(http://www.gereports.com),AT&T(http://www.corp.att.com/stateandlocal/),MicrosoftandPhilips.
ExamplesofactualsmartcitiesincludetownsbuiltfromscratchlikeNewSongdoinSouthKorea
(http://www.songdo.com)andMasdarintheUnitedArabEmirates(http://masdarcity.ae),butmore
oftenexistingcitiesthataremadesmarter,liketheAmsterdamSmartCityprojectinthe
Netherlands(http://amsterdamsmartcity.com).
2.2.Critique
Aswenoteelsewhere(deLangeanddeWaal,2012a),theomnipresenceofnewmediainanurban
contexthascomeundercriticismalongthreebroadlines.First,observersnotethatwayfinding
devices,locationbasedservices,digitalsignage,andcustomerloyaltycardstransformourcities
intoconsumeroptimizedzones,whilesimultaneouslyproducingexclusionarypracticesofsocial
sorting(CrangandGraham,2007Shepard,2011deWaal,2012a,2013).Second,omnipresent
cameraswithfaceandgaitrecognitionsoftware,RFIDbasedaccesscards,smartmeters,
connecteddatabases,andmobilenetworkpositioning,pushcitiestowardrevivedbigbrother
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

scenariosofpervasiveinstitutionalcontrolandsurveillance(CrangandGraham,2007Greenfield
andShepard,2007Lyon,2009).Third,mobilescreens,portableaudiodevicesanduntethered
onlineaccesstoonesfamiliarinnercircleenablepeopletoretreatfrompubliclifeintoprivatized
telecocoons,bubblesorcapsules(Cauter,2004Habuchi,2005Bull,2005Ito,etal.,2009).In
thesescenarioscitydwellersnolongerengagewithstrangersaroundthem.Thereisalackofspace
forspontaneousencountersandpubliclife,andagenerallackofinvolvementwiththeimmediate
environment.
Additionally,smartcitydevelopmentstakethetechnologylabasthestartingpoint.Theactualcity
isseenasthelastandmostdifficulthurdleinsuccessivephasesofdeploymentorrollout,rather
thanthesoleplacewhereexperimenttrulyprovesitsvalue.Smartcityprojectstypicallyconsistofa
triplehelixofgovernment,knowledgeproduction(e.g.,universities)andindustry.Suchconsortia
oftenignoretheroleofcitizensasequallyimportantagents.Atbestcitizensinsmartcitypolicies
areallowedtoprovidefeedbacksomewhereinthedesignprocess,althoughoftentimestheyfigure
asendusersinsteadofbeingengagedintheearlystagesofcocreation.
Artistsandmediaactivistshaveusedthesesamemediatechnologiestoquestionandsubvertthe
logicofthethreeCsofconsumption,control,andcapsularization(deLangeanddeWaal,2012b)
andapproachurbanitesascitizensratherthanasconsumersorendusers.Thisoftenhappens
throughludicinterventionsthatharkbacktoSituationistlegaciesofdriveanddetournement
(Debord,1958ChangandGoodman,2006Charitos,etal.,2008deWaal,2012b).Whilewe
believesuchcriticismsarevaluable,manyremainhighlytemporaryandsticktoanoppositional
politics.Howcanweusethepotentialstrengthsofurbantechnologiestohelpforgemoredurable
projectidentities[8]?Wearguethatanalternativetakeisneededonurbandesignwithdigital
technologiesthatfocusesontheactiveroleofcitizensandusesthecityitselfasthetestbedfor
experiments.
2.3.Socialcities
Anothertalestillunderconstructionhasrecentlyrisentothefore.Inthisvision,urban
technologiesengageandempowerpeopletobecomeactiveinshapingtheirurbanenvironment,to
forgerelationshipswiththeircityandotherpeople,andtocollaborativelyaddresssharedurban
issues(Paulos,etal.,2008Foth,etal.,2011deLangeanddeWaal,2012b).Thefocusinthese
discussionsisonsocialcitiesratherthanonsmartcities[9].Itexploreshowdigitalmedia
technologiescanenablepeopletoactascocreatorsoflivableandlivelycities.Thisnarrativeis
inspiredbythebodyofliteraturethatdescribesprofoundshiftsinthebalancebetweenproduction
andconsumption:fromprofessionalamateurtowisdomofthecrowd,fromdoityourselfcultureto
thehackerethic(Himanen,2001LeadbeaterandMiller,2004BenklerandNissenbaum,2006
Shirky,2008Rheingold,2012).Centralisthequestionhowcollaborativeprinciplesandparticipatory
ethicsfromonlineculturecanbeportedtotheurbanrealminordertocoordinatecollectiveaction
andhelpsolvesomeoftheurgentcomplexissuesthatcitiesarefacing.
Whatthenaretheseissues?Theseexistonmultiplescales.Somehaveaglobalscope,likesocial
equityandenvironmentalsustainability,oradequatewater,foodandenergysupplies.Othersare
specifictoparticularcities,likeshrinkingcities,agingpopulationsandemptyspaces.Onan
intermediarylevelmanycitiesintheworldfacechallengessuchastheperceiveddeclineof
publicness,safety,socialinclusionandcohesion,andthegapbetweencitizensandpolicy.Such
issuestypicallyarenotownedbyasingleparty.Theyarecollectiveissuesthatinvolvemultiple
stakeholdersandrequireformsofcollaborativegovernancetotacklethem.Typicalfortheseissues
isthatshortandlongterminterestsofdifferentstakeholdersdiverge.Asaresultitishardto
establishacommondefinitionoftheproblemitself,letalonefindasolutioneveryoneagreeson.
Moreover,asingleinterventionmaycatalyzeunforeseeneventsthataltertheinitialstate.Because
ofthiscomplexitysuchissueshavebeencalledwickedproblems(RittelandWebber,1973).

3.Ownership:Engagingcitizenswithnewmedia
Wewanttocontributetothesocialcitydiscoursebyadvancingthenotionofownershipasalensto
lookathowcitiesaremadeandremadewiththehelpofdigitalmedia.Ownershipactsaheuristic
devicetomakesenseofthevarietyofdevelopmentsthatcanbegroupedunderthesocialcitylabel.
Weuseownershiptorefertothedegreetowhichcitydwellersfeelasenseofresponsibilityfor
sharedissuesandaretakingactiononthesematters.Assuchitisahackofownershipineveryday
parlanceasbeingtheproprietorofsomething,whichgivesthepossessortherighttoexclude
someoneelse.Whenunderstandingownershipinmoreinclusivetermsitmeansthatonehasthe
righttoactuponanissue.Itisthissenseofownershipthatweareafter:notacontractual,
proprietaryownership,butasenseofbelongingtoacollectiveplace,commitmenttoacollective
issue,andwillingnesstoshareaprivateresourcewiththecollectiveinordertoallowothercitizens
toact,withoutinfringingonotherpeoplesrightofownership.InLefebvrestermsthisistherightto
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

