Page 106 - Çevre Şehir İklim İngilizce - Sayı 4

Smart Cities and Sustainable Urban Regeneration

is common, the existence of strategy documents and road maps, which are put
forward by considering separate and fragmented processes for each sub-goal,
directs the implementation accordingly. This situation indicates the existence
of multiple legal and administrative foundations that overlap/intersect with
one other, which also makes bureaucratic processes difficult due to duplicate
content, resulting in conflicts of authority. Similarly, this situation also makes it
difficult to concretely monitor and evaluate the targets to be achieved. In this
context, it is critical for the cities and urban life of the future that the national
actions to be implemented cover both smart cities and sustainability targets and
that partnerships are established. It is envisaged that the performance indicator
matrix created within the scope of the study can be used as a starting basis in
order to ensure relevant inclusiveness and establish partnerships.

Technological Determinist x Social Determinist
Smart City 1.0 is a model that focuses on technology developers and the
solutions they offer based on individual problems, but is criticized for ignoring
the social dimension of technology (Vishnivetskaya and Alexandrova, 2019).
With the Smart City 2.0 model developed in line with the criticisms made, it is
aimed to make the social dimension a part of the process (ibid). However, this
goal has not been fully achieved. The main reason why this goal could not be
achieved is that the process was operated one-sidedly. Citizens can establish
a unilateral information exchange relationship through the interface provided
to them. The only difference between the right to information carried out
through traditional methods (e.g. petition) is that the relevant process is
performed digitally with the help of digital tools. This situation necessitated
the development of the Smart City 3.0 model. According to this model, the
citizen becomes an active component, that is, an actor, of decision-making
processes (ibid.). Namely, in the Smart City 3.0 model, there is an interaction
beyond a one-sided information exchange. This interaction to be ensured
aims to obtain positive results in terms of adoption of cities by citizens.
Considering the phases that the smart city concept/model has gone
through over time, it is seen that a massive approach where social dimension is
highlighted is adopted, by abandoning individualism where where information
is presented and requested. Underlying this change is the need to be accepted
by society or the broad masses. The sustainability of a technology which is not
used or accepted by society or the masses is not possible, as is its continuity.
In this context, abandoning the technological determinist approach that
focuses on technology, and adopting a social determinist approach will be
an important step to establish society-oriented, inclusive and livable cities. It
is seen that current smart urban regeneration practices prioritize the use of
technology and its adaptation to space. However, it should be kept in mind

Year 2 / Issue 4 / July 2023 95