The role of ecological modernization discourse in smart cities : analyzing the case of the Amsterdam Smart City Partnership

(1)

The Role of Ecological Modernization Discourse in

Smart Cities: Analyzing the Case of the Amsterdam

Smart City Partnership

J. (Jonathan) Dul (10003517)

June 23, 2016

Master Thesis Political Science – International Relations Graduate School of Social Sciences, University of Amsterdam

Supervisor: Dr. L.W. (Luc) Fransen

(2)

Abstract

___________________________________________________________________________ Ecological modernization and smart cities are both subject to discussion with regards to the importance they give to environmental interests. Since the ecological modernization discourse is likely to be present in smart city initiatives, this thesis is guided by the following research question: How does the ecological modernization discourse in smart city initiatives influence the importance of the

environmental aspect of smart city initiatives? The causal relationship between the ecological

modernization discourse and the importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities is deductively examined in a qualitative research approach using descriptive discourse analysis and directed content analysis. The case of the Amsterdam Smart City (ASC) partnership is analyzed by focusing on its eight founding partners. The findings show a limited importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities. Even though evidence for the presence of alternative discourses and different explanatory mechanisms was recognized, the findings show it is plausible that the presence of the ecological modernization discourse leads to a lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities. To understand this relationship, the findings point to the presence of non-confrontational behavior and a technological fix. This thesis provides a starting point for further research on the intersection of smart cities and ecological modernization, and encourages policymakers and others interested in smart city concepts to evaluate the importance of the theme of environmental sustainability in comparison to the other themes in smart cities.

(3)

PART 1. INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH DESIGN

1. Introduction

___________________________________________________________________________ Most people live in cities, which are the most polluting areas in the world. Therefore, making cities environmentally sustainable is often regarded as very important to realizing a sustainable future (Bulkeley & Betsill, 2005). The implementation of smart technologies is seen as a tool towards sustainable cities (Chourbai et al., 2012). The smart city concept is often related to more planning, control and efficiency in order to solve problems considering urban living (Neirotti et al., 2014). Its central aim is to improve quality of living of urban citizens. ICT systems are key in achieving this goal, hence the notion of ‘smart’ cities. For example: sensors in all parking lots in the city center of Amsterdam that connect to navigation systems in cars ensure that traffic looking for parking space, which is thirty percent of all traffic in Amsterdam’s city center, is reduced to a minimum. The result is reduced searching time, less use of petrol and less pollution in the streets of Amsterdam, favoring the environmental sustainability of the city. Besides serving the green cause, smart city technologies also aim at improvements in other domains, namely: management and organization, technology, governance, policy context, people and communities, economy, and built infrastructure (Chourabi et al., 2012). Especially business interests are well represented within smart cities (Hollands, 2008: 308). Smart cities’ combination of serving both business interests and environmental interests fits the ecological modernization discourse. This discourse assumes the compatibility of ecology and economy, and emphasizes the value of technological innovation for sustainable development. Analysis of academic literature shows that the ecological modernization discourse is likely to be the primary discourse in smart city initiatives.

However, some argue that environmental interests are inadequately represented in ecological modernization-oriented initiatives. Besides that, the importance of environmental sustainability in the context of smart cities is topic of debate. Viitanen and Kingston (2014) are critical on smart city solutions and question whether they are actually that green. According to them, the ‘green growth’ framework is serving the global technology sector’s objective of expanding their market, rather than serving a green environment. The parking lot sensor example as mentioned above shows this potential environmental downside of smart city projects: the sensors need batteries, navigation systems need electricity, and the data centers that

(6)

collect and process all data consume lots of energy. This poses an interesting question: is the environmental aspect of smart cities as important as many think?

This thesis explores the controversy as outlined above. The ecological modernization discourse is likely to be present in smart cities, and both ecological modernization and smart cities are being questioned about their ability to truly favor environmental sustainability. Therefore, this thesis analyzes the influence of the ecological modernization discourse on the environmental aspect of smart cities. The following research question is answered: How does the

ecological modernization discourse in smart city initiatives influence the importance of the environmental aspect of smart city initiatives?

1.1. Outline of the thesis

The thesis applies a deductive research method in order to answer the research question. A theoretical framework is derived from different academic sources. Five hypotheses, describing the causal relationships at hand, are proposed. Two variables are hypothesized as mediating the relationship between the ecological modernization discourse and a lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities: non-confrontational behavior and a technological fix. These hypotheses are examined in a positivist research design that qualitatively analyzes whether or not the four key variables in this research are present: ecological modernization discourse (independent variable); the lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart cites (dependent variable); non-confrontational behavior (mediator variable); and technological fix (mediator variable). Data is collected through interviews and document analysis. In contrast to the popular use of critical discourse analysis, this thesis uses the method of descriptive discourse analysis, which enables the researcher to recognize the presence of the discourse at hand. It is applied to integrate discourse in an analysis of causal relationships that also recognizes other factors and variables that play a role, rather than assuming that everything is shaped through and within discourses.

Taking the critical case of the Amsterdam Smart City (ASC) partnership as an example, the thesis shows that although some conflicting findings are recognized, it is plausible that the ecological modernization discourse in smart cities leads to a lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities. Moreover, the presence of the mediating variables, namely non-confrontational behavior and technological fix, plausibly explain the causal relationship as described above. Besides the hypothesized relationships, another explanation for the lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities is found: other themes, such as mobility,

(7)

safety, and data, seem to be more urgent and popular urban issues, resulting a lack of importance of the environmental sustainability issue.

