How Smart can a “Smart City” be?

An event debating Smart Cities was carried out on June 23^rd, featuring the themes of Society and Technology, at the Polytechnic School of University of São Paulo. Promoted by the Society and Technology Study Center (CEST) alongside InternetLab, the event hosted the participation of specialists from different fields of knowledge, such as architecture and urbanism, psychiatry, communications, engineering and law. The objective was to put forward the most varied and plural visions regarding the smart city theme, as well as adapting the discussion to the Brazilian scenery.

Professor Dr. Clóvis Alvarenga Netto introduced the thematic to the public questioning the validity of the name Smart Cities. How smart are these cities? This was the first provocation put forward by the speakers. According to Professor Alvarenga the foreign examples must be adapted, for the reality of Brazil is very distinct – in this way, what is considered “smart” in other countries may not be what is adequate to Brazil.

Architect and urbanist Caio Vassão questioned the objective rationality that permeates the thematic of Smart Cities, and made the initial provocations, believing necessary a deeper debate regarding the subject. To the specialist, the citizen must take part in the construction of its city. To this, a cooperation between the civil society and those who proportionate the city – like politicians, engineers, among others – would prove interesting.

Juliana Nolasco, manager of public policy for Google Brasil, as also participated in the initial talks. At the beginning of her speech, she talked about the internet of things approach that, according to Nolasco, is the joining of the internet with the physical world, like smart trashcans or smart toasters. She pointed to the necessity of a good use of “smart things”, since we imagine smart cities as the application of technologies on urban spaces. Population’s participation and engagement, however, was pointed as the most important aspect in the construction of a smart city. A famous example is the Waze application, and the fact that counts on its users to indicate places of heavy traffic, accidents, radars, etc.

After the initial propositions, a round table debate took place with the participation of six specialists from different fields of knowledge. Lucas Girard, from CEST, mediated the debate alongside Francisco Brito Cruz, from InternetLab.

Professor Dr. André Lemos began his speech by making a rupture in the conception that technology is necessarily connected to smart cities, by saying that each city is smart in its own way. He also highlighted the main challenges of having the urban infrastructures too “connected”, such as hacking the urban systems that are connected to the internet.

Fernando Gebara, professional from the area of international normalization, and Ana Paulo Bruno, urbanist that also works with the Ministry of Cities, both tackled similar topics. They highlighted the need of accessibility of smart cities for people with disabilities, as well as the fact that some technological horizons are very distant from the real needs of Brazil, such as reduction in social inequalities.

Hernamo Tavares, professor and physician from the Institute of Psychiatry of University of São Paulo, asked to the public who had a smartphone in their pocket at that moment. As expect, everyone confirmed. With this questioning, he meant to show how technology is overbearingly present in our daily lives.

João Thiago Poço, manager of business development at Microsoft, spoke again on the importance of popular participation, as well as the necessity of public policies to the construction of smart cities, including the matter of privacy. Next was Jacqueline Abreu, coordinator of the “Vigilance and Privacy” area at InternetLab, which returned to the idea of the dangers of hacking, be it sensors, applications, etc. She was also concerned with the uses of citizen’s data and its privacy. In this way, the first part of the round table was finished.

After the coffee break, the second part begun. André Lemos spoke on the benefits of technology in society, and mentioned as an example the public trashcans in Dublin that alerts the waste collectors when full, as a way to avoid unnecessary trips to the empty ones. However, Ana Paulo Bruno believes that, in this scenario, a more intelligent solution would be one that diminishes the volume of waste altogether, although she does also see the positive points of using the technology. Jacqueline Abreu, on the other hand, criticized the technological advances that are excluding. She supposes that if said trashcans were to be implemented, they would figure in the central parts of town.

In this aspect, Hermano Tavares criticized the relationship between individuals and public spaces. In contrast, Ana Paula believes there is a movement nowadays to the appropriations of these spaces.

Right after the initial expositions in this table there was a first moment for questions. When asked about the necessity of setting right the negative ways of individuals’ relationships with the urban space, before thinking about smart cities, André e João responded that the technology plays a great role to help the correction, but that is also depends on collective help from citizens themselves. Hermano said that there should be an education program to people that are inserted in technology, and Jacqueline affirmed that only “smart citizens” could correct urban mistakes.

In the last round of the seminar, the importance of sustainable cities, instead of smart cities, was questioned, as well as how to maintain data privacy in the context of technological advances. André Lemos said that social awareness movements towards a sustainable society already exist, although we cannot depend on its results alone – therefore, smart cities projects are important. Hermano and Fernando say their goodbyes after agreeing on the importance of privacy in the technology age. Jacqueline affirmed that even though we are in an era of technological advances, the right to privacy is indispensable and encompasses all and any citizens. João criticized big companies for their use of clients’ private data for their own profits. At the end, Ana Paula closed the discussion talking about the importance of technology as a tool for political interferences.

Click here to go to the event’s page and have access to the lectures, interviews and pictures.