Hong Kong’s smart city dreams need trust, not just new tech, to succeed

Governments must recognise that technology does not exist in a vacuum but amid broader social, political and economic forces that are often unpredictable
The security and privacy concerns of citizens cannot be dismissed through assurances about the fairness and objectivity of technology

Kris Hartley

Published: 6:45am, 29 Nov 2021

Why you can trust SCMP

Technology has fundamentally changed how people connect. Many of us are never offline except when sleeping, and virtual interactions with family, friends and colleagues have come to define our daily routines.

Technology is also changing how people interact with their leaders. Governments have long embraced technology and advanced infrastructure to make public service delivery more efficient and effective. They are also looking to social media and other communication platforms as a way to disseminate information and foster public support.

Accordingly, the Hong Kong government has committed to investments in “smart city” technologies, including the recently released iAM Smart app, which appears to have some roll-out troubles. The term “smart city” refers broadly to the application of technology to the tasks of governing.

One example is the collection of data about usage patterns for transport, health facilities and other public services. In Hong Kong, the Leave Home Safe app is another example of how government gathers information to facilitate policy decisions – in this case, rapid responses to Covid-19 cluster outbreaks.

Despite the advertised objectivity of technology, scholars, politicians and advocates have raised concerns about the use of technology for governance. Common fears include a loss of privacy, security, equity and policy representation.

03:25

How Hong Kong’s new coronavirus contact-tracing app works

As such, governments must recognise that technology does not exist in a vacuum but amid broader social, political and economic forces that are unpredictable and often unmanageable.

A recently published survey of public perceptions in Hong Kong about smart cities, which I conducted in 2019, sheds some light on these political dynamics. The article published in association with the survey states that “well-documented public concerns about the use of technology in governance threaten to undermine trust in and legitimacy of smart cities programmes”.

Among the study’s findings are that around 50 per cent of the roughly 1,000 respondents expressed optimism about the ability of smart cities to improve quality of life. A similar percentage agreed smart cities should be a policy priority.

At the same time, only a quarter of respondents were aware of Hong Kong’s smart city efforts. Furthermore, there were evident concerns about trust and privacy.

Such concerns can be classified into several types: level of trust in government technology; confidence the government keeps personal information safe and secure; willingness to sacrifice data privacy for the collective benefit; belief that one’s concerns are heard in the smart city policymaking process; and, desire to provide input into smart city policy content.

01:01

China’s plan to build its first smart roads fully-covered by 5G networks in Beijing

The survey found that less than one-third of respondents trusted government technology, with nearly 35 per cent neutral on the topic. The highest level of disagreement – 56 per cent – was on willingness to sacrifice some data privacy for the collective benefit.

At the same time, nearly half of respondents believed their concerns were not adequately heard while more than 40 per cent wished to have an opportunity to provide more input into smart city policies.

According to the study, respondents can trust the underlying technologies of smart cities as a largely “mechanical” issue while holding concerns about security and privacy as issues under political or policy influence.

The vision many governments have for a digital future is constructed not for the public but in collaboration with the public. The concerns of citizens cannot be dismissed through assurances about the fairness and objectivity of technology.

Efforts to integrate technology into public services are coming up against a harsh political reality that calls for better public awareness of and education about technological matters.

How Singapore synergy shows way forward for Hong Kong’s smart city dreams

In some countries, even the authority of expert knowledge and evidence-based policymaking is being challenged by populist political resistance. Examples include vaccine resistance, climate denialism and people opting out of public and private mechanisms that collect data about individuals.

All that computes is not necessarily “smart”. Resistance to technology might appear obtuse and reactionary but could also reflect collective wisdom. Technology is only as effective, fair and safe as the characteristics designed into it.

Thus, technology is not wholly objective but potentially rife with bias, as are the policy systems built on it and decisions that emerge from it.

In a 2020 research article, my colleague Glen Kuecker and I stated that “claims to legitimacy made by technocrats are not impervious to political challenge, a matter that policymakers must consider when making appeals to the authority of expertise”.

Building trust in government technology and smart cities is achieved neither through claims about technology’s purity nor by dazzling the public with showy projects. It is about the hard work that attends any policy issue – connecting with citizens at a personal level, understanding their problems and showing them how policies can help improve their lives.

In building the credibility of smart cities projects, a government must first start from a firm platform of legitimacy. Those governments around the world enjoying a high level of citizen trust will find smart cities a promising endeavour.

For governments lacking such trust, technology is no way to win it back. As trust in governments and institutions continues its decline in many countries, prospects of a technological utopia become dimmer still.

Smart cities raise long-standing questions about the role of power in policymaking, but with a uniquely modern technological flourish. Citizens will not be distracted by technological bells and whistles.

The world over, they still know what they fundamentally need from government and can recognise whether leadership is interested in delivering it.

Kris Hartley is an assistant professor in the Department of Asian and Policy Studies at the Education University of Hong Kong

Post