文化生產 dNetwork

IUF : Panel 1 智能城市 Smart City and Governance

智慧都市網絡作為問題意識恰恰為了指出現行科技發展與都市治理相結合的盲點。標榜促進都市生活便利性與刺激文化創造的智慧城市,往往在市府與高科技公司的合作下轉往壟斷性的強權競賽,公民權與永續發展受到忽略,是時候透過反思與討論滋生新的合作網絡與連結方法。

智慧都市網絡論壇透過三個專題討論從不同面向與規模進行思辯,上午擔當首發的智能城市專題,邀請政府官員與專家學者為我們描摹出當下盛興的智慧城市發展趨勢,也指出在資本獨霸的方法外,結合市民草根參與的可能性。

自2016年開始推行的台北智慧城市(Taipei Smart City)政策,便為我們展現不同的操作方法。有別於競逐硬體設備與世界排名,台北市政府資訊局成立的臺北智慧城市專案辦公室(Taipei Smart City Project Management Office,P.M.O.)作為公私協力的創新媒合平台,不僅致力於市民數位服務體驗的研究與反饋,同時提供中小型企業在法令諮詢與組織架構溝同,協助相關配套措施發展。耳熟能詳的例子有結合空氣品質監測與環境教育的「空氣盒子」,還有近來透過物聯網技術試辦的智慧停車格

與會發表的台北市副秘書長兼地政局長李得全則將帶來智慧生態社區的計畫回顧。自2015年起由地政局主責的智慧生態社區示範計畫透過在地工作坊凝聚公民參與及社區營造,並透過跨局處整合平台媒合產官學界,藉以將地方居民自主提案的構想轉化落實。導入治理(governance)的概念與作為,並且實踐四向參與式的治理途徑(由上而下、由下而上、由外而內以及由內而外),智慧生態社區不僅反思當前水泥化都市的永續發展危機,並且讓政府與政策面對快速變遷的環境與問題之際更具彈性。

來自愛爾蘭的人文地理學者Rob Kitchin早自千禧年前便關注網絡科技重塑的地緣政治問題,以及由日新月異的資訊科技帶來的視覺化變遷。近十年來擔任歐盟數項研究與計畫主持人,關注智慧城市治理及公民社會因之而起的反對浪潮。其將帶來的適用性鴻溝(adoption gap)分享,恰恰細緻地為我們勾勒出智慧城市浪潮底下數位縉紳化(digital gentrification)的危機及重構都市網絡的重要性。

配合電子資料庫的建置以及數位學習的推廣,數位典藏(digital archive)計畫遍行台灣各大學術機構與博物館單位。除了因應計劃案釋放出大量的補助與工作機會,數位化典藏究竟為觀眾帶來什麼樣不同的體驗?而博物館機制是否又因此重新定位與重新組夠。來自澳洲墨爾本墨爾本澳洲流動影像中心(ACMI)的Seb Chan將為我們帶來來自博物館與圖書館的機構反思。

 

李得全 (Li Te- Chuan)

臺北智慧生態社區治理之回顧與挑戰

臺北為何要推動智慧生態社區?當前全球化與全球暖化下,臺北不僅面臨城市競爭挑戰,極端氣候也更為加劇。根據跨國保險組織 Lloyd’s 保險公司與劍橋大學風險研究中心,在 104 年針對全球 301 個城市面對自然災害與事故的調查結果,臺北市被評選為全球最脆弱的城市,若市政建設繼續走過去「水泥化」的老路,未來城市永續發展將越來越堪憂。我們認為智慧生態社區是促進城市永續發展的關鍵,因為經由社會企業(組織)可紓解財富的衝突兼顧經濟發展與社會公平;生態城市可調和開發的衝突兼顧環境保育與社會公平;智慧城市可降低資源的衝突兼顧經濟發展與環境保育。 

在現存僵化、層級化與碎裂化的組織與制度下,政府往往無法面對快速變遷、 不確定性與複雜性,故需引入治理的概念與作為。治理是一種新的公共管理,他涉及權利的分享,責任的分擔,行為的互動與自主的網絡,其關鍵也涉及到民主與效率的抉擇。當前治理的模式正處於從階層(hierarchy)轉向到尺度(scales)間與網絡(network)互動的過程,故為能促進有效的治理,即需具備可操作性、互動平台、 跨域協調及目標共識等 4 項條件,並藉由四向參與式的治理途徑,以由上而下、由下而上、由外而內以及由內而外,回應當前與未來快速變遷的情勢。 

