
www.buildingsandcities.org/journal-content/special-issues/data-politics-si.html
This special issue advances understandings of the practices, politics and power implications of data-driven buildings and cities
Buildings and cities are increasingly being reconfigured and reimagined by flows of data e.g. in smart homes and cities, digitally networked infrastructure services, shared mobility programmes and autonomous vehicles, surveillance and security systems, and urban control centres. The benefits of a datafied built environment are uneven and result in detrimental impacts to some individuals and groups at the expense of others.
Guest editors: Andrew Karvonen and Tom Hargreaves
Datafication processes are far from neutral. In many cases, the datafication of the built environment is invisible to users which has negative democratic implications. The asymmetrical access to data produces conditions that are beneficial to some but not all. Decisions about what data gets collected and what is ignored are unavoidably political processes that privilege some while neglecting others. This special issue raise key questions about how data-driven buildings and cities can be designed to be inclusive and democratic.
A key theme emerging from the special issue involves processes of societal exclusion that are commonplace in datafication. Mello Rose and Chang argue that datafication processes tend to ignore important sources of 'subjective socio-cultural data' while Sharma et al. highlight the under-representation of particular social groups and the perpetuation of existing structures of inequality. White and Larsson demonstrate how digital platforms produce social relations that are de-individualized and de-personalised to realise globalised and consumerist modes of life, while Sareen et al. show how digitalisation favours privatised and individualised structures rather than collective forms of management and ownership.
A second theme in the special issue is the centrality of local geographies and histories to datafication processes. All of the contributions emphasise the importance of qualitative methods and datasets to characterise local histories and geographies while providing a strong corrective to the universalising quantitative abstractions of most datafication processes.
This special issue highlights the importance of including civil society in the development of new visions and alternatives that can dismantle existing unjust power structures. The contingent character of datafication processes is not inevitable but is the result of particular actions that could have turned out differently. Commoning can be a means to normalise and institutionalise more progressive and inclusive forms of collective consumption. Data-driven processes that are founded in social justice could realise fundamental systemic changes. A more 'radical ethics' of data politics could serve to renegotiate and re-evaluate interconnected urban crises.
Data politics in the built environment (Editorial)
A. Karvonen & T. Hargreaves
Social justice implications of smart urban technologies: an intersectional approach
N. Sharma, T. Hargreaves & H. Pallett
Urban data: harnessing subjective sociocultural data from local newspapers
F. Mello Rose & J. Chang
Social implications of energy infrastructure digitalisation and decarbonisation
S. Sareen, A. Smith, S. Gantioler, J. Balest, M.C. Brisbois,
S. Tomasi, B. Sovacool, G. A. Torres
Contreras, N. Dellavalle & H. Haarstad
Disruptive data: historicising the platformisation of Dublin's taxi industry
J. White & S. Larsson
Phronesis and epistemic justice in data-driven built environments
Miguel Valdez
The data politics of tech corporations
Dillon Mahmoudi & Alan Wiig
Disruptive technologies and the regulator's dilemma
Andrea Pollio
Populist dissent and digital urbanism
Robert Cowley
Retrofitting Norwegian residential buildings: an archetype-based dynamic stock model
L S A Rousseau, S Amini, S Akin & E G Hertwich
Decolonising time: vernacular villages and the politics of heritage temporality
R Al-Rabady
Commutes to alternative workplaces: GHG emissions and physical activity
J Taylor, L Thoen, A Espinosa Mireles De Villafranca, P Anashin, J Vanhatalo, D Milián
Bernal & I Okkonen
Nine ‘myths’ about the building stock of Great Britain