appropriation,whichisclearlydistinctfromtherighttoproperty[10].
Whatistheadvantageoflookingaturbanissuesasownershipquestions?Ithighlightshowincities
thereoftenisadiscrepancybetweenformaljuridicalrightsonindividualorinstitutionallevelsanda
collectivesenseofresponsibilityforthelivedenvironment.Assaid,ownershipcanhavean
exclusivemeaningasproprietorship(minenotthine)withpassivelyconferredrights.Thisisthe
casewithpurelyprivatemattersandpurelypublicmattersforwhichthestateisthesoleresponsible
body.Ownershipcanalsohaveaninclusivemeaningthatinvolvesstewardshipofwhatbelongstoall
ofus.Itthendemandsastanceofcollectiveengagementandaction.Thisinclusiveandactivenotion
ofownershipunderlinesthatcitylifeisnotjustamatterofavoidingfrictionbutalsorequiresthe
willingnesstoaffect,thatistotouchuponthingsandotherpeopleandtosetsomethingorsomeone
inmotion(Thrift,2004deLange,2013).
Anotheradvantageisthatownershipoffersafreshtakeonexistingmodelsforcitizenengagement.
Theideaofengagingcitizensinshapingtheirlivingcircumstancesisofcoursenotnew.Inmany
westerncountriesithasbeenaroundsincethe1970s.Amongtownplanners,forexample,place
makinghasbeenapopularconcept,wherebylocalpeoplehavetheirsaywithinacommunity
drivenprocess(Beyea,etal.,2009).Policymakers,housingcorporations,politiciansand
knowledgeinstituteshavealsotakenupthesubjectofcitizenengagement.Wecanidentifytwo
extremes:atopdownparticipationmodelandabottomupcommunitymodel.Policyinstitutions
useparticipationmodelstoinitiateprojectsinwhichcitizensareinvitedtohaveasay,likeinatown
hallmeeting.Somecriticsdismissthisaspseudoparticipation(Miessen,2010),whichis
reminiscentofwhatArnsteinhascalledtokenism(Arnstein,1969).Politiciansandgovernment
authoritiesgiveparticipationanostalgicsugarcoatingofinclusivity,democraticdecisionmakingand
solidarity.Indoingsotheyareoffloadingtheirownresponsibilities(InstitutefortheFuture,2010).
ThisisespeciallyurgentinthecontextoftheBigSocietypolicyconceptdevisedbytheU.K.
Conservativeparty,whichseekstoshiftfrombiggovernmenttoapoliticalsystemwherepeople
havemorepowerandcontrolovertheirlives.[11]
Thecommunitymodelattemptstofosterasenseoftogethernessthathasrootsinphysical
proximityorvirtualpresenceofhomogenousgroupsofpeoplewhosharekeyaspectsoftheirlives.
Itupholdsidealsofneighboring,localness,smallscale,similarityandsimplicity.However,Jane
Jacobsamongotherspointedoutthatcitydwellerstypicallyrejectsmalltownparochialism.Oras
sheoutspokenlyputit:
Togethernessisafittinglynauseatingnameforanoldideal
inplanningtheory.Thisidealisthatifanythingisshared
amongpeople,muchshouldbeshared.Togetherness,
apparentlyaspiritualresourceofthenewsuburbs,works
destructivelyincities.Therequirementthatmuchshallbe
shareddrivescitypeopleapart.[12]
Inherviewcitiesoffercitizenstheadvantagetoescapenarrowsocialcontrolofthesmallvillage,
andobtainthefreedomtochoosetheirownlifestyles.
WiththenotionofownershipwepositionourselvesinresponsetoearlierinvestigationsofusingICTs
forurbanissuesinwhathasbeencalledcommunityinformatics[13].Whilewecontinueintheline
ofthoughtthatICTscanbeusedtohelpsolvesharedissues,wedisagreeonthecentralityofthe
notionofcommunity.ShinandShinforexamplenotethatthenotionofcommunityismorally
chargedandproblematic,yetargueforcommunityasanidealtokeepstrivingfor:[P]ursuing
communityisnotmerelyanidealistic,utopianprojectrather,itisarealisticrequirementforlife.
[14].Community,webelieve,neednotbethesoleorevennecessarypreconditiontoacton
collectiveissues.Inourviewcommunityistooreminiscentofsmallscaleandlocalwaysoflife
insteadofcontemporaryurbanlife.Insteadweprefertheuseofnetworkedpublics(Varnelis,
2008),groupsofpeoplewhoconvenearoundasharedmatterofconcerninentitiesthatmaybe
morefleeting,composedofdifferencesratherthanbeingbasedonsameness,andorganizedin
distributednetworksratherthaninnaturalsocialbondsoflocality,class,ethnicity,culturalidentity,
andsoon[15].
Importantly,complexurbanissuesoftentranscendpurelylocalinterests.Tenaciousurbanissues
involveacomplexofstakeholders,composedofcitizensthemselves,butalsoauthoritiesandpolicy
makersonmultiplelevels,housingcorporations,awidearrayofsocialorganizationsandknowledge
institutesinvolvedinurbanaffairs,aswellaslocalandglobalbusinesses.Ownershipprovidesa
horizonforactioninwhicheachstakeholderreciprocallycontributestothewholeonadifferentbut
equalbase.
Thus,withownershipweseektoovercometheparochialisminherentinbottomupcommunity
modelsandthepaternalismoftopdowninstitutionalparticipationpolicies.Howcannewmedia
enableamoreparticipatorykindofcitymaking,withoutfallinginthetrapofeitherparticipation
modelsinwhichnothingessentiallychanges,ortheantiurbanidealsoflocalismandsmallis
beautifulimpliedbycommunitymodels?Theadventofdigitalmediatechnologiesintheurban
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

sphereoffersopportunitiestoorganizecitizenengagementneitherinlocalbottomupnor
institutionalizedtopdownfashion,butinnetworkedpeertopeerways.Insteadofseeking
consensusthesetoolsallowroomformanagingdifferences.Wehaveseenhowurbannewmedia
areoftenperceivedtoalleviateandeliminatemomentsofuncertaintyandtensioninherenttourban
life.Itiseasytounderstandhowthatthreatenswhataccordingtoprominenturbantheoristsisthe
citysfragilequintessence,namelylivingamongstrangersanddealingwithdifferencesand
serendipitoussituations(Simmel,1997Wirth,1938Jacobs,1992Milgram,1970Sennett,1976).
Weshouldnotehoweverthatthereisnothinginherentlynew(orwrongperse)withpersonalizing
andsmoothingoutthecity.Sincetheriseoftheearlymodernmetropolisurbanitesinonewayor
anotherhavetailoredthecitytotheirindividualpreferences.Peopleorienttofamiliarphysical
elementstofeelmoresecure(Lynch,1960).Theyplayintricatesocialavoidancegamesof
disengagement,distractionanddeceit(Goffman,1959Lofland,1973).Theyadoptblasattitudesas
awaytocopewithsensoryoverload(Simmel,1997Milgram,1970).Thechallengethereforeinour
viewistobalancethesestoriesofpersonalizationandefficiencyontheonehandandofbuilding
collectivesbasedondifferencesandmutualismontheotherhand.Individualsmustnotonlydevise
avoidancestrategiesbutalsocooperateinordertoaddressthemorecomplexissuesthatarepart
ofcitylife.