Smart Ecological Community: Review and Future Challenges

Why does Taipei City promote Smart City and IoT ecosystem collaboration? Under the globalization and global warming, Taipei is not only facing the challenge of city competition but the intensifying extreme weather. According to a survey of how cities face natural disasters and accidents, presented by the multinational insurance organization Lloyd’s Insurance Company and the University of Cambridge Risk Research Center in 2015, Taipei was assessed as the most vulnerable city worldwide. If the construction keeps following the old “concrete” path, the urban sustainability development may be concerned. We consider the Taipei Smart City and IoT ecosystem collaboration the key to urban sustainability, since social enterprises (organizations) can not only relieve the disparity of wealth but take economic development and social justice into account. Eco-city reconciles the conflict between development with environmental conservation and social justice; Smart City reduces the conflict of resource allocation between economic development and environmental conservation.

Under the existing rigid, hierarchical and fragmented organizations and systems, the government often can’t face rapid changes, uncertainty, and complexity, so it is necessary to introduce the concept of Governance. Governance is a new kind of public management, it involves the sharing of rights and responsibilities, the interaction of behaviors and the network of autonomy. The key to it involves the choice of democracy and efficiency. The current governance model is in the process of moving from the hierarchy to the interaction between scales and the network, therefore, to promote effective governance, operability, interactive platform, coordination, and common goal are four required conditions. Through the four-way participatory approach (from top to bottom, from bottom to top, from outside to inside, and from inside to outside), Governance can respond to the rapid changes of current or future situation.

 

Rob Kitchin

智慧城市與其適用性鴻溝

智慧城市議程已經制定了十多年,許多城市仍舊努力將資訊與通信科技導向的倡議導入智慧城市的願景,以使城市現行提供的服務適應新技術,進而推動智慧城市策略。透過刻畫一個於都柏林和波士頓執行的五年研究計畫,此次演講將檢視介於市政當局創造出來的智慧城市與抵抗智慧城市技術的反對聲浪之間的適用性鴻溝。我們將聚焦四個關鍵的治理議題:治理(governance)、規模(scale)、公民/公民權(citizens/citizenship),以及倫理(ethics)。本文有二點主張:其一,智慧城市政策及其部署將受制於許多結構性、制度性、政治性、倫理性、實踐性和展望性的問題阻礙,這些問題都將非常棘手,並且會延緩適用性的發生;其次,這些問題需要經由認知共同體和支持聯盟進行重新架構、重新想像和重新塑造,以達至批判性的反思和矯正。

 

Smart City Governance and the Adoption Gap

The smart city agenda is over a decade in the making, yet many cities are struggling to corral ICT-led initiatives into a smart city vision, to adapt existing city services to new technologies, and to drive forward a smart city strategy. Drawing on a five-year program of research conducted in Dublin and Boston, this talk examines the adoption gap in creating smart cities by city administrations and points of resistance with respect to the rollout of smart city technologies. It focuses on four key governmental issues: governance, scale, citizens/citizenship, and ethics. The paper argues that (1) smart city policy and deployment is hampered by a number of significant structural, institutional, political, ethical, practical and visioning issues that are fairly intractable and are set to slow on-going adoption; (2) these issues require critical reflection and redress through a reframing, reimagining and remaking of smart cities by its epistemic community and advocacy coalition.

 

Seb Chan

數位文化資產作為市政基礎設施? 機運與失敗案例分享

在過去20年裡,博物館和圖書館嘗試調整他們的做法,從收藏轉向公眾參與;與此同時,這些組織持續以不同的速度將其資產和業務數位化。這二方面的發展繼而引來針對這些組織的運作方式進行重新定位與改組。在這次的演講中,我將展示一些自己工作項目中的例子,這些項目橋接二方面的發展:通過線上與博物館內的體驗,使數位化收藏成為公眾參與的一種方式和機會。博物館或圖書館擁有「完全數位化」的收藏意味著什麼?會因此改變機構嗎?這對機構社群來說又意味著什麼?

 

 

Digital cultural heritage as civic infrastructure? Opportunities and failures

For the past two decades, museums and libraries have been reorienting their practices away from collections and towards engaging their publics. Parallel to this, these organizations have been working at various speeds to digitize their holdings and their operations. Both these developments have required a significant repositioning and restructuring of how these types of organisation operate.  In this talk, I will present some examples in my own work of projects that have attempted to build a bridge between these developments – making digitised collections a means and opportunity for civic engagement through both online and through in-museum experiences. What does it mean for a museum or library to have a ‘fully digitised’ collection? Does this, in itself, transform the institution? And what might this mean for the institution’s communities?

X