The following chapters discuss how this research reached its conclusions. The second chapter provides a brief literature review of smart cities and ecological modernization, in order to show the theoretical relevance of this thesis. Chapter 3 presents the central research question and sub-questions that guide the analysis. The fourth chapter discusses the theoretical concepts at hand, provides the theoretical framework, and proposes a conceptual model. The fifth chapter discusses the methodology in order to deductively examine the proposed conceptual model. Chapter 6 elaborates on the empirical case of this research: the ASC partnership. Chapter 7, 8, and 9 present the empirical findings of the research. In the ninth chapter, the findings are wrapped up and the conclusions are presented, together with comments on the relevance and shortcomings of the research, and directions for further research are proposed.

(8)

2. Literature Review

___________________________________________________________________________ Through a brief literature review, this chapter presents the theoretical relevance of this thesis. First, relevant literature on smart cities is discussed to indicate that the lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities is underexposed in the smart city literature. Then, this brief review shows that even though there is evidence found in the literature that links ecological modernization to smart cities, no research has yet been done on the intersection of smart cities and ecological modernization.

2.1. Reviewing Smart City Literature

The smart city concept has been receiving an increasing amount of attention in academic literature (De Jong et al., 2015). Many articles focus on the application of smart technologies from a more technical perspective and are mostly found in computer science journals, information studies journals, and (sustainable) energy related journals. Other scholars mostly focus on the different definitions and labels that surround the smart city concept. Some are mostly interested in providing operational tools such as frameworks and definitions for the sake of researching the topic (Caragliu et al., 2011; Chourabi et al., 2012). Others focus on the multitude of concepts that is similar to smart cities and look into their popularity, differences, and similarities (De Jong et al., 2015). Besides that, some are mostly concerned with what the label of smart cities reveals and hides, questioning the ‘assumptions and contradictions hidden within the concept’ (Hollands, 2008: 303). Another strain of articles aims at analyzing the critical factors and features surrounding smart cities (Chourabi et al., 2012; Joss et al., 2013). However, the dangers of smart cities are also discussed in the literature. It is argued that caution is needed regarding the technological determination of eco-friendly smart city strategies. The argument that smart cities lead to more democratization is possibly misleading (Viitanen & Kingston, 2014). Moreover, the extent to which business interests and environmental interests are compatible in this case is questioned (Hollands, 2008: 313; Joss et al., 2013; Viitanen & Kingston, 2014). According to these authors, applying too many smart technologies in cities is potentially dangerous for the environment, due to the rising energy demand and increasing electronic waste that results from these applications. This thesis investigates the above-described controversy. There is much room left to research the environmental aspect of smart cities, since there is no consensus in the literature whether or not smart cities are as green as they are claimed to be.

(9)

2.2. Linking Smart Cities to the Ecological Modernization Literature

It is very possible that the ecological modernization perspective is also playing an important role in the smart city concept. In environmental policymaking the ecological modernization perspective is often used by ‘governmental administrations, political parties, as well as environmental movements […] to refer to their main aims and strategies’ (Mol et al., 2014: 20). The ecological modernization argument that economic and environmental interests are able to travel together well is often commonly accepted. It is very interesting that the importance of environmental interests is questioned in the literature about ecological modernization-oriented initiatives (Coffey & Marston, 2013; Lidskog & Elander, 2012). This is comparable to the way some scholars challenge the ‘greenness’ of smart cities. Stakeholders in smart city initiatives might be driven by their ecological modernization perspective in pursuing smart city initiatives, serving both economic and environmental interests. Moreover, smart technologies fit the ecological modernization assumption that new technologies are able to facilitate sustainable development. However, to the knowledge of the author, no research has been conducted on the intersection of ecological modernization and smart cities. Thus, this research is the first to discuss the role of the ecological modernization perspective in relation to smart cities. The above indicates that there might be a relation between the presence of the ecological modernization discourse and smart city initiatives in which the importance of environmental interests is lacking.

Summarizing, this thesis investigates a controversy surrounding smart cities and ecological modernization: both concepts are questioned with regards to their claim to environmental sustainability. However, the existence of a relationship between the two has never been examined. The ecological modernization discourse is one of the most popular discourses in environmental policymaking, so it is likely also to be popular in smart city initiatives. This thesis discusses whether or not the ecological modernization discourse is apparent in smart city initiatives and if this discourse plausibly influences the environmental aspect of smart city initiatives. By doing this, another case is added to provide fuel for the discussion about whether or not smart cities are as green as they are stated to be. Besides that, it adds to smart city literature by establishing whether or not ecological modernization plays a role in smart city outcomes. Moreover, it adds to ecological modernization literature by examining the arguments that ecological modernization potentially favors economic interests over ecological interests, by looking at the case of smart cities.

(10)

3. Research Questions

___________________________________________________________________________ To shed light on the controversies as indicated above, this thesis aims at finding out what the influence is of the ecological modernization discourse on the importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities. The following research question is central in this thesis:

How does the ecological modernization discourse in smart city initiatives influence the importance of the environmental aspect of smart city initiatives?

The following sub-questions are answered as well in order to provide a comprehensive answer to the central questions of this thesis:

1. What is ecological modernization?

2. How is the ecological modernization discourse recognized in language? 3. What are smart cities?

4. Is the ecological modernization discourse the primary discourse in smart city initiatives? 5. How important is the environmental aspect within smart city initiatives?

6. What mechanisms explain the effect that ecological modernization discourse has on the importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities?

(11)

4. Theory

___________________________________________________________________________ This chapter discusses the theoretical concepts and framework guiding the analysis of smart cities. First, ecological modernization is discussed. The discussion emphasizes that this thesis deals with weak ecological modernization, provides a short overview of what the theoretical concept entails and elaborates on the ecological modernization discourse and its discursive features. Then, the smart city concept is defined and explored. After that, the theoretical framework of this thesis is proposed. Five hypotheses are derived from different assumptions in the literature. These hypotheses describe the causal relationship between ecological modernization discourse and the environmental aspect of smart cities and provide an explanation for that relationship through two mediating variables: non-confrontational behavior and a technological fix. The empirical part of this thesis later deductively examines these different hypotheses, taking a positivist stance.