4.Promisingdevelopmentsforstrengtheningcitizenownership
Asmentioned,ownershipisrelatedtosocialpoliciesthathavebeenaroundsincethe1970s.
Nonethelesswearguethatnewmediaaffordseveralpromisingqualitativeshiftswithregardtothe
waypeopleengage,empower,andact,andinadditionhowtheymanagesharedissuesand
resources.First,onthelevelofresourcesandissuesbigdataandurbanmediaallowforcollective
issuestobenamedandmadevisibleinnewways.Second,onthelevelofengagementmediaart
projectscontributetoasenseofplace,allowingpeopletoseethemselvesaspartoftheurban
fabric.Third,mediatechnologiesempowernewnetworkedpublics:groupsofpeoplewhoorganize
themselvesaroundcollectiveissues.Fourth,inwhatcanbecalledDIYurbanism,media
technologiesallowcitizenstoactinnewways,forinstancedesigntheirowncityandcollectively
governurbanaffairs.
4.1.Resourcesandissues:Theriseofadatacommons
Acurrentdevelopmentisconsideringthecityasaninformationgeneratingsystem.Avarietyof
technologiescollectanenormousamountandrangeofdata.Consciouslyorunconsciously,citizens
contributetotheaccumulationofdatathroughtheirusesofallkindsofproductsandservices.As
thesedataarebeingaggregated,theymaybecomeadatacommons:anewresourcecontaining
valuableinformationforurbandesigners.Datasetscanbeusedtobringout,visualizeandmanage
collectiveissues.Preconditionsfortheestablishmentofadatacommonsincludetheavailabilityof
andaccesstoopendata,andtheskillscitizenshavetousethedatainameaningfulway.Withthe
notionofownershipinmindoneissueatstakeiswhohaspossessionrightsoverthesedata.Are
thesealimitednumberofplayers(mostlygovernmentalauthoritiesandprivatecompanies)orcan
citizenstoohaveaccesstothesedatainordertocreateinterestingnewapplicationsandservices.
Examplesincludeanumberofappconteststhathavebeenorganizedbyvariousmunicipalitiesin
theNetherlandsbasedonopendatasets[16].Notonlyisitpossibletouseaggregateddataabout
urbanpracticestovisualizecollectiveissues,itisalsopossibletobringoutindividualcontributions
andusageofresources.
4.2.Engagement:Senseofplace
Toengagepeoplewithcommunallysharedissues,itisessentialthatpeopleenvisionthemselvesas
partoftheurbanfabric,andunderstandthattheirindividualactionsmakeadifferencetothe
commongood.Theyalsoneedtotrustotherurbanitestoactaccordingly.Digitalmediacanplayan
importantpartinthis,andengagecitizensinnewways.Variousexperimentshavebeendonewith
this.ArtprojectslikeUrbanTapestries(http://urbantapestries.net)ortheDutchHetgeheugenvan
Oost(TheMemoryofAmsterdamEast,http://www.geheugenvanoost.nl)collectstoriesfromvarious
citizensandfunctionasanexchangeplatformforthese.OtherprojectssuchasChristianNolds
Biomapping(http://biomapping.net)actasprovocativeconversationpieces.Noldsinstallation
collectedbiometricdatafromcitizenswhilewalkingacrosstown.Theresultssuddenspikesin
heartrateorgalvanicskinresponsewereusedtoengagelocalsindiscussionsabouttheseplaces
andthesensationstheyproducedinthem.Placeblogshavestartedtoplayaroleinmappingdiverse
localinitiativesinaparticularareaandbydoingsoproduceasitewheresomeofthestoriesof
differentpeoplemaystarttooverlap(Lindgren,2005).
4.3.Publics:Networkedpublics
Networkedpublicsaregroupsofpeoplethatusesocialmediaandotherdigitaltechnologiesto
organizethemselvesaroundcollectivegoalsorissues(Varnelis,2008).Inonlineculture,networks
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

ofprofessionalamateurscreateusergeneratedcontentortakepartincitizenscienceprojects.
ThinkofopensourcesoftwareorWikipediaassuccessfulexamples.Incitieswehaveseena
growinginterestinorganizingpublicsinsuchaway,eithertocollectivelymapissuesaspartof
activismortoorganizethemselvesaroundcommonpoolresources.TheDutchGeluidsnet
(http://geluidsnet.nl/en/)isanexampleoftheformer,inwhichcitizenswholivenearSchiphol
airportintheNetherlandsstartedacampaignagainstexcessiveairportnoisepollution.Participants
setupameshnetworkbyinstallingsoundsensorsinoraroundtheirhouses.Thisdatawascollected
andaggregatedtoproduceabodyoffactsthatcouldbeusedascounterevidenceintheircase
againsttheairport.Latelywehaveseenagreatinterestintheorganizationofpublicsaroundso
calledcommonpoolresources(Ostrom,1990).Thesevaryfromcarsharingandtoollendingto
urbangardening.Whatisnewisthatdigitalmediamakeiteasiertoregisterindividualcontributions
andusageofcollectiveresources,andthereputationsystemsthatemergefromthesepatternsmay
preventtheproverbialtragedyofthecommons(Hardin,1968).Whatboththesenewinterfaces
haveincommonisthattheymakeiteasiertotakeacollectiveownershipintoanissueora
commonresource.
4.4.Act:DIYurbandesign
Digitalmediahaveenabledmechanismsformanagingcollectiveaction.Traditionally,collectives
sufferfromalackofinformationleadingtolessthanoptimaldecisionmaking,whichhampers
action.Withmobileandlocationbasedmediapeoplecansharemoreinformationmorequicklyand
baseadaptivedecisionsonit.Examplesaretherealtimeexchangeofinformationaboutairquality
usingportablesensorsandmobilenetworks,oraggregatedlocationbasedinformationthatallows
predictingandprovidinginformationabouttrafficcongestion.Thetermscocreationand
crowdsourcingareusedforcollectiveissuesbeingtackledandmanagedcollaboratively,withnew
participantshavinganactiverole.AninterestingprojectisFaceYourWorld
(http://www.faceyourworld.net)byartistJeannevanHeeswijkandarchitectDennisKaspori.Young
peopleandotherpeoplelivinginanAmsterdamneighborhoodcollaboratedindesigningacitypark
usinga3Dsimulationenvironmentinwhichtheycoulduploadtheirownimagesandideastodebate
amongsteachother.Withthiscrowdsourcedplantheymanagedtopersuadethelocalgovernment
toabandontheinitialplansfortheparkandexecutetheirsinstead.Likeonlinecounterpartsthat
successfullymanagecollectiveaction(fromWikipediatotheLinuxkernel),itwouldbeanillusionto
viewthesephenomenaasexclusivelybottomupprocesses.Theyrequirecuratorshipandsetsof
rules.Theserulesareoftentimesenforcednotbysingulartopdowninstitutionsbutthrough
distributedformsofsupervisionandsanctionsorganizedbyusersthemselves.
4.5.Limitationsofownership
Thelensofownershipalsobringsoutanumberofproblematicissueswithregardtothesocial
organizationofurbanlifewiththehelpofnewmedia.Manyoftheexamplesabovearestill
anecdotal.Othershavetheirorigininthedomainofart.Bothshowthaturbanmediadohavethe
affordancetopromoteownership.However,theexamplesprovidedalsoraisepertinentand
interrelatedquestions:whatistheeffectivenessorsocialmeritoftheseinterventions,andhowdo
weinstitutionalizethesenewforms?Oncenewurbanissueshavebeenvisualized,andaninitial
interestorsenseofengagementisaroused,howcanpublicsorganizeinaproductivewayaround
them?Whatlegalandregulatoryframeworksdoweneedforinstancetoallowcitizenstoproduce
theirownenergyinacollaborativestructureanddelivertheirsurplustothegrid?Whatnewtypesof
institutionsareneededandhowcanthepitfallsofutopiannewsocietymakingbeavoided?By
takingthesequestionsaspointsofdeparture,ownershipcanalsobeusedasadesignandpolicy
approachthatoffersanalternativetotheurbanimaginaryofsmartcities.

