Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Who Trusts in the Smart City?

Electronic data


Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Who Trusts in the Smart City?: Transparency, Governance and the Internet of Things

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

  • Naomi Jacobs
  • Peter Edwards
  • Milan Markovic
  • Caitlin Cottrill
  • Karen Salt
Article numbere11
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>14/07/2020
<mark>Journal</mark>Data & Policy
Number of pages9
Publication StatusPublished
<mark>Original language</mark>English


Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as connected sensors are increasingly being used in the public sector, often deployed and collecting data in public spaces. A theme commonly seen in the rhetoric surrounding public space IoT initiatives is empowerment, and these deployments are broadly perceived as beneficial by policy makers. However, such technology presents new governance challenges. It is important to ask who is empowered and who benefits, and we must ensure that such technological interventions follow democratic principles and are trusted by citizens.

In this paper we investigate how risk, transparency and data governance require careful consideration in this domain, describing work which investigates how these combine to form components of trusted IoT ecosystems. This includes an overview of the landscape of public space IoT deployments, consideration of how they may often be subsumed in idealized smart city focused rhetoric, and discussion of how methodologies such as design fiction in community settings can uncover potential risks and concerns. Our findings suggest that agency, value and intent associated with IoT systems are key components that must be made transparent, particularly when multiple actors and stakeholders are involved.

We suggest that good governance requires consideration of these systems in their entirety, throughout the full planning, implementation and evaluation process, and in consultation with multiple stakeholders who are impacted, including the public. To achieve this effectively, we argue for transparency at the device and system level, which may require legislative change.