4.1. Ecological Modernization

Here, the first sub-question of this thesis is answered: What is ecological modernization? Ecological modernization’s main assumption is that economic and environmental interests can be combined to the benefit of both. It can be seen as a rather optimistic approach to environmental issues, since it assumes that modernization and increasing economic profits do not necessarily harm the environment, but can actually help towards a sustainable future (Hajer, 1995). This is a very attractive perspective for stakeholders in policymaking processes, because it provides them with a promise that environmental interests are not a burden, but a driver for economic growth (among others: Hilding-Rydevik et al., 2011; Jänicke, 2008; Krueger & Gibbs, 2007; Milanez & Bührs, 2007).

Ecological modernization is a concept that has been used in many different ways in the literature. Buttel distinguishes three different usages of ecological modernization (2000: 58-59). Firstly ecological modernization can refer to a school of thought that emphasizes the compatibility of economic growth and environmental protection. Secondly, ecological modernization is seen as a discourse that is prevailing in environmental policy and thus is steering society in a specific way. Thirdly, ecological modernization is used as a term that refers to strategic environmental management, industrial ecology and eco-restructuring in the private industry. In this thesis, when using the term ‘ecological modernization’, it refers to the school of

(12)

thought of ecological modernization. When discussing the discourse of ecological modernization, it is consequently called the ‘ecological modernization discourse’.

Christoff (1996) recognizes two types of ecological modernization: strong and weak. Strong ecological modernization is critical towards the existing approach to sustainable development. It sees the need for social and institutional transformation in order to deal with the current environmental issues. The strong version asks for more democratization, institutional reflexivity and a more bottom-up environmental regulation. Weak ecological modernization, on the other hand, is the economistic, neo-liberal and technocratic version of ecological modernization. For the purpose of this paper, the ecological modernization definition corresponds to the weak version, which is the most widely spread and common definition of ecological modernization (Bäckstrand & Lövbrand, 2006).

The following paragraphs first discuss what ecological modernization is by discussing the four domains of ecological modernization: technological domain, economic domain, political domain, and the domain of social movements. After that, the discursive features of the ecological modernization discourse are highlighted in order to provide a handhold for the empirical analysis of this thesis.

4.1.1 Domains of ecological modernization

Technology and science

Science and technology are key features of ecological modernization (Jänicke, 1993, 2008; Hüber, 198, 2004). The drive for modernization in the 1980s, combined with the realization that long-term environmentally friendly technologies were needed, brought about the concept of ecological modernization (Jänicke, 2008: 557). A highly important assumption is that a sustainable future is realized through innovation and technological change. Ecological modernization refers to both incremental innovation (cleaner technology) and radical innovations (clean technology) (Jänicke, 2008: 558). Old technologies that heavily damage the environment are being improved or replaced by new and cleaner technologies. These clean technologies are more efficient, reducing consumption of the planet’s resources and decreasing pollution levels. Innovation and competition in the marketplace should even further enhance the technological change towards environmental sustainability (Andersen & Massa, 2000: 337). Besides technological innovation, there is also an important role for science in establishing maximum pollution levels and indicating the critical level of environmental change (Hajer, 1995: 27). This means it is the task of scientists to keep an eye on environmental developments and the feasibility of environmental behavior.

(13)

Economy and business

The economic domain is also highly important in ecological modernization. The main assumption of ecological modernization with regards to the economic domain is the fact that economy and ecology are interdependent and do not oppose each other. Maarten Hajer, who was the first to recognize ecological modernization as a discourse and to treat it as such, strongly influenced later analyses of ecological modernization (discourse) with his book The Politics of

Environmental Discourse (1995). Hajer recognizes three central economic characteristics of

ecological modernization (1995: 25-26). Firstly, ecological modernization uses monetary concepts and concepts from natural sciences in order to make environmental degradation calculable. This enables different stakeholders in environmental protection and economic growth to find each other in a common language to talk about the costs and benefits of pollution. Second, ecological modernization assumes that environmental protection is a positive-sum game, meaning that the earlier assumed zero-sum game between ecology and economy is rejected, since they are believed to enhance each other. This relates to the third economic characteristic of ecological modernization: economic growth and environmental protection can be reconciled. It shows how ecological modernization strongly believes in the fruitful combination of ecological and economic interests.

Politics and legislation

With regards to the political sphere, ecological modernization does not call for radical changes. In principle, it assumes that existing institutions can incorporate and take care for the environment (Hajer, 1995: 25). However, ecological modernization does emphasize the need for some reorientation of the state and the market (Mol, 1997: 142). Even though ecological modernization is critical of a strong and bureaucratic state, it acknowledges the importance of environmental management of the state. Instead of being curative and reactive, the state ought to be preventive with regards to environmental problems. Moreover, a closed and centralized policymaking process needs to be replaced by participatory, decentralized and technocratic expert-led environmental policymaking (Hajer, 1995: 26-29). Private economic actors are seen as important players in this process, through certification, environmental audits, and competition on environmental performance. In all, ecological modernization leaves less initiative for environmental reform directly at the state, but more at societal and economic actors (Paehlke & Torgerson, 1990). Ecological modernization does not call for radical political reforms, but calls for a slightly changing relationship between state, society, and economy.

