IoT Community Technologies: Leaving Users to Their Own Devices or Orchestration of Engagement?
Citizens are increasingly crowdfunding IoT based participatory sensing technologies that allow them to collect and sharedata about the environment. These initiatives are usually referred to as grassroots and are driven by a vision of wideningaccess to tools for political action. In this paper we com...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
European Alliance for Innovation (EAI)
2015-10-01
|
Series: | EAI Endorsed Transactions on Internet of Things |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://eudl.eu/pdf/10.4108/eai.26-10-2015.150601 |
id |
doaj-bc6c49e06db14bf7be3741275c8ee23f |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-bc6c49e06db14bf7be3741275c8ee23f2020-11-25T02:43:26ZengEuropean Alliance for Innovation (EAI)EAI Endorsed Transactions on Internet of Things2414-13992015-10-011110.4108/eai.26-10-2015.150601IoT Community Technologies: Leaving Users to Their Own Devices or Orchestration of Engagement?M. Balestrini0T. Diez1P. Marshall2A. Gluhak3Y. Rogers4Intel ICRI Cities, University College London, UKIntel ICRI Cities, University College London, UKUCLIC, University College London, UKIntel Labs Europe, London, UKUCLIC, University College London, UKCitizens are increasingly crowdfunding IoT based participatory sensing technologies that allow them to collect and sharedata about the environment. These initiatives are usually referred to as grassroots and are driven by a vision of wideningaccess to tools for political action. In this paper we compare patterns of participation and user experience over 15 monthsin two distinct communities using ‘Smart Citizen’, a crowdfunded IoT participatory sensing tool. Our studies reveal thattechnology issues and a lack of reliability of the sensed data hindered user participation. However, in one of thecommunities, many of these challenges were overcome through orchestrated actions led by community champions. Wediscuss how crowdfunding doesn’t necessarily translate into active participation and provide guidelines on how to achievesustained engagement in crowdfunded IoT community sensing projects: enable distributed orchestration provided by localchampions, encourage social interactions that embed skills and learning, and facilitate meaningful participation and rewardmechanisms among community members.https://eudl.eu/pdf/10.4108/eai.26-10-2015.150601IoT community technologiesengagementcrowdfundingsocial actionactivismparticipatory sensing |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
M. Balestrini T. Diez P. Marshall A. Gluhak Y. Rogers |
spellingShingle |
M. Balestrini T. Diez P. Marshall A. Gluhak Y. Rogers IoT Community Technologies: Leaving Users to Their Own Devices or Orchestration of Engagement? EAI Endorsed Transactions on Internet of Things IoT community technologies engagement crowdfunding social action activism participatory sensing |
author_facet |
M. Balestrini T. Diez P. Marshall A. Gluhak Y. Rogers |
author_sort |
M. Balestrini |
title |
IoT Community Technologies: Leaving Users to Their Own Devices or Orchestration of Engagement? |
title_short |
IoT Community Technologies: Leaving Users to Their Own Devices or Orchestration of Engagement? |
title_full |
IoT Community Technologies: Leaving Users to Their Own Devices or Orchestration of Engagement? |
title_fullStr |
IoT Community Technologies: Leaving Users to Their Own Devices or Orchestration of Engagement? |
title_full_unstemmed |
IoT Community Technologies: Leaving Users to Their Own Devices or Orchestration of Engagement? |
title_sort |
iot community technologies: leaving users to their own devices or orchestration of engagement? |
publisher |
European Alliance for Innovation (EAI) |
series |
EAI Endorsed Transactions on Internet of Things |
issn |
2414-1399 |
publishDate |
2015-10-01 |
description |
Citizens are increasingly crowdfunding IoT based participatory sensing technologies that allow them to collect and sharedata about the environment. These initiatives are usually referred to as grassroots and are driven by a vision of wideningaccess to tools for political action. In this paper we compare patterns of participation and user experience over 15 monthsin two distinct communities using ‘Smart Citizen’, a crowdfunded IoT participatory sensing tool. Our studies reveal thattechnology issues and a lack of reliability of the sensed data hindered user participation. However, in one of thecommunities, many of these challenges were overcome through orchestrated actions led by community champions. Wediscuss how crowdfunding doesn’t necessarily translate into active participation and provide guidelines on how to achievesustained engagement in crowdfunded IoT community sensing projects: enable distributed orchestration provided by localchampions, encourage social interactions that embed skills and learning, and facilitate meaningful participation and rewardmechanisms among community members. |
topic |
IoT community technologies engagement crowdfunding social action activism participatory sensing |
url |
https://eudl.eu/pdf/10.4108/eai.26-10-2015.150601 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT mbalestrini iotcommunitytechnologiesleavinguserstotheirowndevicesororchestrationofengagement AT tdiez iotcommunitytechnologiesleavinguserstotheirowndevicesororchestrationofengagement AT pmarshall iotcommunitytechnologiesleavinguserstotheirowndevicesororchestrationofengagement AT agluhak iotcommunitytechnologiesleavinguserstotheirowndevicesororchestrationofengagement AT yrogers iotcommunitytechnologiesleavinguserstotheirowndevicesororchestrationofengagement |
_version_ |
1724769355718197248 |