Integrated Urban Systems Vs. Resilience
It is generally agreed that Smart Cities seek to optimize their systems by increasing integration, through approaches like the Increased interoperability, seamless system integration and automation are seen as having the potential to deliver substantial efficiency gains and eliminate redundancy. Paradoxically, however, the integration of systems for efficiency gains may compromise the resilience of an urban system. When system integration becomes systemic interdependence, the autonomy of single urban systems to function when others fail is eroded.
In some cases, the smartest solution to a resiliency problem may be to favor relatively low levels of integration between certain systems and to allow for redundancy. Copenhagen’s Cloudburst Mitigation Plan was developed in response to a major flash flood event that struck Denmark’s capital in July 2010. The set of proposed solutions encompasses green and blue infrastructure such as permeable surfaces and stream buffers in addition to traditional grey measures. The two systems are complementary but retain a degree of independence. While the nature-based solutions absorb the initial shock, the grey infrastructure acts as a back-up system. Moreover, the removal of concrete and reintroduction of vegetation to the cityscape offers multiple co-benefits such as enhanced livability.
Ultimately, Smart Cities will need to decide for themselves which approach is most appropriate for their local context and what role technological or other solutions should play. But these decisions are not always easy: there is not always a ‘win-win’ solution. There may be tradeoffs, and these need to be taken into account by both decision makers and solution suppliers.
For more information, visit ICLEI.