(14)

Social movements

The role of social movements is also addressed by ecological modernization (Mol, 1997: 141-142). Originally, social movements were mostly concerned with getting the environment on the political and public agenda. Besides their role as an initiator trying to push for environmental change, social movements also had a role as outside commentator reflecting on societal developments. They were mostly critical towards the way business and governments were dealing with environmental problems. However, in accordance with ecological modernization, social movements’ role is changing. Instead of being a critical outsider, they are becoming a critical and independent participant within environmental developments (Mol, 1997: 142). Especially their ability to influence consumers, organize public support en come up with new and creative ideas is used to assist the other actors that are trying to come up with solutions for the ecological problems in modern society. This means that social movements are included in decision-making about solutions towards ecological change, instead of being the actor that criticizes and attacks these solutions.

4.1.2. Ecological modernization discourse

The ecological modernization discourse is a particular way of talking about environmental sustainability. It is one of the most common discourses in environmental discussions. This discourse is a language in environmental politics that reflects the school of thought of ecological modernization as outlined before. The section above shows the domains in which ecological modernization is present and explains the school of thought. For the quality of the analysis of this thesis, it is also important to know how the ecological modernization discourse is used in the language of people. This section briefly discusses the discursive features of ecological modernization and hence answers the second sub-question of this thesis: How is the ecological

modernization discourse recognized in language? These features are mostly taken from Hajer’s highly

influential book on ecological modernization as a discourse (1995). Several other expressions of the ecological modernization discourse deriving from other literature on ecological modernization complement this. Appendix A shows an overview of all the different expressions of the ecological modernization discourse as described below.

Discursive features concerning technology and science

In the domain of technology, one major concept that is present in the ecological modernization discourse is recognized when people talk about technological innovation as making products and production processes less harmful for the environment (Hajer, 1995: 35). Moreover, seeing

(15)

ecological crises as a vehicle for innovation is another expression of ecological modernization discourse (Hajer, 1995: 32). Talking about scientists as having a crucial role in measuring the critical levels of pollution and measuring effects of different processes is also used in ecological modernization discourse (Hajer, 1995: 27).

Discursive features concerning economy and business

With regards to the economic domain, one of the best-known expressions of ecological modernization is the phrase ‘pollution prevention pays’ (Hajer, 1995: 27), which means that environmental protection leads to economic profits. Another economic expression of ecological modernization is talking about the environment in language of business: inefficiencies, cost-effectiveness, positive-sum game, and as a challenge for business (Hajer, 1995: 31). Also, using monetary terms to talk about environmental degradation/protection is typical for the ecological modernization discourse (Hajer, 1995: 26). Moreover, a discursive feature of the ecological modernization discourse is recognized when discussing environmental technological innovation as a marketing tool for businesses, in order to meet the needs of multiple actors in society (Jänicke, 2008: 563). Besides that, seeing environmental protection as ‘a precondition of long-term economic development’ is an important discursive feature of ecological modernization (Christoff, 1996: 484).

Discursive features concerning politics and legislation

In the political domain, the most important discursive feature of ecological modernization is recognized when someone argues that radical political change is not needed and that social contradictions of capitalism do not need to be addressed (Hajer, 1995: 32). Arguing for some slight changes in the political domain are, however, expressions of ecological modernization. For instance, an emphasis on the importance of technocratic policymaking by inducing expert-led processes of change is an articulation of ecological modernization discourse (Hajer, 1995: 32). Moreover, the need for participatory processes and collective action that include multiple actors from society and industry is also a discursive feature of ecological modernization (Poncelet, 2001: 20). This means that the emphasis on cooperation between different actors is strongly expressed in the ecological modernization discourse (Hajer, 1995: 26). Also, concerning legislation, a typical expression of ecological modernization discourse is that the burden of proof is the concern of the suspected polluter, not the burden of the damaged or prosecuting party (Hajer, 1995: 28). Lastly, an important notion of ecological modernization is recognized when

(16)

nature is framed as a public good or resource, instead of being a free good that can be used as a sink (Hajer, 1995: 28).

Discursive features concerning social movements

With regards to the domain of social movements, the most common discursive feature of ecological modernization is recognized when talking about the role of social movements as being direct and increasingly important in ecological transformation (Mol, 1995: 48). The importance of social movements to work together with market actors and government officials, instead of opposing them, is also an expression of ecological modernization (Mol, 1995: 58, 2000: 49). Moreover, seeing their role as decreasing in environmental agenda setting and transforming from radical opposition towards structural contribution is a discursive feature of the ecological modernization discourse (Mol, 2000: 48-49).

4.2. Smart Cities

Explaining the concept of smart cities is also important for the clarity of this thesis. First, the use of the concept of smart cities is analyzed and a definition of a smart city is provided. After that, the domains of smart city will be discussed in order to find out what smart city actually comprises. By doing this, the third sub-question is answered: What are smart cities?

4.2.1. Defining a smart city

Providing a definition of smart city is difficult, considering the fact that the term is widely used for many different kinds of projects and initiatives. The use of the term in academic literature has vastly increased since 2009 (De Jong et al., 2015: 29). It commonly refers to an infrastructure that improves economic and political efficiency and enables social, cultural and urban development (Hollands, 2008: 308). This often relates to ICT infrastructure, but the concept also refers to all kinds of other networks, such as networks of people, businesses and lifestyle services. Often, business-driven development is emphasized in the context of smart cities (Hollands, 2008: 308). Besides that, social inclusion of citizens in public services is also important in smart cities (Caragliu et al., 2011: 68). Moreover, the absorptive capacity of a smart city is emphasized in the literature: a city’s community needs to be able to use technology to learn, adapt, and innovate (Coe et al., 2001). Lastly, social and environmental sustainability is often regarded as being interweaved into the smart city concept (Caragliu et al., 2011: 69). Considering the above, the following definition of a smart city is most inclusive: a city is smart “when investments in human and social capital and traditional (transport) and modern (ICT)

(17)

communication infrastructure fuel sustainable economic growth and a high quality of life, with a wise management of natural resources, through participatory governance” (Caragliu et al., 2011: 79). As this definition indicates, smart city initiatives are dealing with multiple types of interests: economic (‘economic growth’), social (‘quality of life’), and environmental (‘natural resources’). Serving these interests through human and social capital, and through traditional and modern communication infrastructure, is the core of what a smart city does. Smart city initiatives often come in so-called partnerships, since smart cities often include many actors from government, society and industry, stimulating the previously mentioned participatory governance.

