IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/urbpla/v8y2023i2p70-80.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Role for Citizens? Evolving Engagement in Quadruple Helix Smart District Initiatives

Author

Listed:
  • Hannah Devine-Wright

    (Geography, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland / European Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter, UK)

  • Anna R. Davies

    (Geography, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland)

Abstract

Globally, smart city initiatives are becoming increasingly ubiquitous elements of complex, sociotechnical urban systems. While there is general agreement that cities cannot be smart without citizen involvement, the motivations, means, and mechanisms for engaging citizens remain contested. In response, this article asks what the role of citizens is in two recently established smart districts within the wider Smart Dublin programme: Smart Sandyford, a business district, and Smart Balbriggan, a town north of Dublin with Ireland’s most ethnically diverse and youthful population. Using multiple methods (online and in-person interviews, site visits, a focus group, and participant observation), this article specifically examines how the “quadruple helix,” a popular concept within innovation studies and one that is adopted in promotional materials by Dublin’s emerging smart districts, is used by key actors as an overarching framing device for activities. It finds that, to date, the quadruple helix concept is being applied simplistically and uncritically, without attention to pre-existing and persistent patterns of uneven power and influence between the different actors involved. As such it risks inhibiting rather than supporting meaningful citizen engagement for smart and sustainable places that both smart districts articulate as a key driver of their activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Hannah Devine-Wright & Anna R. Davies, 2023. "What Role for Citizens? Evolving Engagement in Quadruple Helix Smart District Initiatives," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 70-80.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:urbpla:v8:y:2023:i:2:p:70-80
    DOI: 10.17645/up.v8i2.6351
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/6351
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/up.v8i2.6351?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:urbpla:v8:y:2023:i:2:p:70-80. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.