What do we mean by smart cities
Smart cities use sensors, cameras and connected devices to monitor traffic, air quality and energy use. The aim is to make services run more smoothly. But smooth systems need lots of data. That data often links back to people. When you walk, drive or use a bus you may leave digital traces. Those traces are recorded, stored and analysed.
How this becomes surveillance
Authors such as Shoshana Zuboff call this surveillance capitalism. Her 2019 book explains how personal behaviour is harvested for profit. We point readers to Zuboff for a deep dive into the business model behind data extraction. Academics like Rob Kitchin have also shown how urban data systems reshape public life. He outlines how the city becomes a platform for data flows and decision making. These are not just technical changes. They are social changes with consequences for power and control.
Real world examples
We can look at Sidewalk Labs in Toronto as a cautionary tale. Journalists at The Globe and Mail traced how the project gathered intense scrutiny over data governance and commercial control of public space. Sidewalk Labs eventually abandoned its plan in 2020 after public concern and regulatory pressure grew. That case shows how corporate ambition, municipal planning and public rights collide. It also shows how transparency and regulation can slow risky projects.
Who benefits and who loses
Cities and companies often present smart tech as a win for everyone. There are genuine benefits. Traffic lights can be smarter. Waste collection can be more efficient. But the benefits are not evenly spread. Companies gain new assets in the form of data. Citizens gain convenience. We think the balance needs public debate. The privacy harms can include profiling, targeted enforcement and the chilling of dissent. These risks are documented by civil liberties groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation which warns of expanding city surveillance.
Can law and design protect us
Regulators can help. The UK Information Commissioner’s Office has warned that smart city projects must follow data protection law. That means clear purposes, limits on retention and strong transparency. But law alone may not be enough. We need civic input. We need design that minimises personal data collection. We need publicly accountable governance. These are common recommendations from privacy scholars and NGOs.
What we should ask of our councils
We urge citizens to ask simple questions. Who owns the data? How long will it be kept? Who can access it? Is the algorithm audited? If answers are vague or proprietary we should be sceptical. Public money and public spaces deserve public control.
References and sources
Shoshana Zuboff. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/shoshana-zuboff/the-age-of-surveillance-capitalism/9781610395694/
Rob Kitchin. The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10708-014-9597-5
Tim Naumetz and other reporting on Sidewalk Labs. The Globe and Mail. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/toronto/article-sidewalk-labs-scraps-long-planned-toronto-project/
Electronic Frontier Foundation. Surveillance issues and smart cities. https://www.eff.org/issues/surveillance
ICO. ICO says smart city projects must follow data protection law. https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news-and-events/ico-says-smart-city-projects-must-follow-data-protection-law/
Sign up to our newsletter for daily briefs.