Conference Agenda

1. Problem Statement and Purpose

The digital and intelligent technology and its concentration in cities have accelerated the process towards an era of complex uncertainties in which new, various and impalpable risks are impacting urban security and its conventional governance practice. Among those risks, changes in the spread of digital extremism have posed a huge challenge to urban security by aggravating social division and polarization as well as causing criminal cases. With the diffusion of digital extremism becoming normal, frequent and complicated, a sustainable and systematic governance model based on urban security resilience is in urgent need. This paper argues that a framework in light of the concept of “comprehensive urban security resilience(CUSR)”, surpassing traditional emphasis on natural disasters or social incidents, should be established. Meanwhile, the study seeks to build a corresponding governance mechanism that intensifies the adaptability of worldwide cities in terms of intangible threats.

2. Methodology

A combination of normative and empirical research approaches was employed with case studies, data and facts. Network Ethnography was also employed to analyze online extremism communities.

3. Findings

The study revealed that the new trends include both static and dynamic features. The former can be generalized as “one body with two wings”: “one body” refers to the dependence on digital and intelligent technology to achieve precise diffusion and effective camouflage while “two wings” means the emphasis on social media and cyber subcultural products to accelerate extremism promotion. The dynamic characteristics can be summarized as “six modes of operation” with the first half——the convergence by algorithm, rigid lock of extreme thought and offensive behavior as well as an interaction of “double realities” exist on social media while the other half——dual attractions of narrative and non-narrative dimensions, the restraint of active thinking as well as the expansion of functions occur on subcultural products like video games. The new trends above are caused by a surge of information flows, the effect of technological non-neutrality and the influence of uncertainties and multi-sector polarization, which calls for a systematic governance mechanism centering on urban security resilience.

4. Proposal

According to CUSR, the rapid speared of digital extremism is a cross-point among political, cultural and social security resilience. Therefore, in order to curb the risk, public institutions should establish an integrated resilience governance mechanism. First, structural resilience must be enhanced by coordinating various actors as well as designing an institutional system focusing on normal governance, full-chain governance and administrative execution; Second, functional resilience should get promoted by a synergy of information infrastructure protection, talent training and cultural identification; Third, supportive resilience needs to be intensified by continuously updating technological means and legislation.

5. References

S. Meerow et al, Defining Urban Resilience: A Review, Landscape ＆ Urban Planning，Vol.147, No. 3, 2016.

A. Helmi et al, Key Trends in Digital Extremism 2024: The Resilience and Expansion of Jihadist and Far-Right Movement, Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2025.

Zhuang Guobo and Liao Hanxiang, Comprehensive Urban Security Resilience: Theoretical Development and Governance Promotion, Theoretical Investigation, No.1 , 2023.

The governance for dispute resolution is a crucial aspect of social governance and serves as a "ballast stone" for social stability. Recent localized experiences from national exemplary cases of innovative social governance indicate that grassroots governance for dispute resolution in China's new era follows the practical logic and developmental trend of "handling incidents without crossing the line"—allowing general conflicts and disputes to emerge but preventing them from escalating uncontrollably to disrupt social stability severely. This governance approach is primarily supported by three mechanisms: a tiered filtration mechanism centered on localized dispute resolution, a resource allocation mechanism centered on integrated dispute resolution, and a process control mechanism centered on soft dispute resolution. Among these, localized dispute resolution focuses on timely, on-site mediation to prevent conflicts from escalating; integrated dispute resolution aims to consolidate diverse dispute resolution resources through one-stop platforms; and soft dispute resolution prioritizes mediation that harmonizes reason, emotion, and law.

1. Problem statement and purpose

Smart city development initiatives are strategic efforts to transform urban governance, enhance service delivery, and drive economic development through digital technologies. Despite these innovations promising inclusive and responsive service delivery, are often framed through an instrumental logic, where technology is used to optimise, control, and streamline urban systems for functional efficiency. This framing reduces mushrooming of informal settlements, mobility networks, economies, and governance systems to standing reserves —entities awaiting integration, regulation, or elimination. In turn, the lived experiences, adaptive capacities, and relational values of informal systems are undermined, especially within South African communities that are burdened by inequality and digital exclusion. Extensive smart city studies address exclusionary tendencies but rarely explore how digital governance enframes informality as a technological deficiency rather than a co-creative domain.

This paper critically examines the technological and ontological assumptions underlying smart city development, exploring how these assumptions influence the inclusion or exclusion of informal systems. The study argues that South African smart city initiatives currently represent static and technocratic governance models that overlook the relational, cultural, and psychosocial dimensions of urban life. This view calls for an alternative theoretical orientation that recognises informality as a legitimate governance domain to advance participatory and transformative smart city planning.

2. Methodology

The study employs a qualitative systematic literature review to examine how the South African smart city discourse frames informal systems. Peer-reviewed articles, policy reports, and case studies on smart city development and digital governance were identified through academic databases. The Covidence platform managed the screening, selection and data extraction processes. Heidegger's philosophy of technology informed the interpretive lens, enabling a critical examination of the ontological implications embedded in dominant smart city models and their implications for inclusive governance.

3. Findings

The study revealed that South African smart city initiatives actively enframe informal systems as technical deficiencies, optimising them through datafication, regulation, or infrastructure upgrades. By reducing informal settlements, mobility systems, and economies to standing reserves—resources to be controlled rather than relational systems with embedded governance value—smart city initiatives produce static governance models rooted in technological authority and optimisation. As a result, they marginalise lived realities and participatory decision-making processes. Consequently, the smart city discourse suppresses plural and co-constitutive urban practices, ultimately hindering inclusive governance and the localisation of SDGs at the subnational level in South Africa. Technological strategies must shift from technocratic optimisation to relational inclusion to enhance transformative governance.

4. Proposal

This paper redefines governance frontiers through relational process ontology and integrative governance. It proposes a paradigmatic shift in how informal systems are understood — not as transitional deficiencies awaiting optimisation but co-creative, relational participants in governance. Drawing on relational psychosocial theory, the study repositions informal systems as dynamic, situated and capable of contributing to inclusive, context-responsive smart city development. Informal systems should be recognised for their suitability—context-responsive value and appropriateness—alignment with constitutional and developmental goals. This reframing calls for a psychosocially grounded smart city paradigm that transcends technocratic optimisation to embrace plural, fluid, and evolving governance identities.