The unraveling of the modern infrastructural ideal?

Holes in the network, disconnection, fragmentation

From universal and uniform to differentiated

• The advent of neo-liberalism and the development of new technologies have led to a weakening of the MII, in the developed and developing worlds, with varying social and spatial consequences

• New technologies, especially IT, allow to discriminate between users and diversify the range and level of services offered like never before

• We will analyse the problems emerging from these changes, as well as the potential positive opportunities

• A key point here is the increasing differentiation of service: where before the aim was to roll out a universal and uniform system, in search of economies of scale and public policy goals, now we see attempts to occupy niches and break down users into as many categories as can be profitable

Golden age of UTN under public control

• The period post WWII-1970s is probably the ‘golden age’ of the ‘modern infrastructural ideal’, at least in the developed world

• It combined public control, high investments, good status for workers in network industries, high levels of cross-subsidies and generally high level of service

• Some examples of networks that were considerably advanced in this stage are national road/highway systems and telecoms

UK highway system, from late 1950s: in just 2 decades, the country went from zero highways to a network!

Why did the MII come under attack?

• If the MII had been so perfect, it would probably not have been challenged

• A set of challenges emerged from the 1970s• These challenges were social, political,

economic, technical and environmental• They have been reshaping the governance of

networked systems ever since• We are still in this post-MII era of

reconfiguration, of transition

The downsides/ critiques• High resource consumption model, high

intensity: laying the ground for sustainability crisis?

• Overly centralised? Poor resilience in case of disaster

• The socio-economic model: high cross-subsidies, lack of dynamism/innovation?

• Victim of own success?

High intensity, high throughput• The networks that were developed in this ‘golden

age’, and which we are still used to today, are part and parcel of a resource-intensive society

• They are high production, high throughput and high waste systems, conceived in an age where resource management was not seen as an issue

• Remember the notion of path dependency—our societies are ‘addicted’ to a certain type of metabolism

• Self-perpetuating high consumption

Examples• Water systems: we use high quality water

resources for low-grade uses, such as flushing or watering lawns; we could imagine dual piping systems to be more efficient, by using ‘grey water’ or collected rainwater for these

• Electricity: how many of our devices are constantly on standby, and how much does this add up to? E.g. ‘vampire’ energy and Jevons paradox

Dual plumbing/grey water system

Overly centralised systems?• Another characteristic of the classic urban technical

network system is its centralisation• One example is the power system, with big power

plants producing energy for large areas, or transport systems focusing around nodes (hub and spoke), telecom exchanges etc.

• This was in keeping with a spirit of rationalisation (Fordism) and economies of scale

• However, this is also a weakness in the case of natural and/or human-made disasters

• De-centralised systems are now being advocated

• These include wind, solar• Energy production can be spread out

geographically and between production modes (most efficient at any given time)

• Introduction of new technologies can take us towards smart consumption: smart meters, smart homes that automatically switch off certain appliances at certain times etc.

Dual meter

• The above examples show that the MII was (and is) potentially conducive to waste

• Thus, a change towards a more decentralised, cost-focused model is not all bad in environmental (and economic) terms…

The socio-economic model: sclerotic?• One reason for the onslaught of neo-liberalism

and the application of new technologies to transforming networked systems was the perception of an old, antiquated model of production and labour embodied by these UTN

• Seen as big, lumbering, old-fashioned corporations, with too many unproductive employees in need of a ‘kick’

Beeching cuts

• The UK railways suffered profound cuts from the mid-1960s

• Networks was seen as over-dimensioned, too costly and bureaucratic

• A coalition of tax-cutters and road-builders• Planners were certain that the car would rule• Dr Beeching devised the cuts• Scotland and Wales were very hard hit• Another plan in 1983 proposed reducing the

network by another 84%!• In mid 1990s, railway system would be privatised

• Today, several of the closed lines have been reopened and are thriving

• There is actually too little capacity vs demand on the network!

• This shows the dangers of massive cuts: how many more lines could be used beneficially today?

• Once networks are ripped out, it’s very hard to put them back in…again, the Edinburgh tram is a good case in point!

MII victim of its own success?• The death of the ‘technological sublime’?• Sense of networks as so ordinary, banal (we

do call them ‘utilities’!)• Buried underground, out of sight etc.• The public aren’t aware of, and don’t

appreciate the socio-technical ‘miracle’ that this is!

• We can see the same happening now with the internet for example.

In the developing world, a different story

• In countries of the South, attempts to emulate the MII remained incomplete, laying the basis for the current situation of fragmented, piecemeal networks

• One general trend is the heritage of colonial times, i.e. a piecemeal development of Western-style UTNs alongside vast areas with no or little systems

• This usually mirrors the divide that existed between the colonial city, built on a Western model, and informal settlements (shantytowns and the like)

• The former has networks similar to Western cities, whilst the latter has piecemeal, often improvised systems (e.g. water trucks in Delhi, or one water pipe for several families; illegal connections to the power system etc.)

