The nature of AI: Metabolism, energy, water, labour and justice in the urban political ecology of artificial intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The integration of vast volumes of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology into the built environment is changing the metabolism of urban spaces. Due to the presence of various AIs in urban systems, there are now more agentic forces influencing the trajectory of urban development and entangling with pre-existing biological intelligences. Because of AI's substantial environmental costs, more resources are now needed to satisfy cities' technological appetite. Urban futures are also becoming more uncertain as private AI companies gain considerable power in urban governance through oligarchic schemes that leave citizens with no voice. In this paper, we bridge Urban Political Ecology (UPE) and urban AI literature, in order to critically examine the nature of AI as it intertwines with urban living and urban infrastructure. More specifically, we offer a threefold contribution to knowledge. First, we examine how the advent of urban AI is altering urban metabolism, zooming in on specific socio-environmental issues pertaining to energy, water and labour. Second, we discuss how the urban metabolisms altered by AI are reproducing uneven dynamics of development that are ultimately leading to different forms of injustice. Third and finally, we propose a potential course of action to politicize urban AI and intervene on its evolution.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".