The Fujisawa Sustainable Smart Town (FSST) project was initiated by Panasonic Corporation to develop a sustainable and technologically advanced residential community, addressing the needs of the Japanese market with an aging population and a declining electronics market. Started in 2012, following the closure of a 19-hectare industrial complex in Fujisawa in 2008, FSST saw its first residents move in by 2014. By 2018, 600 smart houses and 400 small apartments had been completed.
The “Fujisawa Model” reverses the traditional smart city approach, focusing on residents’ lifestyles in terms of energy, mobility, and wellness. Key project goals include reducing CO2 emissions by 70% compared to 1990, reducing water consumption by 30% compared to 2006, and sourcing at least 30% of total energy consumption from renewable sources. FSST also aims to maintain urban life during severe natural disasters.
To achieve these goals, five main services and projects were identified:
1. Energy: Use of renewable sources and advanced technologies for energy management and generation.
2. Security: Creation of a “virtually fenced city” with monitoring.
3. Mobility: Promotion of car-free mobility with sharing services and charging points for electric vehicles.
4. Wellness: Support for healthy lifestyles with health information, urban gardens, and sports facilities.
5. Community: Creation of a cohesive social community with digital and non-digital solutions.
Project governance is managed by three main bodies: the FSST Council, responsible for strategic and financial matters; the FSST Management Company, which handles operational activities; and the SST Committee, which includes residents and serves as a forum for co-creation and feedback.
In summary, FSST is an innovative example of integrating advanced technologies and sustainability to create a resilient and cohesive urban community, addressing contemporary Japan’s economic and social challenges.
Theoretical Framework of Co-Cities and Research Question
3.1 Theoretical Framework of Co-Cities
The co-cities framework is inspired by Elinor Ostrom’s concept of commons, adapted to the urban context. Ostrom demonstrated that communities could sustainably manage commons, characterized by rivalry and non-excludability, through eight key principles and a polycentric governance involving various independent governmental entities. A common good is defined as a shared resource institutionally managed by community members.
The co-cities concept is based on five design principles:
1. Collective Governance: Presence or absence of community-organized governance institutions.
2. Enabling State: The state’s role as a facilitator of collective action.
3. Social and Economic Pooling: Forms of economic pooling.
4. Experimentation: Adaptive and iterative institutional design.
5. Technological Justice: Access to technology and digital infrastructure to facilitate collaboration.
Analysis of Design Principles
Collective Governance of FSST
The Fujisawa Sustainable Smart Town (FSST) project aims to create a smart and sustainable city, predominantly driven by Panasonic with minimal participation from community groups and public authorities. Panasonic has invested about $580 million and maintains a predominant role in strategic decisions. The community was selected based on high financial capacity, with residents having little influence over strategic decisions. Public authorities had a limited, primarily advisory role, and the project is entirely financed by Panasonic. Project governance is heavily skewed towards private interests, with little public and community representation.
Social and Economic Pooling
In FSST, the sharing economy leans more towards access than social and economic pooling. Renewable energy storage batteries are shared operationally, without common ownership. Car sharing and bike sharing services are available for a fee, reflecting a weak sharing economy. Additionally, there is a resident assistance platform based on non-monetized mutual support rather than direct economic transactions.
Enabling State
The enabling state in FSST plays a marginal role, providing general conditions rather than active participation in governance. Japanese government policies support smart cities as part of economic renewal strategy, but direct state intervention is limited.
Experimentation
FSST stands out for its experimentation, characterized by a clear model and framework, implementation strategies, and various innovative projects. While this approach is replicable in similar contexts, it is limited by Japan’s unique context and a focus on specific goals rather than managing urban commons.
Technological Justice
Regarding technological justice, FSST ensures equitable access to digital services for all residents, without evident digital divides due to widespread technology adoption. However, the digital infrastructure is exclusively owned by Panasonic, not the community, limiting the degree of technological justice.
Conclusion
The Fujisawa Sustainable Smart Town (FSST) project raises concerns about urban commons management, highlighting a private sector-dominated smart city model. The FSST case analysis suggests the project focuses on monetizing shared resources, favoring a “new urbanism” characterized by individualization and reduced collective actions, as described by David Harvey. The city favors privatized access to resources, supported by a wealthy demographic and lacking open discussions on social inequality. The “virtually fenced city” emphasizes security at the expense of diversity and public participation.
Scholars like Ranchordás emphasize that without strong public oversight, smart cities become more corporatized, outsourcing public tasks and neglecting social rights and political citizenship. An example is Alphabet’s project in Toronto, where corporations control urban planning and data, limiting city autonomy. In contrast, Barcelona represents a positive model with its ethical digital standards and promotion of collective well-being.
The FSST case demonstrates that corporate dominance can limit inclusive and sustainable policies in smart cities. It is essential to balance corporate power with public involvement to meet collective needs and promote social and economic well-being. The future of smart cities must be guided by an integrated vision, avoiding paths that prioritize private economic interests over the community.