Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36212227›Full record

ArticleAI & society2022

Smart cities: reviewing the debate about their ethical implications.

Marta Ziosi, Benjamin Hewitt, Prathm Juneja, Mariarosaria Taddeo, Luciano Floridi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AI & society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Marta ZiosiOxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, 1 St Giles', Oxford, OX1 3JS UK.
Benjamin HewittOxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, 1 St Giles', Oxford, OX1 3JS UK.
Prathm JunejaOxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, 1 St Giles', Oxford, OX1 3JS UK.
Mariarosaria TaddeoOxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, 1 St Giles', Oxford, OX1 3JS UK.
Luciano FloridiOxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, 1 St Giles', Oxford, OX1 3JS UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5444-2280

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper considers a host of definitions and labels attached to the concept of smart cities to identify four dimensions that ground a review of ethical concerns emerging from the current debate. These are: (1) network infrastructure, with the corresponding concerns of control, surveillance, and data privacy and ownership; (2) post-political governance, embodied in the tensions between public and private decision-making and cities as post-political entities; (3) social inclusion, expressed in the aspects of citizen participation and inclusion, and inequality and discrimination; and (4) sustainability, with a specific focus on the environment as an element to protect but also as a strategic element for the future. Given the persisting disagreements around the definition of a smart city, the article identifies in these four dimensions a more stable reference framework within which ethical concerns can be clustered and discussed. Identifying these dimensions makes possible a review of the ethical implications of smart cities that is transversal to their different types and resilient towards the unsettled debate over their definition.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceData privacyEthicsSmart citiesSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID36212227
PMCPMC9524726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.