Smart and (Un)Sustainable? Empowering Manchester's Youth to Reform the Smart City

让智慧城市变得具体和负责任是一项挑战。根植于技术乌托邦信仰体系的无障碍集成技术（Sadowski和Pasquale，2015）被实施到新自由主义理想的城市结构中，“以效率”可持续性和对市场需求至关重要的选择自由为模型（Cardullo和Kitchin，2019，p.824）。作为一种主要的技术乌托邦式的城市管理和治理方法，占主导地位的政府认为城市功能可以通过技术解决方案来优化或解决（霍布斯-摩根，2017;莫罗佐夫，2013）。然而，日常的结构性问题并没有得到解决。城市核心围绕品牌策略和“公民关注”，“可持续”或“生态”标签，相当于绿色的象征（De Jong，2019）。聪明的城市主义者话语的核心在于巧妙的营销发展战略，促进尖端技术的实施，以推动经济增长，同时通过“绿色增长”的崇高言论减少对环境的影响（Trencher和Karvonen，2019）。然而，对公民参与、利益分配不均以及社会公平与新兴“双速城市”之间不相容的性质的担忧出现了（Martin等人，2018年）。我们看到的不是被赋予权力的公民，而是高效系统和基础设施的关键组成部分。因此，挑战智能、可持续和技术乐观主义战略之间不断演变的关系至关重要。Klein（2014）呼吁从社会技术的角度出发，对我们的城市未来采取更全面的方法，使智能与可持续的城市交通不再作为不一致的范式存在（里昂，2018）。

Rendering smart cities concrete and accountable is challenging. Seamlessly integrated technologiesrooted in techno-utopian belief systems (Sadowski and Pasquale, 2015) are implemented into theurban fabric under neoliberal ideals 'modelled on dogmas of efficiency' sustainability, and freedom of choice crucial to market imperatives (Cardullo and Kitchin, 2019, p.824). A predominantly techno-utopian approach to city management and governance, dominant imaginaries presume urbanfunctioning can be optimised or addressed through technological solutions (Hobbs-Morgan, 2017;Morozov, 2013). Everyday structural problems are not, however, confronted. Urban cores centrearound branding tactics and 'citizen focus', 'sustainable' or 'eco' labels amounting to little more thantokens of greenness (De Jong, 2019). At the heart of smart urbanist discourse lies cleverly marketeddevelopment strategies promoting implementation of cutting-edge technologies to fuel economicgrowth whilst simultaneously reducing environmental impacts through lofty rhetoric of 'greengrowth' (Trencher and Karvonen, 2019). However, concerns towards citizen involvement, unevendistribution of benefits, and theincompatible nature between social equity and emerging 'two-speedcities' arise (Martin et al ., 2018). Instead of empowered citizens, we witness key components ofefficient systems and infrastructures. It is henceforth crucial to challenge evolving relationshipsbetween smart, sustainable, and techno-optimist strategies. Klein (2014) has called for asociotechnical perspective warranting more holistic approaches to our urban futures whereby smartversus sustainable urban mobilities no longer exist as unaligned paradigms (Lyons, 2018).