The last decade has witnessed the rise of the Smart City. Smart Cities, as they are broadly conceived, encapsulate the increasing embedding of technology into the urban infrastructures of cities across the globe^[i]. The smart city concept can best be understood as a constellation of features and potentials made up of big data, algorithmic governance and automated urban management^[ii], as well as citizens’ active engagements with technologies beyond mere ‘networked urbanism^[iii]’. Certain strands of scholarship on smart cities has claimed that the smart city represents a ‘techno-utopian fantasy’, bringing together neoliberal urban visions directed at economic growth and prosperity and efficient and equitable urban governance. Strands of this scholarship have highlighted the acute contradictions of smart urbanism, including its very different expressions across global North and South and digital divides^[iv]. Scholars working in human, urban and social geography have been particularly influential in understanding smart cities by exploring how people actually respond to new tech, amidst the wider context of big data and the digital/wider infrastructures that underpin the way cities are run and managed, as well as the kinds of social and spatial patterns that these systems produce^[v].

The city of Milan has been widely recognised as a leading innovator of urban smartness. Roberta Cocco, Councillor for Digital Transformation and Civic Services of the Municipality, suggests that Milan’s leading position in Italy on the technology front comprised of four pillars:

1) digital infrastructure (preparing the ground for transformation, including Wi-Fi, 5G and broadband),

2) digital services for citizens (to assist in public administration and bureaucracy),

3) digital education (to support citizens’ digital literacy in order to access digital services),

4) digital skills (promoting within the municipality and cross-sector partners to boost employment and careers)^[vi].

Cocco views Milan as a ‘model of experimentation’ in technological urban innovation, echoing a consensus within the municipality that other Italian cities will follow suit.

For example, through the first Milan Digital Week in 2018^[vii], the city has been publicising itself as a leading smart city, hosting numerous international events, (Figure 2), and symposiums ^[viii].

Milan’s status as a leading smart city was evident in its winning the inaugural Wellbeing Cities Award^[ix], having implemented 16 new projects that claim to promote wellbeing for the city and its communities. These range from art and education initiatives to the regeneration of particular areas of the city.

Ethnographic research conducted on the ground and online provides an opportunity to challenge this top down agenda. For example, Katrien Pype’s ethnographic research in Kinshasa, the largest and capital city in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, counters this with a perspective from the ground up, examining how residents engage with technology, combining their own expertise and creativity to produce variegated ways of “being smart in the city”. Pype asks:

‘Who is smart? And who is not? How does mastery over entering technologies relate to local repertoires of authority, power, and prestige?”^[x]

In my Milan research I have tried to explore processes of ‘smartness’ from above and below, and their inter-relatedness, with a specific focus on the response of middle and older age adults.

Routine practices in the culturally diverse neighbourhood I carried out research in included googling for health, navigating the city via geolocative maps and free WiFi zones in public space and institutions such as libraries, arranging community events, or engaging in daily WhatsApp communications.

My research shows how the use of smart city services is contingent upon socio-economic circumstances, accessibility of roaming data, WiFi, and connection speeds, and how people respond to technology in their lives. At the same time, the concept itself continues to be being challenged, as seen in the following student protest slogans in Milan during labour day protests in 2019:

 

Understanding the smart city speaks to the heart of our project and its commitment to examining the meaning of the term ‘smart’ by explaining and understanding more broadly what ‘smartness’ is, and is becoming – and for whom – in the city and beyond.

 

 

[i] Datta, A. ‘The Digital Turn in Postcolonial Urbanism: Smart Citizenship in the Making of India’s 100 Smart Cities’. In Transactions of the IBG. DOI: 10.1111/tran.12225

[ii] Leszczynski, A. (2016).  Speculative futures: Cities, data, and governance beyond smart urbanism. Environment and Planning A, 48, 1691–1708. Levien (2013). Regimes of Dispossession.

[iii] Graham, S., & Marvin, S. (2001). Splintering urbanism: Networked infrastructure, technological mobilities and the urban condition. London, UK: Routledge.

