The term “smart city” fails to fully capture the integrated data system that is the Pudong New Area of Shanghai.  Chinese authorities call it the “city brain,” a centrally controlled A.I. center that surveils and manages the city and its inhabitants.  It offers a disturbing preview of future urban governance, built on a previously unimaginable level of monitoring and control.  Since 2017, this system has linked hundreds of government databases to tens of thousands of sensors, effectively turning an entire urban district into a single, real-time data object.

Officials defend the surveillance for its tangible rewards: cleaner neighborhoods, faster emergency response, smoother traffic, and better protection for isolated seniors.  Those benefits help explain why many citizens accept the system.  But the costs are equally real.  It normalizes penetrating, constant visibility, the steady expansion of behavior-based penalties, and an infrastructure that is also used for political and social control.

What is Pudong’s city brain?

China Daily, the state newspaper, describes this hub as an online management platform that connects “341 separate government systems” — including public security, city administration, and environmental protection.  Feeding the system are roughly 40,000 networked sensing devices that monitor conditions in real time.  These include cameras, traffic sensors, environmental monitors, and various Internet-of-Things devices mounted on buildings and infrastructure.  In the first phase alone, the system ingested 11.8 petabytes of city data.

Urban management is divided into about 60 “scenarios” — bus route optimization, noise complaints, flood control, construction sites, sanitation, and more.  Each scenario has its own indicators, alarms, and automatic response workflows.  The result is a data platform whose purpose is to watch and coordinate the district at all times, providing a granular picture of daily life in Pudong.

What does the urban brain monitor?

One of the earliest use cases was to monitor and control construction trucks and freight vehicles.  Pudong installed 24-hour probes along key routes so that when a truck violates routing rules, emits abnormal levels of dust, or enters a restricted area, the system automatically flags the incident, alerting law enforcement and the company that owns the vehicle.  China Daily reports that the monitors have reduced daily “irregularities” from construction trucks from 30 a day to just two.  Local officials credit the behavioral change to continuous monitoring and automated alerts.

The same platform ingests live feeds from traffic cameras and other sensors to manage congestion, adjust signals, and reroute public buses in real time.  It is modeled on Alibaba’s “City Brain” traffic projects in other Chinese cities, which use artificial intelligence to analyze live camera and GPS data and optimize traffic flow.  Alibaba can coordinate smart parking solutions, monitor road conditions and trigger maintenance alerts, manage “intelligent streetlights that respond to weather and traffic,” and operate smart grids to conserve energy.

Seeking to become a “zero-waste city,” Shanghai uses the urban brain to streamline waste management.  Artificial intelligence monitors trash trucks and their loads.  Cameras and weighing equipment detect when wet and dry trash are improperly mixed.  The system records the time, location, license plate, and photo evidence, then sends a “warning event” to sanitation authorities.  In just the first half of one recent year, Shanghai’s waste platform generated about 900 such alerts, many involving cases in Pudong.

Pudong also has a dedicated A.I. innovation hub, Zhangjiang Science and Technology City, where authorities experiment with trash bins that automatically recognize and sort waste using computer vision.  Residents who fail to comply face fines of up to 200 yuan, with data and camera footage feeding into local enforcement.  Wall Street Journal reporting notes that violators can lose social credit points, affecting job and loan applications, and that some apartment buildings post compliance lists in the lobby.

The city brain also monitors for illegal rooftop structures, unlicensed renovations, restaurants using recycled cooking oil (“gutter oil”), and unregistered gas installations.  Vehicle-mounted gas sensors and high-precision methane detectors scan buildings and automatically log anomalies into the central platform.

Drones are used to check for illegal construction at high altitudes.  The system dispatches drones equipped with cameras and A.I. recognition so that when the urban brain detects an illegal structure or violation, it can send a drone to capture evidence and upload images directly into a case management workflow, often within fifteen minutes.  Authorities increasingly use drones to monitor citizens as well.

Monitoring the elderly

Several Shanghai communities, including Pudong, have installed smart water meters and other “lifeline” sensors in the homes of seniors.  If a water meter shows no usage for a period of time, the system triggers an alert to the community for a welfare check.  Additional smart monitors are deployed: smoke detectors, gas sensors, and “life signal processors” that feed data back to sub-centers and, in emergencies, to the central hub.  Although these monitors can save lives, it also means that the state continuously monitors and logs the daily routines of vulnerable citizens.

The urban brain also monitors people.  When a resident throws trash, drives a truck, renovates a rooftop, or fails to use water for a given period, his behavior is captured, logged, and evaluated.  Over time, this builds a more granular picture of habits, routines, and “deviations.”  Data may be framed as “anonymous” or “for service improvement,” but the combination of address-level sensors, license plates, and grid-style neighborhood management makes it easy for authorities to connect patterns back to individuals or families.

China’s national social credit framework is not necessarily a single unified social score that triggers penalties.  It is more accurately a system of multiple, separate blacklists, and local scoring systems.  The state reshapes behavior both by law and through penalties and nudges, managed by algorithms.  It is a system of coercion based on fear of detection.  Data from Pudong’s city brain feeds into these local administrative records.  Residents and businesses can be fined, be publicly shamed, or face bureaucratic obstacles.  In some cases, repeat offenders find it harder to get permits or contracts, even if there is no formal criminal charge.

There is no serious concept of “data minimization” or meaningful consent in China’s public-sector data projects.  Citizens cannot opt out of smart meters, street cameras, or drone flyovers.  They rarely know what specific data are collected, how long they are kept, or who exactly has access.  The uncertainty alone produces behavioral change and encourages self-censorship.

Massive, centralized data stores can be abused to target citizens or businesses.  A mid-level official with access could target a citizen and sell data for bribes, business, or political advantage.  Rival political factions can track loyalties and private meetings or selectively leak career-destroying information.  Public debate over these risks inside China is muted, and independent oversight is minimal.

Pudong not the only algorithmic city

An even more advanced variant of Pudong is the Xiong’an New Area, 500 miles from Beijing — a $500-billion A.I. city with about 5 million residents.  Algorithms manage utilities through a vast tunnel network.  Underground highways hide delivery trucks, while self-driving pods move goods to distribution points beneath apartment blocks.  Residents live in tightly designed 15-minute communities, ringed by green infrastructure and the Millennium Forest Project, five times the size of Manhattan.

Western nations are also rolling out “intelligent” surveillance, but these systems are less centralized, less granular, and more private.  Were a Western country to hoover up as much data, it would likely trigger media investigations, lawsuits, or political hearings.

Open criticism of state surveillance is risky in China.  The press is controlled, civil society is tightly managed, and courts are not independent of the state.  Public discussion of abuses is rare, few will question them, and most criticism is framed as hindering stability or helping foreign enemies.  If internal rules or audits exist, they still operate within the same power structure that built the system in the first place.

Image via Pxhere.