5.Implicationsforurbandesign:Newmediaandthebuiltform
Therelationshipbetween(digital)mediatechnologiesandthephysicalcityhasoftenbeenthoughtof
inastraightforward,evensimplisticmanner.Therelationhaslongbeentheorizedintermsofa
substitutioneffectwherebyICTseventuallywouldmakethephysicalurbanformobsolete[17].In
thisview,voicedby,forinstance,McLuhan,Virilio,andMitchell,ICTswouldleadthecitytobecome
increasinglydematerialized,decentralizedandephemeral[18].ICTswouldcausethedisappearance
ofconcentratedfunctionsfromthecitycentersinrealmssuchascommerce(Dodge,2004),public
institutions(Mitchell,1995),andhousing[19].TobefairitshouldbeaddedthatdeSolaPooltakesa
morenuancedapproachthandepictingtechnologysimpactonthecityasmerelyoneway.Despite
itstitle,deSolaPoolandhiscolleaguesmakeitconsistentlyclearinThesocialimpactofthe
telephone(1977)thatthetelephoneisafacilitatingdeviceandthatitoftencontributedtoquite
oppositedevelopments[20].Thecityandthetelephonemutuallyshapeormodifyeachother.The
telephone(andthecar)werejointlyresponsibleforthevastgrowthofAmericansuburbiaand
exurbia,andforthephenomenonofurbansprawl.Thereissometruthtothat,eventhough
everythingwehavesaidsofarseemstopointtothereversepropositionthatthetelephonemade
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

possibletheskyscraperandincreasedthecongestiondowntown[21].Sincetheearly1990s
onwardsagrowingnumberofauthorshavepointedoutthatICTsactuallyconcentratefunctionsand
peopleincities.Citiesarehubsforinformationnetworks,skillsandknowledgeinglobalcitiesand
technopoles(Sassen,1991CastellsandHall,1994)andforculturalindustriesincreativecities
(Florida,2004).
Atthelevelofdesignpracticecrudetranslationsfromobservationtointerventionfrequentlyresultin
slavishlycateringtosomeofthetechnologicalaffordancesdiscussedinthefirstsection.Forinstance
inreactiontopeopleworkingubiquitouslywiththeirportablewirelessdevices,ahostofspacesare
adaptedtonomadiclaborbybeingequippedwithWiFi,powersocketsandcocooningzones.
Convenientasthismaybeforindividuals,suchareactive,evenservileattitudeofurbandesignto
thedemandsoftechnologicalprogressavoidsamorecriticalengagementthatinterrogatesthe
desirabilityofsuchdevelopments(deLangeanddeWaal,2009).
Webelieveitisnecessarytoexplorealternativestodirectconnectionsofcausalityorcorrelation
betweentechnologyandthecity.Ownershipallowsustoventurebeyondrelationshipsof
amplification,substitution,ormodification,andtakeamoreculturallysensitivedetourthathighlights
newwaysofcocreatingthecity.
Forone,thedatageneratedbythecitycanbeusedasvariablesin(parametric)designapproaches.
Architectsandotherprofessionalscanandarealreadyusingthesedatatogaininsightinspatial
patternsofcitizens,abouttheirmentalmapsandemotionalsenseofwellbeingtiedtoparticular
places,ortolearnaboutthepresenceorabsenceofparticularsubculturestowhomdesignscanbe
tailored.DutcharchitectureandresearchofficeSpace&Matter
(http://www.spaceandmatter.nl/index.php/architecture/urbaneindhoven/)harvestedsocialnetwork
datatoresearchatransformationplanforanoldenergyplantinEindhoven.Throughthesesearches
theyfoundtwosubculturesofskatersandBMXbikers,andclimbers.Byinvestigatingandcomparing
theirrespectivespatialneeds,theyproposedtostrikeabalanceinthereuseofthebuildingby
retrofittingitwithperforationsinthefloorthatwouldbenefitbothsubcultures.
Thedatathatthecityanditsinhabitantsproducecanbeusedtovisualizecollectiveissuesinnew
waysthatappealtopeoplesemotionalattachment.Forinstance,therehavebeenquiteafew
projectstryingtovisualizeenvironmentalissues,fromMITsSenseableCityLabsTrashTrack
(http://senseable.mit.edu/trashtrack/),whichfollowstherouteofdiscardedobjects,totheMedialab
PradosIntheAir(http://www.intheair.es/),whichmeasuresanddisplaysairpollution.Mostdata
visualizationprojectsstayinthedigitalrealmofinformationarchitecture,turningdatainbeautiful
visualizations.Someofthemhoweverjumpovertourbanarchitecturebyexperimentingwith
physicalandtangibleinstallationsratherthanonlinemapsorprojectionsonmuseumwalls.ForIn
theAiraprototypewasdevelopedforafountainwithcolorsandlightintensitythatreflectair
quality.IntheDutchcityofDoetichemartistQ.S.SerafijnandarchitectLarsSpuybroekcreatedthe
DTower(http://www.dtoren.nl/site/),aninteractivelightsculpturethatreflectsthemoodofthe
cityandwhichcanbeseenasanearlyexplorationofanarchitectureofaffect(seedeLange,
2013).Thecolorsofthelightinstallation(yellowforfear,greenforhatred,redforloveandbluefor
happiness)aredeterminedbytheoutcomesofadailyonlinequestionnaireamongstresidentsabout
theirmood.Astheprojectwasfinalizedin2004itdidnotyetmakeuseofanyrealtime
information.Itcanbeexpectedthatinthenearfuturemanyinteractiveinstallations,lightsculptures
andotherobjectswillappearinthecitythatreflectinconcreteormoreabstractwaystherealtime
rhythmsandemotionsofthecityoraddressparticularissues(suchasairpollution)thatmayarise
fromthedatacommons.
Atthesametimewewitnesstheemergenceofnewspatiotemporaltypes.Forsometimenow
manycitieshaveseensocalledpopupevents(popupbars,popupclubs,popupshops),often
invacantbuildingsandunderusedsites(SchwarzandRugare,2009).Additionally,crowdfunded
neighborhoodbuildingsandinfrastructuresemergethataresometimesliterallybuiltwithsecond
handordiscardedmaterials(anexampleinAmsterdamishttp://noorderparkbar.nl).Often
organizedwithacollaborativeDIYattitudeandwiththeaidofsocialmedia,theseinterventionsshift
focusfromplacemakingtocreatingtemporaryevents.Theirsuddenappearanceand
impermanenceunderlinethetransientnatureofurbanplacesinanageofnewmediadevelopments
thatoccuronacompletelydifferenttimescalefromtraditionalarchitecture(deLangeanddeWaal,
2009).Thus,thebalanceofarchitecturalpracticeappearstoshiftfrommanipulatingspaceto
manipulatingspaceintime.AcasetakentotheextremeisDUSArchitectsBubbleBuilding
(http://dusarchitects.com/projects.php?categorieid=publicbuildings&projectid=bubblebuilding)made
entirelyoutofsoapbubbles.Itismeanttostimulateplayfulinteractionssincevisitorsmust
collaboratetobuildthesoapstructure.
Intheseexamplesweseehowsomeofthetensionsmentionedintheintroductionindividualand
collective,differenceandsimilarity,conflictandcollaborationbecomematerializedand
reconfiguredinarchitecture.Theriseofurbandatameansitismucheasiertofind,buildandlive
amongpeoplebasedonperceivedsimilarities.Thisispartlytrueinthecaseofcollectiveprivate
commissioning(CPC),anofficialDutchhousingpolicymeasuresince2000thataimstostimulate
enduserstocollectivelydesignandbuildtheirownhomes,astheyhadpriortoWorldWarIIafter
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

