Negotiating the urban smart grid: Socio-technical experimentation in the city of Austin

McLean, Anthony; Bulkeley, Harriet; Crang, Mike

doi:10.1177/0042098015612984

Cited by 70 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One such strategy is the smart city, which stresses the digitalization of the city (Anttiroiko ). Examples include Amsterdam Smart City (Raven et al ) and the Pecan Street Smart Grid project in Austin, Texas (McLean et al ). Cities have also led the way in creating experimentation platforms such as living labs (Tukiainen et al ; Gascó ; Kronsell and Mukhtar‐Landgren ; Raven et al ).…”

Section: A Typology Of Governance Platformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can the power of platforms be harnessed for governance?

Ansell

Miura

2019

Public Administration

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although not as eye‐catching as their business counterparts, many public and private institutions are currently experimenting with using platforms as a strategy of governance. Governance platforms are now being constructed by a wide array of actors at different geographical scales and across a wide range of issue areas. Although often enabled by digital technology, governance platforms fundamentally embody a new organizing logic to achieve distributed participation and mobilization. While private platforms are transforming the way that companies create and market their products or services and shifting the fundamental logic of how value is produced and appropriated, can this powerful organizing logic be harnessed for public as well as private purposes? We investigate how governance platforms generate powerful effects and survey the extant literature on governance platforms. We conclude that governance platforms do demonstrate promise, although they face a number of challenges.

show abstract

Section: A Typology Of Governance Platformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can the power of platforms be harnessed for governance?

Ansell

Miura

2019

Public Administration

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A large body of work has arisen in recent years -particularly within Science and Technology Studies, although not exclusivelyexamining the interplay between the organisation of society and the development of smart or future energy technology landscapes (Walker, Karvonen, & Guy, 2015;Bickerstaff, Hinton, & Bulkeley, 2016;McLean, Bulkeley, & Crang, 2016;Groves et al, 2016;Strengers & Nicholls, 2017) of which energy feedback is often regarded as "the first step" (Ballo, 2015, p.9). This work has tended to be grounded by the 'sociotechnical' paradigm, within which there is a clear acknowledgement of the co-evolving relationship between social expectations or visions and technical possibilities (Guy, 2006 (Hargreaves, Nye, & Burgess, 2010, p.6113), emphasising the variety of forms these reasons could take, and thus the multiple nature of evaluations of success.…”

Section: Multiple and Dynamic Experiences Of Smart Energy Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructing policy success for UK energy feedback

Robison

Foulds

2017

Building Research & Information

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy feedback tools are commonly used to promote energy saving. In the UK, energy feedback provision (currently via an In-Home Display) is part of the government-mandated roll-out of smart meters to all homes by 2020. A core assumption underlying this widespread provision is that information, or evidence, can lead to positive changes in action. This is analogous to assumptions underlying the notion of 'Evidence-Based Policy', which raises questions about how users, researchers and policymakers go about using evidence in aiming for a 'successful' outcome. In addition the 'policy feedback' research agenda has asked how policies alter the landscapes within which they operate by, for example, affecting relationships between actors. Via an in-depth review of DECC (now BEIS) policy literature over 2010-2016, the UK smart meter roll-out was analysed in terms of how its energy feedback focussed measures may be deemed as 'successful'.Findings include that direct energy savings played a smaller role than might be expected, and translation from one success measure to another was repeatedly observed. A key conclusion is that acting on feedback requires an assessment of success, but such assessment is highly contextual, for consumers and policymakers alike. Ways to increase reflexivity in this area are discussed.

show abstract

“…Numerous ecological modernisation policies have "already deftly demonstrated that such 'win-win' approaches to urban problems subsume environmental issues under neoliberalised concerns of 'efficiency, competitiveness, marketability, flexibility and development'" (Laidley, 2007: 261). It may be that developments towards smart cities could further splinter existing infrastructures (McLean, Bulkeley and Crang, 2016).…”

Section: Technological Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining infrastructure integration: Abstract aspirations and institutional variations

McLean¹

2017

PPP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 'integration' of infrastructures has emerged as a central discourse in how future technical networks should be designed, delivered and managed to cope with the challenges of urbanisation and climate change. However, just how a nation state or an urban region can achieve this 'integration' is unclear. Infrastructural networks differ greatly across regions, nation states and continents, and the differences in how these networks are governed and structured is often overlooked. This paper is an attempt to kick-start a discussion on the meanings and implications of infrastructure integration and to examine how it may occur in practice. The paper has two broad objectives. First, to examine the features of infrastructure integration and to categorise theoretical definitions into five forms -organisational, technological, sectoral, geographic and social. Second, to link academic discussions on infrastructural futures to longstanding debates on the institutional and regulatory variations between nations. This paper examines the institutional differences of three Western countries -the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany -and attempts to explore how variations in the concept of the state, relationships with cities, local authorities and citizens, and differing socio-economic cultures may influence and shape the potential for infrastructure integration.

show abstract

Negotiating the urban smart grid: Socio-technical experimentation in the city of Austin

Cited by 70 publications

References 42 publications

Can the power of platforms be harnessed for governance?

Can the power of platforms be harnessed for governance?

Constructing policy success for UK energy feedback

Defining infrastructure integration: Abstract aspirations and institutional variations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About