4.2.2. Domains of a smart city

Having defined the smart city concept, it is worthwhile to see in what domains smart city initiatives are carried out and what their functionality is within these domains. Chourabi et al. (2012) distinguish eight different clusters of factors that play a role in smart cities. In these domains, smart city initiatives are relevant in different ways.

Management and organization

Smart city initiatives can play an important role in management and organization of the government, through different types of solutions. Currently, mostly e-government solutions apply to this domain (Chourabi et al., 2012: 2291), but there is space for other smart city solutions such as networks of citizens or businesses that can help to better manage and organize the city.

Technology

Smart cities are often related to smart technologies and thus the domain of technology plays an important part in smart city initiatives. In most cases, smart city initiatives are reliant on technological innovations, with a strong focus on ICT related technologies (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2291). Although smart city technology is often seen as a driver of quality of life, the true impact is still unclear. Inequality through a digital divide, privacy issues, and the long-term impact on the environment are negative issues that potentially follow from the use of smart technology.

Governance

Smart city initiatives also play a part with regards to urban governance. Smart city projects that aim at improving citizens’ quality of life involve multiple stakeholders (Chourabi et al., 2011:

(18)

2292). This asks for better governance that includes all stakeholders. Smart governance is therefore based on citizen participation and private public partnerships (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2292). ICT-based governance is one type of smart governance solution that can be applied in order to efficiently include al relevant actors in the governance process.

Policy

Removing the appropriate legal and regulatory barriers is an important aspect of smart cities (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2292). For example, in order to use data of citizens, privacy legislation needs to be adapted to the new situation. Moreover, a government that pushes innovation policies forward is needed in order to innovate towards becoming a smarter city (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2292). Besides that, it is in the context of policy where problems that can be solved through smart city initiatives need to be articulated.

People and communities

Smart city initiatives have a strong influence on the lives of citizens. The aim of smart cities is to improve citizens’ quality of life, which emphasizes the importance of this domain (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2293). Moreover, smart city projects are also focused on participation of citizens, informing citizens, and educating citizens (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2293). In this domain lies an important responsibility for smart cities: balancing the needs of different communities of citizens when making a city smart (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2293).

Economy

Economic interests are for many cities the main driver of smart city initiatives, since it is said to boost economic competitiveness of a city. In the economic domain, smart city initiatives refer to innovation, entrepreneurship, trademarks, productivity and flexibility of the labor market, and the integration in national and global markets (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2293). Positive economic outcomes of smart city initiatives are increasing business, providing jobs, developing the workforce, and improving productivity (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2293). Companies can profit from smart cities either by implementing efficiency-increasing ICT systems, or by being in the center of innovation themselves, selling smart services or smart products.

Built infrastructure

The ICT- and electricity infrastructure that is already in place in a city is also important for smart cities. When the available networks are already conform high quality standards, the realization of

(19)

a smart city becomes much easier (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2293). This also means that if this domain is undeveloped, it is a potential barrier to smart city initiatives.

Natural environment

In terms of environmental impact, smart cities have a forward-looking attitude. Central in this attitude is the assumption that technology helps “to increase sustainability and to better manage natural resources” (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2294). Solving traffic congestions, measuring air quality or using a energy saving smart grid are all smart city solutions that are known for positively impacting the environment. The green aspect of smart cities influences the livability of a city and needs to be taken into account when considering smart city initiatives (Chourabi et al., 2011: 2294).

4.3. Theoretical Framework

Having defined the central concepts of this thesis, the following section introduces a conceptual model, in order to be able to answer the central research question of this thesis. Several assumptions deriving from the literature provide the basis of this model. Five hypotheses are presented here. The first three hypotheses deal with ecological modernization discourse, smart cities, and the green aspect of smart cities. The fourth and fifth hypotheses cover two concepts that explain the relationship between ecological modernization discourse and the environmental aspect of smart cities: non-confrontational behavior and a technological fix. The hypotheses state that the ecological modernization discourse leads to a lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities, and that this causal relationship is explained by the presence of non-confrontational behavior and a technological fix. The empirical part of the thesis later examines these hypotheses.

4.3.1. Smart cities and ecological modernization

Smart cities and ecological modernization are not clearly discussed in the literature as two concepts that relate to each other. However, the two concepts do seem to cover many of the same topics. The ecological modernization discourse fits perfectly with the concept of smart cities, since both are emphasizing a positive combination of technology, economy, and ecology. As discussed, smart technologies are seen as a solution towards managing natural resources and sustainable economic growth. These are issues that are central in ecological modernization as well. Moreover, smart cities’ emphasis on participatory governance through partnerships perfectly suits ecological modernization’s school of thought. Ecological modernization highly

(20)

values participation and cooperation among multiple stakeholders from society, government, and industry. Also, much overlap exists between the domains of ecological modernization and the domains of smart cities, as shown in Figure 1. The only smart city domain that does not directly link to a domain of ecological modernization is the domain of the natural environment. However, this is still linked to ecological modernization, since improving the environment is one of ecological modernization’s inherent purposes.