whichpublichousingbecamethetaskofnationalgovernment,localauthoritiesandsemipublic
housingcorporations.CPCaimstofitthemobilityandDIYattitudeofthepresentnetworksociety,
andtheneedforarenewedcollectiveselfesteem[22].Whileonthescaleofthehousingproject
thismayleadtohomogenization,aslikemindedpeopletendtoclusterandchoosesimilardesigns,it
mayleadtoamosaiclikeheterogeneityatthewiderscaleofneighborhoods.Nonethelessitraises
questionsaboutwhoownsthecity,asanevaluativestudyintotenyearsofCPCandvariantsfinds:
[A]ccordingtotheresidentsquestioned,therearesomecaseswhere(C)PCprojectsseemtobe
perceivedasdifferentandgated.Althoughopennessisoftenguaranteed,somearestillregarded
asoutsiders.[23].
Intheabovecasestraditionalinstitutionsareoftenbypassed.Architectsadopttherolesof
commissionerandexecutoratonce.Ratherthanbeingdemanddrivenandwaitingforacommission
orenteringcompetitions,theyactivelyseekoutanissueliketheredevelopmentortemporaryuse
ofaparticularplaceandtrytoorganizepublicsthattakeownership.Insteadofpitchingthey
campaignandmobilizenetworkedpublicstorealizetheirplans.Thismovementawayfroma
demanddrivenworkethicappearstohavestrikingparallelswiththeintrinsicallymotivatedplayful
hackerspiritofdoingsomethingjustbecauseitisfun[24].

6.Conclusion
Wehaveforwardedownershipasalenstolookattheroleofnewmediatechnologiesinthecity,
chieflyasanalternativetothesmartcityparadigm.Wehaveshownhowdigitalmediahavecreated
anumberofqualitativeshiftsinthewaypublicscanbeengagedwith,organizedaroundandact
uponcollectiveissues.Theseshiftsmeanthatithasbecomeeasierformanycitizenstoorganize
themselvesandtakeownershipofparticularissues.Inturnthismayleadnotonlytonewwaysin
whichsociallifeisorganized,butalsotonewwaysofshapingthebuiltenvironment.Wealsoargued
thataculturallysensitiveapproachtotherelationbetweencityandtechnologyismuchneeded.
Whilemanyofthesedevelopmentsspringfromgrassrootsinitiativesandareorganizedaround
decentralizednetworks,theycertainlyarenotwithoutstructure,rulesandinstitutions.Ofcoursewe
havetokeepinmindthatnoteveryonehasaccesstothesedigitaltechnologies,letaloneisnet
smartenoughtousethembeneficially(Rheingold,2012).Anotherissueforfurtherdebateisthe
ongoingstruggleovercontrolofinfrastructuresanddata.Perhapsthisisacontributionarchitects
andotherurbandesignerscanmaketotheworldofnewmediadesign:todesigntrulyaccessible
andinclusiveurbaninterfacesthatengagecitizenswithparticularissuesandallowtothemto
organizethemselvesandact.

Abouttheauthors
MichieldeLange(Ph.D.)isaparttimeLecturerinNewMediaStudies,UtrechtUniversity,
Netherlands,andrunsafreelanceresearchofficefornewmediaandurbanism.HecofoundedThe
MobileCity(http://www.themobilecity.nl),anindependentresearchgroupthatinvestigatesthe
influenceofdigitalmediatechnologiesonurbanlife,andimplicationsforurbandesign.In2010he
finishedhisdissertationaboutmobilemedia,urbanculture,playandidentity.
Email:m[dot]l[dot]delange[at]uu[dot]nl
MartijndeWaal(Ph.D.)isanassistantprofessorintheDepartmentofMediaStudiesatthe
UniversityofAmsterdam.HeisacofounderofTheMobileCity,andapartfromacademiaalsoruns
ThePublicMatters,anofficethatadvisescultural,media,nonprofitsandgovernmentorganizations
ontheroleofnewmediainthepublicsphere.In2009hewasavisitingscholaratMITsCenterfor
FutureCivicMedia.HisbookThecityasinterfacewaspublishedbyNAi010inSpring2013.Themain
themeofthebookistheroleofdigitalmediaintheurbanpublicsphere.
Email:b[dot]g[dot]m[dot]dewaal[at]uva[dot]nl

Notes
1.Ling,2008Paulos,etal.,2008deLange,2010:pp.179183DourishandBell,2011deWaal,
2012a.
2.InthewordsofacompanythatsellsNearFieldCommunicationsolutions,thiswillproducean
effectivepersonalizationofthephysicalworld.Source:
http://www.nearfieldcommunication.com/business/overview/,accessed23September2012.
3.deGournay,2002:pp.201204Fox,2006,p.13.
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

