Designing robots for cityness
To focus on the fundamental question of what makes a good city, one approach is to explore how robots or urban technologies can enhance the desirable qualities of city life. To address this issue, the term “cityness” will be used to refer to these desirable qualities. Although this may seem indirect, it offers a clear connection between the design and use of robots and the broader discussion of what makes a city desirable.
The concept of “cityness” was introduced by Sassen to describe non-western or novel forms of urbanity. Robots may contribute to a new urban future outside of traditional norms. Like a street vendor in Midtown Manhattan, who brings people from different walks of life together, robots can foster interactions with and between many people, creating a sense of “cityness.” They can serve as an invitation for engagement and create intersections in public spaces, encouraging people to meet and experience the city. Considering cityness in relation to self-driving vehicles may encourage the design of alternative modes of (semi-)public transportation that enable people to meet or experience the presence of others. Robots can contribute to the city virtues suggested by Young’s work on the city as a normative ideal. They can foster the erotic aspect of city life, which involves encountering the novel, strange, and surprising. Robots may also facilitate the ideal of social differentiation without exclusion by being open to and respectful of various user groups. However, they can also pose a threat by amplifying social sorting and contributing to the “code/space” phenomenon. It is crucial to be aware of this potential threat (Nagenborg, 2020).
References
Nagenborg, M. (2020). Urban robotics and responsible urban innovation. Ethics and Information Technology, 22(4), 345-355.