We explore smart city development, with a focus on the modalities of citizen participation, using an institutional logics approach. Taking Mexico City as our case study, we describe the presence and dynamics of several logics influencing smart city development. At an organizational level we identify the bureaucratic and technocratic logics underpinning the practices of the governmental agency leading smart city development. Characterized by centralization and the pursuit of efficiency, and framed by a discourse of austerity and financial control, these logics promote a modality of citizen participation that is limited and unidirectional in nature, with citizens positioned largely as users. At a supra-organizational level, we identify a logic of active citizen participation in urban governance that is formalized in city laws. However, this logic is itself entangled in a logic of clientelism and patronage, manifested through networks of power. These logics work synergistically to limit broader, inclusive citizen participation in, and realization of benefits from, smart city agendas. We conclude that a richer understanding of institutional logics enhances the analysis of the social construction of the smart city in particular, situated contexts.
AggerAnnikaSørensenEva (2018). Managing collaborative innovation in public bureaucracies. Planning Theory, 17, 53–73.
3.
AnthopoulosLeonidas (2017). Smart utopia vs smart reality: Learning by experience from 10 smart city cases. Cities, 63, 128–148.
4.
Arellano-GaultDavidDemortainDavidRouillardChristianThoenigJean-Claude (2013). Bringing public organization and organizing back in. Organization Studies, 34, 145–167.
5.
ArnsteinSherry R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35, 216–224.
6.
BalestriniMaraRogersYvonneHassanCarolynCreusJaviKingMarthaMarshallPaul (2017). A city in common: A framework to orchestrate large-scale citizen engagement around urban issues. In Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – Proceedings, May 2017, 2282–2294. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
7.
Berglund-SnodgrassLinaMukhtar-LandgrenDalia (2020). Conceptualizing testbed planning: Urban planning in the intersection between experimental and public sector logics. Urban Planning, 5, 96–106.
8.
BromleyPatriciaPowellWalter W. (2017). From smoke and mirrors to walking the talk: Decoupling in the contemporary world. Academy of Management Annals, 6, 483–530.
9.
BurnsRyanFastVictoriaLevendaAnthonyMillerByron (2021). Smart cities: Between worlding and provincializing. Urban Studies, 58, 461–470.
10.
CardulloPaoloKitchinRob (2019a). Smart urbanism and smart citizenship: The neoliberal logic of ‘citizen-focused’ smart cities in Europe. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 37, 813–830.
11.
CardulloPaoloKitchinRob (2019b). Being a ‘citizen’ in the smart city: Up and down the scaffold of smart citizen participation in Dublin, Ireland. GeoJournal, 84, 1–13.
12.
CharnockGreigMarchHugRibera-FumazRamon (2021). From smart to rebel city? Worlding, provincializing and the Barcelona Model. Urban Studies, 58, 581–600.
13.
HarguindeguyCollin L.MolinaRafael (2009). Las organizaciones de la sociedad civil en México: De la invisibilidad al protagonismo. Nuevo Mundo Mundos Nuevos, Coloquios, 1–15.
14.
CugurulloFederico (2018). The origin of the smart city imaginary: From the dawn of modernity to the eclipse of reason. In LindnerChristophMeissnerMiriam (Eds.), The Routledge companion to urban imaginaries (pp. 113–124). London & New York: Routledge.
15.
DacinM. TinaDacinPeter A. (2008). Traditions as institutionalized practice: Implications for deinstitutionalization. In GreenwoodRoystonOliverChristineLawrenceThomas B.MeyerRenate E. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (2nd edition, pp. 327–352). London: SAGE Publications.
16.
DattaAyona (2018). The digital turn in postcolonial urbanism: Smart citizenship in the making of India’s 100 smart cities. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 43, 405–419.
17.
De Alba-UlloaJessicaArellanes-ArellanesJuan (2017). Challenges in public-private partnerships: The case of the Chapultepec cultural corridor in Mexico City. In ReillyThomas (Ed.), The governance of local communities: Global perspectives and challenges (pp. 21–80). New York: Nova Publishers.