4.Ling,2008,pp.159,182.
5.Bull,2005deLange,2009,p.66.
6.Bull,2005,p.175.
7.Seealsonumerousspecialjournalissuesaboutsmartcities,likeJournalofUrbanTechnology
(volume18,number2,2011)Urbanist(number517,2012)JournaloftheKnowledgeEconomy
(volume4,number2,2013)Economist(27October2012).
8.ManuelCastellsdistinguishesbetweenthedominantlegitimizingidentity,thecounteractive
resistanceidentity,andtheaffirmativeprojectidentity(Castells,1997,pp.78).
9.SeethedocumentationontheinternationalworkshopandconferenceSocialCitiesofTomorrow,
organizedbyTheMobileCity,VirtueelPlatformandARCAM,1417February2012inAmsterdam,
www.socialcitiesoftomorrow.nl.
10.Lefebvre,1996,p.174Mitchell,2003,p.18PugalisandGiddings,2011,p.282.
11.ConservativeParty(GreatBritain),2010,p.ix.
12.Jacobs,1992,p.62.
13.Gurstein,2000,2003KeebleandLoader,2001Foth,2009:p.xxixShinandShin,2012.
14.ShinandShin,2012,p.28.
15.SeealsoLatour,2005,p.114.
16.See,forinstance,AppsforAmsterdam(www.appsforamsterdam.nl/en).
17.Forcriticaldiscussions,seeDowneyandMcGuigan,1999Graham,2004,pp.324Picon,2008,
pp.3234deLange,2010,pp.160166TutersandLange,2013.
18.McLuhan,1994,p.366,pp.378379Mitchell,1995Virilio,1997,p.25.
19.deSolaPool,1977,pp.141,302.
20.Pool,1977,p.302.
21.Pool,1983,pp.4344.
22.BoelensandVisser,2011,pp.105106.
23.BoelensandVisser,2011,p.124.
24.Himanen,2001,pp.37.

References
SamAllwinkleandPeterCruickshank,2011.Creatingsmartercities:Anoverview,Journalof
UrbanTechnology,volume18,number2,pp.116.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2011.601103,accessed5November2013.
SherryR.Arnstein,1969.Aladderofcitizenparticipation,JournaloftheAmericanPlanning
Association,volume35,number4,pp.216224.
MichaelBatty,KayAxhausen,FoscaGiannotti,AlexeiPozdnoukhov,ArmandoBazzani,Monica
Wachowicz,GeorgiosOuzounis,andYuvalPortugali.2012.Smartcitiesofthefuture,European
PhysicalJournalSpecialTopics,volume214,number1,pp.481518.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2012017033,accessed5November2013.
YochaiBenklerandHelenNissenbaum.2006.Commonsbasedpeerproductionandvirtue,Journal
ofPoliticalPhilosophyvolume14,number4,pp.394419.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.14679760.2006.00235.x,accessed5November2013.
WayneBeyea,ChristineGeith,andCharlesMcKeown.2009.Placemakingthroughparticipatory
planning,In:MarcusFoth(editor).Handbookofresearchonurbaninformatics:Thepracticeand
promiseoftherealtimecity.Hershey,Pa.:InformationScienceReference,pp.5557.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/9781605661520.ch004,accessed5November2013.
LuukBoelensandAnneJoVisser.2011.Possiblefuturesofselfconstruction:Poststructural
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

reflectionsontenyearsofexperimentationwith(C)PC,In:LeiQuandEvertHasselaar(editors).
Makingroomforpeople:Choice,voiceandliveabilityinresidentialplaces.Amsterdam:Techne
Press,pp.103128.
MichaelBull,2005.Theintimatesoundsofurbanexperience:Anauditoryepistemologyofeveryday
mobility,In:JnosKristfNyri(editor).Asenseofplace:Theglobalandthelocalinmobile
communication.Vienna:PassagenVerlag,pp.169178.
ManuelCastells.1997.Thepowerofidentity.Malden,Mass.:Blackwell.
ManuelCastellsandPeterHall.1994.Technopolesoftheworld:Themakingoftwentyfirstcentury
industrialcomplexes.London:Routledge.
ManuelCastells,MireiaFernandezArdevol,JackLinchuanQiu,andArabaSey.2004.Themobile
communicationsociety:Acrossculturalanalysisofavailableevidenceonthesocialusesof
wirelesscommunicationtechnology,AnnenbergResearchNetworkonInternationalCommunication,
UniversityofSouthernCalifornia,athttp://arnic.info/workshop04/MCS.pdf,accessed5November
2013.
LievendeCauter,2004.Thecapsularcivilization:Onthecityintheageoffear.Rotterdam:NAi
Publishers.
MicheleChangandElizabethGoodman,2006.Asphaltgames:Enactingplacethroughlocative
media,Leonardo,volume14,number3,athttp://www.leoalmanac.org/wp
content/uploads/2012/07/AsphaltGamesEnactingPlaceThroughLocativeMediaVol14No3July
2006LeonardoElectronicAlmanac.pdf,accessed5November2013.
DimitrisCharitos,OlgaParaskevopoulou,andCharalamposRizopoulos.2008.Locationspecificart
practicesthatchallengethetraditionalconceptionofmapping,Artnodes,number8,at
http://www.uoc.edu/artnodes/8/dt/eng/paraskevopoulou_charitos_rizopoulos.html,accessed5
November2013.
HafedhChourabi,TaewooNam,ShawnWalker,J.RamonGilGarcia,SehlMellouli,KarineNahon,
TheresaA.Pardo,andHansJochenScholl,2012.Understandingsmartcities:Anintegrative
framework,HICSS12:Proceedingsofthe201245thHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystem
Sciences,pp.2,2892,297.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2012.615,accessed5November2013.
ConservativeParty(GreatBritain),2010.InvitationtojointhegovernmentofBritain:The
ConservativeManifesto2010,[London:ConservativeParty],at
http://media.conservatives.s3.amazonaws.com/manifesto/cpmanifesto2010_lowres.pdf,accessed5
November2013.
MikeCrangandStephenGraham,2007.Sentientcities:Ambientintelligenceandthepoliticsof
urbanspace,Information,Communication&Society,volume10,number6,pp.789817.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691180701750991,accessed5November2013.
ChantaldeGournay,2002.PretenseofintimacyinFrance,In:JamesE.KatzandMarkA.Aakhus
(editors).Perpetualcontact:Mobilecommunication,privatetalk,publicperformance.Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress,pp.193205.
GuyDebord,1958.TheoryoftheDrive,InternationaleSituationiste,number2,at
http://www.cddc.vt.edu/sionline/si/theory.html,accessed5November2013.
MartinDodge,2004.Geographiesofecommerce:ThecaseofAmazon.com,In:StephenGraham
(editor).Thecybercitiesreader.London:Routledge,pp.221225.
PaulDourishandGenevieveBell.2011.Diviningadigitalfuture:Messandmythologyinubiquitous
computing.Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress.
JohnDowneyandJimMcGuigan(editors),1999.Technocities.London:SAGE.
RichardL.Florida,2004.Theriseofthecreativeclass:Andhowitstransformingwork,leisure,
communityandeverydaylife.NewYork:BasicBooks.
MarcusFoth(editor),2009.Handbookofresearchonurbaninformatics:Thepracticeandpromiseof
therealtimecity.Hershey,Pa.:InformationScienceReference.
MarcusFoth,LauraForlano,ChristineSatchell,andMartinGibbs(editors),2011.Fromsocial
butterflytoengagedcitizen:Urbaninformatics,socialmedia,ubiquitouscomputing,andmobile
technologytosupportcitizenengagement.Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress.
KateFox,2006.Society:Thenewgardenfence,In:Themobilelifereport2006:Howmobile
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

