Easier said than done? Involving citizens in the smart city

Much of the smart cities literature urges greater citizen participation in smart city innovation. However, there is often little consideration given to how citizens might be more meaningfully involved in the processes of governance around smart cities, what enables their involvement, or what might need to change in order to facilitate their participation. Taking an institutional perspective, this paper seeks to move this aspect of the smart city debate forward. Using Mexico City as an exemplar, it examines the broader institutions of urban governance within which citizen-oriented smart city activities operate, identifying those which help and hinder citizen participation. It then considers the extent to which unhelpful institutions are embedded, and to what extent they are amenable to change to allow successful smart city participation initiatives to flourish. Our argument is that when considering citizen participation in smart city activities we need to attend more closely to the institutions which represent their context and the extent to which those institutions can be changed, where necessary, to create a more conducive environment. Many institutions will be beyond the reach of local actors to change or to deinstitutionalise; thus involving citizens in the smart city is ‘easier said than done’.Economic and Social Research Council | Ref. ES/S006710/1Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologí

Exploring citizen participation in smart city development in Mexico city: an institutional logics approach

We explore smart city development, with a focus on the modalities of citizen participation, using an institutional logics approach. Taking Mexico City as our case study, we describe the presence and dynamics of several logics influencing smart city development. At an organizational level we identify the bureaucratic and technocratic logics underpinning the practices of the governmental agency leading smart city development. Characterized by centralization and the pursuit of efficiency, and framed by a discourse of austerity and financial control, these logics promote a modality of citizen participation that is limited and unidirectional in nature, with citizens positioned largely as users. At a supra-organizational level, we identify a logic of active citizen participation in urban governance that is formalized in city laws. However, this logic is itself entangled in a logic of clientelism and patronage, manifested through networks of power. These logics work synergistically to limit broader, inclusive citizen participation in, and realization of benefits from, smart city agendas. We conclude that a richer understanding of institutional logics enhances the analysis of the social construction of the smart city in particular, situated contexts.Economic and Social Research Council | Ref. ES/S006710/

THE FOREIGN POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES: LEADING POWER?

The United States, with its historical background of exceptionalism, rose to power in the twentieth century and has maintained it until today. If it were not for the state’s economic power and its strong institutions within the three branches of government, the U.S. would not be now a dominant global power and a regional hegemonic leader. Thus, even when faced with the lack of leadership, the state is able to retain its dominance in the international arena. Supported with a short review of U.S. history, this article presents the state’s (in)activism in global politics during Obama’s presidency

Immigrant Politics. Analyzing U.S. Presidential Elections through Immigration and Hispanics

The United States is a democracy that every four years elects a President. During the presidential campaigns, the issue of immigration has grown to become one of the most debated in recent times. It has been used to attract voters and to develop the political platform of every candidate. By an empirical analysis of the last four presidential campaigns and the current one of 2016, regarding immigration positions of the candidates and politicians, this article looks to find the connection —if any— with this issue and the Hispanic vote. Thus, candidates focus on these issues in order to gain new constituencies. The declarations and policies about immigration of the 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012 and 2016 candidates will be analyzed in order to validate this premise.Estados Unidos es una democracia que cada cuatro años elige a su presidente. Durante las campañas presidenciales, el tema de la migración ha crecido hasta convertirse en uno de los más debatidos en los últimos tiempos. Se ha utilizado para atraer a los votantes y para desarrollar las plataformas políticas de todos los candidatos. Mediante un análisis empírico de las cuatro últimas campañas presidenciales y la actual de 2016, respecto a las posiciones sobre migración de los candidatos y los políticos, este artículo busca encontrar la conexión —de existir— con este tema y los votos de la comunidad hispana. Por lo tanto, los candidatos se centran en estas cuestiones con el fin de ganar nuevos apoyos. Se analizarán las declaraciones y las políticas sobre migración de los candidatos en 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012 y 2016, a fin de validar esta premisa

Missing voices: Latin American perspectives in International Relations

Academics working in International Relations (IR) often portray the discipline as predominantly American. The traditional orthodox narrative of the discipline, told through the ‘Great Debates’, reinforces this, as it depicts the main scholars in the history of the discipline as primarily originating from either the United States or the United Kingdom. In fact, the most popular books covering key thinkers in the discipline feature virtually no Latin American theorists. The marginalization of voices from the global South, including women, and of non-traditional perspectives has created a knowledge gap within the discipline. To address this, this special section of International Affairs, ‘Missing voices: Latin American perspectives in International Relations’, delves into the rich tapestry of international thought on world affairs, encompassing the works of several intellectuals from Latin America. We are convinced that highlighting these perspectives is vital to dispelling myths and positioning IR in the path of a truly global discipline.Fil: Villanueva, Ricardo. Universidad del Mar; MéxicoFil: De Alba Ulloa, Jessica. Universidad Anahuac Mexico; MéxicoFil: González Olvera, Pedro. Universidad del Mar; MéxicoFil: Lorenzini, Maria Elena. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencia Política y Relaciones Internacionales; Argentin

Challenges to Scholarship and Policy During Crises

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a dramatic influence on mortality and public health and generated much speculation on potential impacts on international politics. Fast-moving crises such as the COVID pandemic and 2008 financial crises entail many challenges for scholarship; events evolve rapidly, our prior knowledge base is limited, it is unclear whether existing theories or analogies apply, and new research findings emerge quickly but also erratically. Researchers face demands to engage with policy and general audiences when normal standards of scholarship may be difficult to apply. Crises can also have a dramatic impact on how we conduct research and interact with other scholars. The forum introduction outlines how crises pose challenges for scholarship and policy and the value of approaching crises such as COVID-19 in comparative perspective. Milner highlights the important differences between the immediately observable short-term impact of crises and the more difficult to evaluate long-run impacts. Kneuer examines how crises can impact political change, detailing how COVID countermeasures can serve as a pretext for autocratization and the safeguards afforded by institutions. Solingen examines the impact of serial crises on global value chains and the difficulties in tracing impacts when crises are compounded. De Alba-Ulloa documents how scholars in the Global South and North face similar challenges during the COVID pandemic, but differences in resources to mitigate can exacerbate inequalities. Davies highlights the difficulties in studying public opinion during COVID and need for behavioral data to understand global health emergencies. Ghosn examines dilemmas in interacting with severely affected communities during crises and offers advice on better practices