18.
FlyvbjergBent (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. In SilvermanDavidSealeCliveGoboGiampietroGubriumJaber F. (Eds.), Qualitative research practice: concise paperback edition (pp. 219–245). London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
19.
GaffneyChristopherRobertsonCerianne (2018). Smarter than smart: Rio de Janeiro’s flawed emergence as a smart city. Journal of Urban Technology, 25, 47–64.
20.
GioiaDennis A.CorleyKevin G.HamiltonAimee L. (2012). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16, 15–31.
21.
GlynnMary AnnLounsburyMichael (2005). From the Critic’s Corner: Logic blending, discursive change and authenticity in a cultural production system. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 1031–1055.
22.
GreenwoodRoystonMagán DíazAmaliaXiao LiStanCéspedes LorenteJosé (2010). The multiplicity of institutional logics and the heterogeneity of organizational responses. Organization Science, 21, 521–539.
23.
GreenwoodRoystonOliverChristineLawrenceThomas B.MeyerRenate E. (Eds.) (2017). The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (2nd edition). London: SAGE Publications.
24.
GreenwoodRoystonSuddabyRoyHiningsRobin (2002). Theorizing change: The role of professional associations in the transformation of institutional fields. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 58–80.
HausMichaelHeineltHubert (2005). How to achieve governability at the local level? In HausMichaelHeineltHubertStewartMurray (Eds.), Urban governance and democracy: Leadership and community involvement (pp. 12–40). London: Routledge.
27.
HensmansManuel (2003). Social movement organizations: A metaphor for strategic actors in institutional fields. Organization Studies, 24, 355–381.
28.
HoffmanAndrew J. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 351–371.
29.
HollandsRobert G. (2015). Critical interventions into the corporate smart city. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 8, 61–77.
30.
IrazábalClaraJirónPaola (2021). Latin American smart cities: Between worlding infatuation and crawling provincializing. Urban Studies, 58, 507–534.
31.
JirónPaolaImilánWalter A.LangeCarlosMansillaPablo (2021). Placebo urban interventions: Observing smart city narratives in Santiago de Chile. Urban Studies, 58, 601–620.
32.
JossSimonSengersFransSchravenDaanCaprottiFedericoDayotYouri (2019). The smart city as global discourse: Storylines and critical junctures across 27 cities. Journal of Urban Technology, 26, 3–34.
33.
KitchinRob (2019). Toward a genuinely humanizing smart urbanism. In CardulloPaoloFeliciantonioCesare DiKitchinRob (Eds.), The right to the smart city (pp. 193–204). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
34.
KitchinRobCardulloPaoloDi FeliciantonioCesare (2019). Citizenship, justice and the right to the smart city. In CardulloPaoloFeliciantonioCesare DiKitchinRob (Eds.), The right to the smart city (pp. 1–28). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
35.
KornbergerMartinMeyerRenate E.BrandtnerChristofHöllererMarkus A. (2017). When bureaucracy meets the crowd: Studying ‘open government’ in the Vienna City Administration. Organization Studies, 38, 179–200.
36.
LabiancaGiuseppeGrayBarbaraBrassDaniel J. (2000). A grounded model of organizational schema change during empowerment. Organization Science, 11, 235–257.
37.
León AlvarezLuisRosenJovanna (2019). Technology as ideology in urban governance. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 110, 497–506.
38.
LynchCasey R. (2019). Contesting digital futures: Urban politics, alternative economies, and the movement for technological sovereignty in Barcelona. Antipode, 52, 660–680.
39.
MarchHugRibera-FumazRamon (2016). Smart contradictions: The politics of making Barcelona a self-sufficient city. European Urban and Regional Studies, 23, 816–830.
40.
MartinChris J.EvansJamesKarvonenAndrew (2018). Smart and sustainable? Five tensions in the visions and practices of the smart-sustainable city in Europe and North America. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 133, 269–278.