phoneschangethewaywelive,at
http://www.yougov.co.uk/extranets/ygarchives/content/pdf/CPW060101004_1.pdf,accessed5
November2013.
ErvingGoffman,1959.Thepresentationofselfineverydaylife.GardenCity,N.Y.,:Doubleday.
StephenGraham(editor),2004.Thecybercitiesreader.London:Routledge.
StephenGrahamandSimonMarvin,2001.Splinteringurbanism:Networkedinfrastructures,
technologicalmobilitiesandtheurbancondition.London:Routledge.
AdamGreenfieldandMarkShepard.2007.Urbancomputinganditsdiscontents,Situated
TechnologiesPamphletSeries,athttp://www.situatedtechnologies.net/files/ST1
Urban_Computing.pdf,accessed12December2007.
MichaelGurstein(editor),2000.Communityinformatics:Enablingcommunitieswithinformationand
communicationstechnologies.Hershey,Pa.:IdeaGroupPub.
MichaelGurstein,2003.Effectiveuse:AcommunityinformaticsstrategybeyondtheDigitalDivide,
FirstMonday,volume8,number12,athttp://firstmonday.org/article/view/1107/1027,accessed5
November2013.
IchiyoHabuchi,2005.Acceleratingreflexivity,In:MizukoIto,MisaMatsuda,andDaisukeOkabe
(editors).Personal,portable,pedestrian:MobilephonesinJapaneselife.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT
Press,pp.165182.
GarrettHardin,1968.Thetragedyofthecommons,Science,volume162,number3859(13
December),pp.1,2431,248,andathttp://www.sciencemag.org/content/162/3859/1243.full,
accessed5November2013.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.162.3859.1243,accessed5November2013.
PekkaHimanen,2001.Thehackerethic,andthespiritoftheinformationage.NewYork:Random
House.
RobertG.Hollands,2008.Willtherealsmartcitypleasestandup?Intelligent,progressiveor
entrepreneurial?City,volume12,number3,pp.303320.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13604810802479126,accessed5November2013.
InstitutefortheFuture,2010.Aplanetofciviclaboratories:Thefutureofcities,information,and
inclusion,athttp://iftf.me/public/SR1352_Rockefeller_Map_reader.pdf,accessed5November
2013.
MizukoIto,2005.Intimatevisualcopresence,2005UbiquitousComputingConference(Tokyo),at
http://www.itofisher.com/mito/archives/ito.ubicomp05.pdf,accessed5November2013.
MizukoIto,DaisukeOkabe,andKenAnderson.2009.Portableobjectsinthreeglobalcities:The
personalizationofurbanplaces,In:RichLingandScottW.Campbell(editors).Thereconstruction
ofspaceandtime:Mobilecommunicationpractices.NewBrunswick,N.J.:TransactionPublishers,pp.
6787.
JaneJacobs,1992.ThedeathandlifeofgreatAmericancities.NewYork:VintageBooks.
LeighKeebleandBrianLoader(editors),2001.Communityinformatics:Shapingcomputermediated
socialrelations.London:Routledge.
MichieldeLange,2013.Thesmartcityyoulovetohate:Exploringtheroleofaffectinhybrid
urbanism,In:DimitrisCharitos,IoulianiTheona,DaphneDragona,andHarisRizopoulos(editors).
ThehybridcityII:SubtlerEvolutions,athttp://www.bijt.org/wordpress/wp
content/uploads/2013/06/130524_HC2Athens.pdf,accessed5November2013.
MichieldeLange,2010.Movingcircles:Mobilemediaandplayfulidentities.FacultyofPhilosophy,
ErasmusUniversityRotterdam,Rotterdam,athttp://www.cs.vu.nl/~eliens/download/read/moving
circles.pdf,accessed5November2013.
MichieldeLange,2009.Fromalwaysontoalwaysthere:Locativemediaasplayfultechnologies,
In:AdrianadeSouzaeSilvaandDanielM.Sutko(editors).Digitalcityscapes:Mergingdigitaland
urbanplayspaces.NewYork:PeterLang,pp.5570,andathttp://www.bijt.org/wordpress/wp
content/uploads/2009/12/fromalwaysontoalwaysthere_def02.pdf,accessed5November2013.
MichieldeLangeandMartijndeWaal.2012a.Ownershipinthehybridcity,at
http://virtueelplatform.nl/english/news/ownershipinthehybridcity/,accessed5November2013.
MichieldeLangeandMartijndeWaal.2012b.Socialcitiesoftomorrow:Conferencetext,at
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