• In cities of the developing world, recent changes have had mixed effects

• New technologies, such as prepay meters, have allowed some to connect and budget for their consumption in ways that were not possible before

• But the roll-out of neoliberal policies of cost-recovery has also been harmful to vulnerable populations, meaning sometimes less access than before

• E.g. Cape Town ‘townships’/Eskom

The role of technology• Information technologies, such as computers

and over the last 2 decades, rise and pervasiveness of the internet—always on, always there (mobile devices)

• This allows service providers to:• -gather more, and more precise information on

their customers, and thus tailor their offer• -cut out many intermediary jobs (self-service,

offices not required)

Cherry-picking (Graham and Marvin 2001)

• This refers to the capacity of network service providers to choose their customers based on willingness to pay and solvency

• Private sector businesses, more focused on profit, will only seek the ‘best’ customers

• Hence use of credit scoring and other tools to ‘filter out’—thanks to possession of massive quantity of information on people

Bypass (idem)• While the publicly-owned systems of the ‘golden age’

had an aim of universal service, many operators since then would rather avoid serving entire sections of the population so as not to take any risks

• This is all the more pronounced in the developing world, where frequently some neighbourhoods will have no (official) water/waste/electric etc. services

• But in the developed world, we have dead zones or zones of poor service for instance internet (digital divide), as it is not profitable enough for a private sector provider to roll out a network there

The digital divide

• At the global scale, here in the case of the internet, it is clear that there are whole areas that are poorly or not covered

• These correspond to the poorer countries

• Even within developed areas, however, there are gaps and holes in the system, and not everyone is covered equally, especially when it comes to the newer technologies

• In fact, the faster the development of technologies, the lesser government intervention, the greater the gaps seem to get

• Case of ultra high-speed fiber these days, for example, where only a few test sites are equipped, and where the price is prohibitive for many

Premium network spaces• A corollary of these evolutions is the emergence of PNS• This is the concentration of a range of high quality

networked services in certain socio-spatial sectors, usually within luxury (premium) housing developments

• We can think here of gated communities, branded housing projects, techno parks, special economic zones etc.

• These PNS are often more connected to other similar areas, even across the planet, as they are to their own cities and neighbours;

• in a way, this is a form of extra-territoriality, of secession, as these spaces form a new socio-technological entity

• This is very apparent in the developing world, where the socio-spatial segregation is strong

• The wealthier, living in high-end, often gated housing, benefit from world-class networked connections

• The poorer, at the opposite end of the spectrum, often do not even have the basic systems, such as water, power…

Negative consequences• The phenomena of cherry-picking, bypass and

premium network spaces can have negative consequences in terms of social cohesion and inclusiveness

• In this sense, changes in networked systems governance can be linked to current trends towards urban fragmentation

• In your opinion, what is urban fragmentation?• Think of a definition, and some examples…

What is urban fragmentation?• Fragmentation is the opposite of integration• Refers to a process whereby the city seems to

‘come apart’• In social, political, economic and also physical

terms• People and spaces are less connected, there is

less of a sense of community, of shared destiny, and less functional integration

• Different from segregation: the Apartheid city in South Africa was segregated, but not necessarily fragmented, as it formed a functional whole—the white city needed the black workforce

• In today’s fragmented city, the elite does not even really need the ‘underclass’ as goods are produced overseas, and even service jobs are delocalised!

• In this sense, the separation is even more pronounced, and can lead a part of the city to secede

San Fernando Valley

• The SFV is an interesting case• Indeed, the issue of network governance played

a big role in the secession not happening• It was difficult to come to an agreement as the

how the LADWP would be partitioned between the cities

• The company would have had to be broken up, which is against its charter

• It could have charged enormous prices to the new city, making it non-viable economically!

• Here, networks played an integrating role

A positive potential too?

• It is important here to nuance the image of the MII• The uniformity and universalism, the equitable

treatment of all users irrespective of income etc., was never quite achieved—this was always an ideal

• It may also not be a totally reasonable ideal in certain poorer areas of our cities, or in the developing world, as not everyone has the capacity to afford these systems

• In this sense, recent evolutions may offer some interesting possibilities

The spread of mobile phones in Kenya (and other African countries)

• M-Pesa system in Kenya• Other similar systems in Nigeria etc.• Use of mobile phones by a population which is

underserved by traditional networks and traditional banking systems

• Cheap, ubiquitous mobiles have allowed to connect people to the banking sector in ways that were impossible before

• Paying, sending/receiving money become easy, facilitating daily life and business

Providing network access

Cheap and easy access to services

• M-Pesa is a clear example of post-MII network access

• New technologies and new modes of governance (private sector rather than government) have effectively managed to connect people who were not networked

• In this sense, smaller scale, ‘lighter’ approaches can be extremely socially beneficial

Pre-payment meters: always bad?• Seen as a symbol of the unraveling of the MII,

since some people shunted towards a lower level of connection, more precarious and more expensive per unit

• However, may be a way to manage budget more proactively for some, on the model of pay as you go for phones

Your thoughts• What do you think, on balance, of the

opportunities and limits offered by the new approaches to network governance?

• Think of some examples along the lines of what we have just seen (you may use computers to help)

• Is the MII really dead/dying? Or mutating? • Take some moments in your groups to reflect

on this…