MasucciMichelePearsallHamilWiigAlan (2019). The smart city conundrum for social justice: Youth perspectives on digital technologies and urban transformations. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 110, 476–484.
43.
MilesMatthewHubermanMichael (2003). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
44.
MoraLucaBoliciRobertoDeakinMark (2017). The first two decades of smart-city research: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Urban Technology, 24, 3–27.
45.
MoraLucaDeakinMarkReidAlasdair (2019). Strategic principles for smart city development: A multiple case study analysis of European best practices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142, 70–97.
46.
Mukhtar-LandgrenDalia (2021). Local autonomy in temporary organizations: The case of smart city pilots. Administration & Society, 53, 1485–1511.
47.
OcasioWilliamThorntonPatriciaLounsburyMichael (2017). Advances to the institutional logics perspective. In GreenwoodRoystonOliverChristineLawrenceThomas B.MeyerRenate E. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (2nd edition, pp. 509–531). London: SAGE Publications.
48.
OliverChristine (1992). The antecedents of deinstitutionalization. Organization Studies, 13, 563–588.
49.
ParoutisSotiriosBennettMarkHeracleousLoizos (2014). A strategic view on smart city technology: The case of IBM Smarter Cities during a recession. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 89, 262–272.
50.
PollioAndrea (2016). Technologies of austerity urbanism: The ‘smart city’ agenda in Italy (2011–2013). Urban Geography, 37, 514–534.
51.
PollittChristopherBouckaertGeert (2017). Public management reform: A comparative analysis-into the age of austerity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
52.
RavenRobSengersFransSpaethPhilippXieLinjunCheshmehzangiAlide JongMartin (2019). Urban experimentation and institutional arrangements. European Planning Studies, 27, 258–281.
53.
ReayTrishHiningsRobin (2009). Managing the rivalry of competing institutional logics. Organization Studies, 30, 629–652.
54.
RossiUgo (2019). The common-seekers: Capturing and reclaiming value in the platform metropolis. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 37, 1418–1433.
55.
SchmidtEduard J.GroeneveldSandra (2019). Setting sail in a storm: Leadership in times of cutbacks. Public Management Review, 23, 1–23.
56.
ScottRichard W. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
57.
SheltonTaylorLodatoThomas (2019). Actually existing smart citizens: Expertise and (non)participation in the making of the smart city. City, 23, 35–52.
58.
ShieldsRobinWatermeyerRichard (2018). Competing institutional logics in universities in the United Kingdom: Schism in the church of reason. Studies in Higher Education, 45, 3–18.
59.
SöderströmOlaPaascheTillKlauserFrancisco (2014). Smart cities as corporate storytelling. City, 18, 307–320.
60.
ThorntonPatriciaOcasioWilliam (2008). Institutional logics. In OliverChristineGreenwoodRoystonSahlinKirstinSuddabyRoy (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 99–129). London: SAGE Publications.
61.
ThorntonPatriciaOcasioWilliamLounsburyMichael (2015). The institutional logics perspective. In ScottRobertKosslynStephen (Eds.), Emerging trends in the social and behavioural sciences (pp. 1–30). London: Wiley.
62.
TilcsikAndrás (2010). From ritual to reality: Demography, ideology, and decoupling in a post-communist government agency. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 1474–1498.
63.
TownsendAnthony M. (2013). Smart cities: Big data, civic hackers, and the quest for a new utopia. New York: WW Norton & Company.
64.
TrencherGregory (2019). Towards the Smart City 2.0: Empirical evidence of using smartness as a tool for tackling social challenges. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142, 117–128.
65.
Vargas SolanoNestorGalván GómezManuel A. (2014). La Participación Ciudadana En La Ciudad de México: Panorama, Retos y Perspectivas. In SánchezAyala (Ed.), Nuevas Avenidas de La Democracia Contemporánea (pp. 433–463). Mexico City: UNAM, Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas.
66.
WhiteJames M. (2016). Anticipatory logics of the smart city’s global imaginary. Urban Geography, 37, 572–589.