http://www.socialcitiesoftomorrow.nl/background,accessed5November2013.
MichieldeLangeandMartijndeWaal,2009.Howcanarchitectsrelatetodigitalmedia?TheMobile
CitykeynoteattheDayoftheYoungArchitect,athttp://www.themobilecity.nl/2009/12/06/how
canarchitectsrelatetodigitalmediatmckeynoteatthe%E2%80%98dayoftheyoung
architect%E2%80%99//,accessed5November2013.
BrunoLatour,2005.Reassemblingthesocial:Anintroductiontoactornetworktheory.Oxford:
OxfordUniversityPress.
CharlesLeadbeaterandPaulMiller.2004.Theproamrevolution:Howenthusiastsarechangingour
economyandsociety.London:Demos.
HenriLefebvre,1996.Writingsoncities.Selected,translated,andintroducedbyEleonoreKofman
andElizabethLebas.Cambridge,Mass.:Blackwell.
ChristianLicoppe,2004.Connectedpresence:Theemergenceofanewrepertoireformanaging
socialrelationshipsinachangingcommunicationtechnoscape,EnvironmentandPlanningD:
SocietyandSpace,volume22,number1,pp.135156.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/d323t,accessed5November2013.
TimLindgren,2005.Bloggingplaces:LocatingpedagogyinthewherenessofWeblogs,Kairos
volume10,number1,athttp://www.technorhetoric.net/10.1/binder2.html?coverweb/lindgren/,
accessed5November2013.
RichLing,2008.Newtech,newties:Howmobilecommunicationisreshapingsocialcohesion.
Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress.
LynH.Lofland,1973.Aworldofstrangers:Orderandactioninurbanpublicspace.NewYork:Basic
Books.
KevinLynch,1960.Theimageofthecity.Cambridge,Mass.:TechnologyPress.
DavidLyon,2009.Identifyingcitizens:IDcardsassurveillance.Cambridge:Polity.
MarshallMcLuhan,1994.Understandingmedia:Theextensionsofman.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT
Press.
JoshuaMeyrowitz,1985.Nosenseofplace:Theimpactofelectronicmediaonsocialbehavior.New
York:OxfordUniversityPress.
MarkusMiessen,2010.Thenightmareofparticipation.NewYork:SternbergPress.
StanleyMilgram,1970.Theexperienceoflivingincities,Science,volume167,number3924(13
March),pp.1,4611,468.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.167.3924.1461,accessed5November2013.
DonMitchell,2003.Therighttothecity:Socialjusticeandthefightforpublicspace.NewYork:
GuilfordPress.
WilliamJ.Mitchell,1999.Etopia:Urbanlife,Jimbutnotasweknowit.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT
Press.
WilliamJ.Mitchell,1995.Cityofbits:Space,place,andtheinfobahn.Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress.
WilliamJ.Mitchell,2006.SmartCity2020,Metropolis(April),http://www.metropolismag.com/April
2006/SmartCity2020/,accessed5November2013.
ElinorOstrom,1990.Governingthecommons:Theevolutionofinstitutionsforcollectiveaction.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
EricPaulos,R.J.Honicky,andBenHooker,2008.Citizenscience:Enablingparticipatoryurbanism,
In:MarcusFoth(editor),2009.Handbookofresearchonurbaninformatics:Thepracticeand
promiseoftherealtimecity.Hershey,Pa.:InformationScienceReference.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/9781605661520.ch028,accessed5November2013.
AntoinePicon,2008.Towardacityofevents:Digitalmediaandurbanity,In:StephenRamosand
NeyranTuran(editors).NewGeographiesvolume0,pp.3243.
IthieldeSolaPool,1983.Forecastingthetelephone:Aretrospectivetechnologyassessment.
Norwood,N.J.:ABLEX.
IthieldeSolaPool(editor),1977.Thesocialimpactofthetelephone.Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress.
KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

LeePugalisandBobGiddings,2011.Arenewedrighttourbanlife:Atwentyfirstcentury
engagementwithLefebvresinitialcry,ArchitecturalTheoryReview,volume16,number3,pp.
278295.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13264826.2011.623785,accessed5November2013.
JackLinchuanQiu,2009.Workingclassnetworksociety:Communicationtechnologyandthe
informationhavelessinurbanChina.Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress.
JackLinchuanQiu,2007.Thewirelessleash:Mobilemessagingserviceasameansofcontrol,
InternationalJournalofCommunication,volume1,number1,at
http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/15,accessed5November2013.
CarloRattiandAnthonyTownsend.2011.Thesocialnexus,ScientificAmerican,volume305
(September),pp.4248.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican091142,accessed5November2013.
HowardRheingold,2012.Netsmart:Howtothriveonline.Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress.
HorstW.J.RittelandMelvinM.Webber,1973.Dilemmasinageneraltheoryofplanning,Policy
Sciences,volume4,number2,pp.155169.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730,accessed5November2013.
SaskiaSassen,1991.Theglobalcity:NewYork,London,Tokyo.Princeton,N.J.:PrincetonUniversity
Press.
TerrySchwarzandSteveRugare(editors),2009.Popupcity.Cleveland,Ohio:ClevelandUrban
DesignCollaborative,CollegeofArchitectureandEnvironmentalDesign,KentStateUniversity.
RichardSennett,1976.Thefallofpublicman.NewYork:W.W.Norton.
MarkShepard(editor),2011.Sentientcity:Ubiquitouscomputing,architecture,andthefutureof
urbanspace.Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress.
YongjunShinandDongHeeShin,2012.Communityinformaticsandthenewurbanism:
Incorporatinginformationandcommunicationtechnologiesintoplanningintegratedurban
communities,JournalofUrbanTechnology,volume19,number1,pp.2342.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2012.626698,accessed5November2013.
ClayShirky,2008.Herecomeseverybody:Thepoweroforganizingwithoutorganizations.New
York:PenguinPress.
GeorgSimmel,1997.Themetropolisandmentallife,In:DavidFrisbyandMikeFeatherstone
(editors).Simmelonculture:Selectedwritings.ThousandOaks,Calif.:Sage,pp.174186.
NigelThrift,2004.Intensitiesoffeeling:Towardsaspatialpoliticsofaffect,GeografiskaAnnaler:
SeriesB,HumanGeography,volume86,number1,pp.5778.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.04353684.2004.00154.x,accessed5November2013.
MarcTutersandMichieldeLange.2013.Executableurbanisms:MessingwithUbicompssingular
future,In:RegineBuschauerandKatharineS.Willis(editors).Medialittundrumlichkeit
Multidisziplinreperspektivenzurverortungdermedien(Multidisciplinaryperspectivesonmediaand
locality).Bielefeld:Transcript,pp.4970.
KazysVarnelis(editor),2008.Networkedpublics.Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress.
PaulVirilio,1997.Opensky.TranslatedbyJulieRose.London:Verso.
MartijndeWaal,2013.Thecityasinterface:Hownewmediaarechangingthecity.Rotterdam:NAI
Uitgevers/PublishersStichting.
MartijndeWaal,2012a.Destadalsinterface:Digitalemediaenstedelijkeopenbaarheid,
ProefschriftRijksuniversiteitGroningen.
MartijndeWaal,2012b.Theideasandidealsinurbanmedia,In:MarcusFoth,LauraForlano,
ChristineSatchell,andMartinGibbs(editors).Fromsocialbutterflytoengagedcitizen:Urban
informatics,socialmedia,ubiquitouscomputing,andmobiletechnologytosupportcitizen
engagement.Cambridge,Mass.:MITPress,pp.520.
LouisWirth,1938.Urbanismasawayoflife,AmericanJournalofSociology,volume44,number1,
pp.124.

KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\





GH/DQJH

Editorialhistory
Received20October2013accepted27October2013.

Owningthecity:NewmediaandcitizenengagementinurbandesignbyMichieldeLangeand
MartijndeWaalislicensedunderaCreativeCommonsAttribution3.0UnportedLicense.
Owningthecity:Newmediaandcitizenengagementinurbandesign
byMichieldeLangeandMartijndeWaal.
FirstMonday,Volume18,Number114November2013
http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/rt/printerFriendly/4954/3786
doi:10.5210/fm.v18i11.4954.

KWWSILUVWPRQGD\RUJRMVLQGH[SKSIPUWSULQWHU)ULHQGO\