S Evans, P Steadman, A Neto-Bradley, D Humphrey, R Liddiard,H Shamsi, J Palmer & G Simons
Critical Reconstruction Theory and the invention of post-disaster response
G Lizarralde, D Wachsmuth, F Özdoğan & M Cossu
Post-war reconstruction-as-knowledge practice: Fukui’s dual disaster recovery
A Y F Urushima & K Yamaguchi
Critical reflections on the process of interdisciplinary building science research
G T Morgan, M F Touchie, J Robinson, A Jakubiec & J Tran
Comparing technical disassembly potential methods for concrete and timber buildings
N Westerholm, A Tuure, S Pajunen & M Kuittinen
One-stop shops as leverage points for renovation sufficiency
G Pardalis & M Sula
Creating resilient cities: advocacy and planning for equity-based recovery
A Paidakaki
Impact of glazed balcony design on daylight in Finnish apartments
L Jegard, R Castaño-Rosa & S Pelsmakers
Climate-related risks: implications for municipal governments in Brazil
C Nastari Fernandes, P Ciminelli Ramalho & F Lima-Silva
Changing land-use metrics in mass housing: Türkiye case study
M S Çepni, A K Kutluca, T Salihoğlu, A Atmaca & S Mintemur
Personal comfort systems for adults with intellectual disabilities
K Exss, M Trebilcock, P Wegertseder-Martínez, S Schiavon & H Zhang
How buildings shape occupant movement: a systematic review and framework
G Chinazzo & N Wang
Rethinking the second life of post-disaster and post-conflict temporary housing
N Akdede, B Ö Ay & İ Gürsel Dino
Embodied carbon impacts of residential development siteworks: new assessment framework
P Comerford, O Kinnane, R O’Hegarty & P Crowe
Horizontal building extensions: potential in Finnish blocks of flats
J Tarpio & P Lehtovuori
Post-disaster reconstruction and ethics: the power of social capital
B Ubesingha, G Ofori, G Agyekum-Mensah & D Frings
Towards net zero: sectoral ambitions and global trends in building decarbonisation
C E Caballero-Güereca, J Vogel, N Alaux, C M Ouellet-Plamondon, J Silva Santana, G Foliente, T Lützkendorf & A Passer
Climate literacy and labour agency in vocational education and training
J Calvert, V Price, C Winch, L Clarke, M Sahin-Dikmen, P-L Bilodeau & E Dionne
Towards a new neighbourhood-scale climate risk-adaptation approach
C Rigoni, S Oliveira, O Romice, A Moreno-Rangel & A Chatzimichali
Sharing energy renovations know-how through citizen–professional knowledge networks
C Foulds, S Royston, A Aggeli, A Crowther & R Robison
Environmental impacts of reclaimed bricks: comparing different deconstruction methods
E Salmio & S Huuhka
eCOMBINE: framework for energy, comfort, behaviour and a multi-domain environment
V M Barthelmes, C Karmann, V Gonzalez Serrano, K Lyu, J Wienold, M Andersen, D Licina & D Khovalyg
Living labs as ‘agents for change’ [editorial]
N Antaki, D Petrescu & V Marin

The most important part of any journal is our people – readers, authors, reviewers, editorial board members and editors. You are cordially invited to join our community by joining our mailing list. We send out occasional emails about the journal – calls for papers, special issues, events and more.
We will not share your email with third parties. Read more
Latest Commentaries
Disaster Reconstruction: Practitioner Insights Improve Outcomes
Regan Potangaroa (Auckland University of Technology - AUT), Kelvin Zuo (Massey University), Suzanne Wilkinson (AUT) explain why experience-led knowledge from the field, when triangulated with contemporaneous documentation, can constitute evidence for understanding post-disaster reconstruction systems. People working within reconstruction environments (engineers, builders, logisticians and community actors) provide crucial observations about how reconstruction systems function in practice, particularly supply chains, material flows, procurement and governance in post-disaster rebuilding. Integrating this knowledge can lead to better outcomes.
Preparedness for Recovery
Kristen MacAskill (University of Cambridge) and Lianne Dalziel (University of Canterbury) explain capabilities (and the associated capacity) are essential for preparedness. Capacity for both physical infrastructure and organisational / institutional response are necessary. This commentary focuses primarily on institutional capacity for disaster risk management, and the positive (if slow) developments in the value that is being placed on preparedness.