The fact that the smart city concept and ecological modernization show lots of overlap, combined with the fact that ecological modernization is the primary discourse in many discussions concerning environmental issues and environmental policy (Coffey & Marston, 2013; Lidskog & Elander, 2012; Mol et al., 2014), makes it likely that ecological modernization is also the dominant discourse surrounding smart cities. This leads to the first hypothesis of this thesis:

H1: Ecological modernization is the primary discourse in smart city initiatives.

Figure 1. Overlapping domains of ecological modernization and smart cities. Source: Jonathan Dul (2016)

The second hypothesis of this thesis focuses on the environmental aspect of smart cities. Even though natural environment is one of the domains of smart cities and environmental sustainability is assumed to be interweaved into the smart city concept, some scholars still doubt the ‘greenness’ of smart cities. For example, the production of ICT-products demands lots of fossil fuels and chemicals (Hollands, 2008: 313). Moreover, integrating ICTs in everyday

(21)

practices in households will increase demand for electricity (Ropke et al., 2010). Besides that, providing people with energy-saving technology usually leads to an increase in use of these products, resulting in an overall increasing energy demand (Herring & Roy, 2007). In general, a clear methodology to check for smart cities’ contribution to sustainability is yet to be developed (Morelli et al., 2013: 74). Due to the fact that many doubt the green impact of smart cities, it is argued that economic interests are often more important than environmental interests with regards to smart cities (Joss et al., 2013; Viitanen & Kingston, 2014). This leads to the following hypothesis:

H2: There is a lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities.

The third hypothesis deals with the ecological modernization discourse and the green aspect of smart cities. Some scholars argue that ecological modernization favors economic interests over environmental interests, thus limiting the importance of environmental interests. Coffey and Marston (2013) show how ecological modernization resulted in a decreasing importance of environmental issues in Australian environmental policy making. The ecological modernization discourse marginalized radical environmental opinions and favored business interests (Coffey & Marston, 2013: 189, 195). In Sweden, an eco-modernist approach to environmental policy has also not been favorable to the environment. While claiming positive developments on the topic of environmental sustainability, the Swedish policies led to an increasing amount of environmental emissions outside of Sweden (Lidskog & Elander, 2012). These are examples of how ecological modernization might not be as favorable for the environment as it is often claimed to be. As stated earlier, this lack of environmental importance is also found in literature about smart cities. These two assumptions about the lack of ‘greenness’ of ecological modernization and smart cities, together with the assumption that ecological modernization is the primary discourse in smart cities, generates the third hypothesis:

H3: The dominance of the ecological modernization discourse in smart city initiatives leads to a lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities.

4.3.2. Non-confrontational behavior

Non-confrontation could possibly explain why the ecological modernization discourse leads to a lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities. A partnership model suggests multiple partners to work together in order to reach a common goal. Still, when partners from different backgrounds need to collaborate, chances exist that they have different interests that lead to conflict. Commercial parties and governmental organizations potentially have different

(22)

goals, for example with regards to environmental and economic interests. These tensions fuel confrontational behavior in partnerships. However, Poncelet (2001) shows that, in contrast to his own expectations, confrontation is not often recognized in environmental partnerships. The presence of the ecological modernization discourse is suggested to stimulate this non-confrontational behavior (Poncelet, 2001). The fact that ecological modernization emphasizes the need for cooperation and collaboration among multiple stakeholders is one of the reasons why its presence leads to non-confrontation (Poncelet, 2001: 20). Moreover, the fact that the ecological modernization discourse emphasizes win-win situations (economy and ecology) results in an attitude that assumes that confrontation is not needed, since all interests can be served (Poncelet, 2001: 21). Potentially, when present in smart city partnerships, the ecological modernization discourse could lead to non-confrontational behavior in smart city initiatives. In turn, this non-confrontation could result in a situation where nobody really critically questions the true environmental impact of the smart city initiative. This would be a case in which the environmental aspect of smart cities lacks importance, due to the presence of the ecological modernization discourse. The fourth hypothesis describes the function of non-confrontational behavior as a mediating variable:

H4: Due to the dominance of the ecological modernization discourse, non-confrontational behavior is common in smart city partnerships, which results in less importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities.

4.3.3. Technological fix

Ecological modernization leads to a strong belief in technological solutions to problems (Jänicke, 2008). It is therefore not surprising that the concept of ecological modernization is linked to the technological fix concept (Brey, 1997). A technological fix or technical fix is a solution provided by technology that seems to be solving a problem, but is actually not adequately representing the complexity of a problem and is also not able to solve multiple problems at the same time (Degnbol et al., 2006: 537). In general, a technological fix is being understood as an effort to solve problems through the use of technology, but on the long-term its effects are to make things worse (Rosner, 2004). Brey (1997) argues that the faith of ecological modernization in technology is a typical example of a technological fix. The side effects of new technologies that stem from ecological modernization are potentially undermining ecological modernization’s own goal of sustainable development, since these side effects potentially harm the environment in the long run (Brey, 1997: 23). In the context of smart cities, Galdon-Clavell (2013: 717) states that smart technology is often seen as a quick fix for current and future urban challenges. The need to address these challenges results in a situation in which smart city initiatives are developed

(23)

without looking critically at the true impact of smart cities (Galdon-Clavell, 2013: 721-722). Since ecological modernization possibly leads to a technological fix and smart city solutions are also recognized as a technological fix, it is likely that the technological fix concept is an explanation for the lack of importance of the green aspect in smart city initiatives. Hence the fifth hypothesis, which describes technological fix as a mediating variable:

H5: Due to the dominance of the ecological modernization discourse, a technological fix is present in smart city initiatives, which results in less importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities.

4.4. Summarizing the Theoretical Framework

This chapter provides the underlying theoretical concepts and theoretical assumptions that steer the rest of this thesis. The ecological modernization school of thought emphasizes the compatibility of ecology and economy by providing technological solutions to environmental problems. The discursive features that stem from the ecological modernization discourse are found in four different domains: science and technology; economy and business; politics and legislation; and social movements. Appendix A presents an overview of the different discursive features of ecological modernization across the different domains. These discursive features show how ecological modernization is recognized in language.