[iv] Luque-Ayala and Marvin (2015). Developing a Critical Understanding of Smart Urbanism’ in Urban Studies 52(12): 2106-2116.

[v] The work of Ayona Datta on Smart Cities https://ayonadatta.com and digital urban transformations in India https://ayonadatta.com , and Gillian Rose on smart cities and the (visual-digital) production of knowledge continues to be particularly insightful: https://www.urbantransformations.ox.ac.uk/project/smart-cities-in-the-making-learning-from-milton-keynes/

[vi] https://www.morningfuture.com/en/article/2019/04/17/smart-city-milano-roberta-cocco/596/ (Accessed: 19/11/19).

[vii] Milan has long been known for its world famous annual fashion week and design weeks, but since 2018 it has introduced ‘Milan Digital Week’, reflecting the city’s increasingly digital-orientated focus and shifts in the image of the city as predominantly fashion capital to the recent emergence as a digital capital, certainly of Italy, but also more broadly within Europe. https://www.milanodigitalweek.com

[viii] The founding of the ‘Milan Smart City Conference’ in November 2019 is a notable example of this contemporary push towards developing Milan’s leading reputation as a global smart city in the contemporary technological moment of the launch of the first applications for 5G. Three core concerns of the 2019 Milan Smart City Conference are stated as: ‘Infrastructure’, ‘Security’ and ‘Smart Mobility’. See the conference website here: https://www.smartbuildingitalia.it/en/smart-city-conference/

[ix] https://www.smartcitiesworld.net/news/news/milan-crowned-top-city-for-wellbeing-4212

[x] Pype, K. (2017). ‘Smartness from Below: Variations on Technology and Creativity in Contemporary Kinshasa’ in Mavhunga, C, C. What Do Science, Technology And Innovation Mean from Africa?; pp. 97 – 115

Italy has a rapidly ageing population, with 28% of the population over 60 – the second highest percentage globally after Japan [1]. Changing work patterns, and external youth migration following the economic crisis, has left behind a generation of ageing parents and grandparents without traditional structures of family care. Since the 1990s, a significant presence in the care sector in Italy have been migrant carers. Often referred to in Italian as badanti (singular badante), migrant care workers constitute an important form of elderly care not provided by a family member [2]. As a consequence, a transformation has been observed from a family to a ‘migrant-in-the-family’ model of care [3]. In these circumstances, it has been suggested that migrants help Italian families to maintain valuable traditions of family care [4].

All the while, the nascent relationship between Italian elders and badanti raises some notable contradictions within Italian politics and society concerning care and migration. As the indispensability of informal migrant care becomes ever more apparent, the country continues to debate immigration policy, in the run up to a general election in March 2018.

As an anthropologist I am seeking a wide-angle view of ageing and caring in multicultural Italy. This requires a suspending of categories – of migrant, refugee, asylum seeker or badante – in order to engage with Italy’s various mobile and transnational populations who are themselves ageing – often away from their homelands. Who cares for who and how? How are everyday ailments dealt with? And what forms of communication are involved – for example, how do smartphones and Googling affect traditional health/care practices and notions of wellbeing? These are just some of the issues I will be exploring, in public and private spaces, on- and offline, in a multicultural neighbourhood of Milan where I will be living for 16 months.

References:

[1] United Nations 2015 World Population Ageing Report

[2] Van Hooven (2010). ‘When Families Need Immigrants: The Exceptional Position of Migrant Domestic Workers and Care Assistants in Italian Immigration Policy’. Bulletin of Italian Politics. Vol. 2, Issue: 2, pp. 21-38.

[3] Bettio, F., Simonazzi, A. and Villa, P. (2006), ‘Change in Care Regimes and Female Migration: the “Care Drain” in the Mediterranean’, Journal of European Social Policy. Vol. 16, Issue 3, pp. 271-85.

[4] Rugolotto, S., Larotonda, A., van der Geest, S., (2017)., ‘How Migrants Keep Italian Families Italian: Badanti and the Private Care of Older People.’ International Journal of Migration, Health and Social Care. Vol. 13 Issue: 2, pp.185-197.