Smart cities are defined as a city where “investments in human and social capital and traditional (transport) and modern (ICT) communication infrastructure fuel sustainable economic growth and a high quality of life, with a wise management of natural resources, through participatory governance” (Caragliu et al., 2011: 79). The emphasis on participatory governance is reflected in the fact that many smart city projects are part of coordinating smart city partnerships.

Deriving from different theoretical assumptions, it is likely that ecological modernization is the primary discourse in smart city initiatives. Besides that, it is also probable that the environmental aspect of smart cities lacks importance. This leads to the assumption that the presence of the ecological modernization discourse results in a lack of importance of the environmental aspect in smart city initiatives. Possible explanations of this effect are to be found in non-confrontational behavior in smart city partnerships and in a technological fix that might be present in smart city initiatives. Figure 2 (see next page) displays this conceptual model as derived from different assumptions in the literature.

(24)

Figure 2. Conceptual model Source: Jonathan Dul (2016)

The empirical part of the thesis later examines the conceptual model as presented in Figure 2. If the four different concepts from the conceptual model are present in the empirical case of this thesis, it is safe to say that the proposed model is plausible to be true. This is the result of the assumed directions of these causal relationships as provided by the theory. The methods of this deductive approach are discussed thoroughly in the following chapter.

(25)

5. Methodology

___________________________________________________________________________ This chapter elaborates on the methodology used to examine the presence of the proposed conceptual model. Amsterdam Smart City (ASC) is presented as the empirical case in order to explore the conceptual model. Interviews and documentation are used as the main data sources of this thesis. Furthermore, this chapter discusses the methods of analysis. Discourse analysis is used descriptively in order to measure the presence of the ecological modernization discourse, rather than critically assessing how the language at use in ASC shapes the social reality. The other variables of the conceptual model are analyzed through directed content analysis. This method of analysis also enables the researcher to discuss and critically assess empirical findings that do not validate the conceptual model, by doing a second run of empirical analysis dealing with conflicting findings. Hypotheses in this thesis are regarded as plausible when the variables associated with these hypotheses are present in the case of ASC. Combined with the theoretically assumed directions of the hypotheses, the presence of the variables is regarded as providing support for them. The chapter furthermore discusses the operationalization of the variables at stake and concludes with a brief discussion of the issues concerning validity and reliability that might arise while using this methodology.

5.1. Case Selection

The case at hand in this research is the ASC partnership. There are many smart city projects in Amsterdam, focusing on many different fields and industries (Amsterdam Smart City, 2015). Amsterdam is one of the front-runners in smart-city initiatives and is successful in meeting the EU2020 targets according to a report on smart cities in the European Union (Manville et al., 2014). Moreover, Amsterdam is trying to meet its energy targets while at the same time scoring very well on the economic aspect of smart cities. Besides that, the case of ASC is a perfect example of a multi-stakeholder smart city partnership, its primary partners being: Alliander, the Amsterdam ArenA, the Amsterdam Economic Board, the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, the City of Amsterdam, KPN, and PostNL.

Amsterdam provides a critical case in analyzing the role of the ecological modernization discourse in smart city partnerships. The Netherlands and Germany are the countries of origin of the ecological modernization concept (Fisher & Freudenburg, 2001). Together with the fact that Amsterdam has a leading position on the topic of smart cities, it is likely that if there is a relationship between ecological modernization and smart city initiatives, it will be apparent in the

(26)

case of Amsterdam. Therefore Amsterdam provides an interesting case to explore this relationship. When the ecological modernization discourse is not recognized in the case of Amsterdam, it is likely to also be absent in other smart city partnerships.

5.2. Data Collection

This thesis is based on the triangulation of two types of data sources in order to gather the information needed to answer the research question: interviews and documentation. The main data source is semi-structured interviews with the primary partners of the ASC partnership. The questions covered the following topics: smart cities, the ASC partnership, and environmental sustainability. For a list of interview questions, see Appendix B. Nine interviews were conducted in Dutch with representatives of the eight founding partners of the ASC partnership. All the respondents represent their organization in the ASC partnership and are entitled to speak for their organization within the partnership, which was the most important selection criterion. Influential representatives of all founding partners committed themselves to this research, which is of high value for the quality of the analysis. The fact that multiple respondents were impressed that all these influential people were willing to contribute to this research emphasizes the quality of the data collected through the interviews. The complete list of respondents is presented in Appendix C. All quotes and paraphrased sentences used in this thesis were checked with all respondents. They confirmed that these quotes and paraphrased sentences are true.

The second data source consists of all kinds of documentation. Websites, PowerPoint presentations, online documented interviews, official statements, and internal documents are analyzed in order to research the points of view of the partners within the ASC partnership regarding smart cities and sustainability. These documents and texts were provided by the respondents or obtained through an online search. All partners are covered in this document analysis, as shown in Appendix D.

5.3. Data Analysis

The data collected in this research is analyzed through two methods of analysis: discourse analysis and content analysis. Since the study only focuses on a single case with few observations, the hypotheses underlying the conceptual model cannot be tested quantitatively. However, the analysis applies a congruence method in order to still be able to examine the relationships as probed in the conceptual model. The congruence method enables the researcher to examine causal relationships in single-case studies, by assessing the consistency between the formulated hypotheses and the outcomes of the case (George & Bennett, 2005: 181). However, the

(27)

congruence method does not allow for examining alternative explanations. This analysis of ecological modernization therefore aims at assessing whether or not the proposed variables (ecological modernization discourse; non-confrontational behavior; technological fix; and the lack of importance of the environmental aspect) are present in the smart city case at hand. It is assumed that when these variables are all present, the direction of the causal relationships between the variables are plausible to be true in the case of ASC, thanks to the theoretical expectations. Besides that, a second run of analysis looks into the data to explore whether or not alternative explanations might be present.

This rather positivist stance is consistently found throughout this thesis. The starting point of analysis is that the concepts used in this thesis are measurable. As will be discussed in the next part, the application of descriptive discourse analysis suits this positivist point of view.

5.3.1. Descriptive discourse analysis

Discourse analysis is an approach that focuses on the use of language (spoken-, written-, sign language etc.). A discourse is “an ensemble of ideas, concepts and categories through which meaning is given to social and physical phenomena, and which is produced and reproduced through an identifiable set of practices” (Hajer & Versteeg, 2006: 175). Discourse analysis is mostly associated with social constructivism. An analysis of discourse from the social constructivist perspective provides insight in how the world is understood and how the world is shaped through the use of language (Phillips & Hardy, 2002). Critical discourse analysis, for example, assesses how language shapes social and cultural relations (Fairclough et al., 2011: 357). Though, in contrast to the popular social constructivist use of discourse analysis, this thesis applies discourse analysis in a more positivist manner. Using descriptive discourse analysis enables the researcher to identify whether or not a specific discourse is present (Fairclough, 1985: 753). Descriptive discourse analysis is used to integrate discourse in an analysis of causal relationships that also recognizes other factors and variables, rather than assuming that everything is shaped through and within discourses. The goal of descriptive discourse analysis is not to analyze the effect of the use of the language in a discourse, but to recognize the discourse at hand. For that reason, this method of analysis is perfect for the purpose of recognizing whether or not the ecological modernization discourse is the primary discourse in the case of ASC. Discourse is thus used functionally in this thesis. Instead of finding an explanation within the discourse, the presence of the discourse is part of the explanation of a specific outcome in the case at hand.

(28)

Besides recognizing the ecological modernization discourse, the analysis also deals with discursive features that do not fit the ecological modernization discourse. If visible throughout the data, these features are analyzed and discussed, to see if potentially a different discourse is present in the case of ASC.

5.3.2. Directed content analysis

The second method of analysis used in this thesis is a directed content analysis. Content analysis helps to analyze data in a systematic and schematic way. The directed approach, a deductive use of theory in content analysis, is a way of analyzing data from documents and texts in order to validate a theoretical framework (Potter & Levine-Donnerstein, 1999: 264). In a directed content analysis, theoretical predictions about the variables of interest help to determine the initial codes that are used to interpret meaning from texts (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005: 1281). The strategy used in this research is to begin coding the collected data with predetermined codes that represent the different variables at stake. In this thesis, directed content analysis helps to identify whether or not the four variables at stake are present in the ASC partnership.

Data that is not identified in the first run is later analyzed in order to explore whether or not they represent a new category, which in turn can extend the theory (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005: 1282). In this thesis, the second run of data analysis therefore discusses findings that are in conflict with the hypotheses. In each empirical chapter the conflicting findings are presented and their impact on the hypotheses is discussed. This leaves room for alternative explanations and guards for the fact that the researcher only attributes notable attention to the expected findings. By doing that, the thoroughness of this thesis is ensured.

5.4. Operationalization

The conceptual model of this thesis comprises four main concepts: ecological modernization discourse, non-confrontational behavior, technological fix, and lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart city initiatives. These concepts are the variables that are measured in a consistent and comprehensive manner. In the following section operationalization of the variables is discussed.

5.4.1. Ecological modernization discourse in smart city initiatives

The independent variable of this research is the ecological modernization discourse in smart city initiatives. In order to measure whether or not the ecological modernization discourse is the primary discourse in the ASC partnership, the discursive features of ecological modernization as

(29)

discussed in Chapter 4 are the perfect points of departure. When discursive features as displayed in Appendix A are consistently recognized in interviews with the founding partners and in documents of the ASC partnership, the ecological modernization is likely to be dominant in the initiative. Especially when conflicting discursive features are less prominently visible within the partnership. The perspectives of all these partners together are analyzed and aggregated as being the discourse of the whole partnership. The fact that all founding partners of the ASC partnership are interviewed makes it likely that the outcome of the interviews truly represents the discourse of the ASC partnership.

5.4.2. Lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart city initiatives The dependent variable of this research is the lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart city initiatives. This variable is measured by understanding whether or not the true environmental impact of smart cities is questioned among the partners of the ASC partnership. When multiple interviews and documents indicate that the environmental impact of smart cities is critically discussed and assessed, it is safe to argue that there is notable importance of the environmental aspect in the ASC partnership. However, when the environmental impact of smart cities is not a genuine point of attention on the ASC agenda and is not of great concern for the partners, it is likely that there is a lack of importance of the environmental aspect of the ASC partnership.

5.4.3. Non-confrontational behavior

One of the mediator variables taken into consideration in this research is non-confrontational behavior. This variable is identified in order to understand the causal relationship between the ecological modernization discourse and the lack of importance of the environmental aspect of smart cities. Measuring this variable is done by finding evidence for confrontational behavior within the ASC partnership. Noting how partners deal with different interests and whether or not this leads to confrontation is important in measuring confrontational behavior. Moreover, respondents were asked to characterize the partnership as being consensus- or confrontation oriented. Non-confrontational behavior is present when difference of interests rarely leads to confrontation and when the partnership is characterized as being consensus-oriented.

5.4.4. Technological fix

Another mediator variable of the conceptual model is the technological fix concept. The presence of this variable helps to understand the causal relationship between ecological

The role of ecological modernization discourse in smart cities : analyzing the case of the Amsterdam Smart City Partnership