Although the genie is out of the bottle, there remain possibilities to limit the scope of technology in the public domain. This was the common thread in Rotterdam during the ‘Smart & Social Fest 2025’ last month. Amongst others, Marietje Schaake (Stanford) and Anne Fleur van Veenstra (Leiden-Delft-Erasmus Centre for Bold Cities) gave their insights on how to improve the current situation.
By Inge Janse
“Technology will always outrun legislation, and we prioritise innovation over checks & balances.” It is crystal clear: former member of parliament (and current director of the Cyber Policy Centre of Stanford University) Marietje Schaake holds a critical perspective regarding the position that technology occupies in the world. “We like to focus on the possibilities, but never on the possible dangers’’.
In her role as keynote speaker during the Smart & Social Fest 2025 hosted by Hogeschool Rotterdam, Schaake advises to continuously evaluate technology through the lens of power. Who has the capital and network to exploit technology, and with what goal in mind?
Historically, says Schaake, we were rather naïve. We imagined digitalisation to foster democratisation. The internet was bottom-up and grassroots. Soon, it became evident that the companies developing the technology were in the lead. Since the internet holds a public function, these companies were suddenly ascribed a public role, including the power that accompanies it. Yet, without any form of control or regulation.
''Exploitation of technology should chase the good. Once we start demanding that good, a market will automatically emerge for companies that identify with that cause.''
Concealed disadvantages
The European Union, says Schaake, presented a safe haven in a tumultuous world. “The past five years, we had ambitious legislation targeting the control of technology. The idea was: in the USA, the market holds the power, in China it is the state, and in Europe it is legislation.’’ However, this trend has countered, and ever since technology meets increasingly fewer checks & balances.
Thus, Schaake calls on the audience: “Create a tech sector within the EU that is thoroughly embedded in our views on a functioning democracy and public values”. According to her, this is doable by prioritising the pursuit of societal conditions in contracting and decreasing space for companies to pursue profit maximisation. “Exploitation of technology should chase the good. Once we start demanding that good, a market will automatically emerge for companies that identify with that cause.”
To illustrate her point, Schaake mentions, amongst others, Signal, the privacy-friendly alternative to WhatsApp. She also refers to a Spanish cooperation of tech developers, which operates without profit maximisation. “In other words, it is possible’’.
Take back control
Paul Rutten, leaving lecturer Creative Business of Hogeschool Rotterdam, builds on Schaake’s advice during his farewell speech. The good of technology in the public domain is only in reach, he claims, when it supports humans to live a good and meaningful life. “Consider welfare in the broad sense each time when deciding about digitalisation. Quit thinking in terms of market power and the pursuit of an efficient government.” He refers to the ideas of economist Mariana Mazzucato. She advocates for a government with a clear mission and framework, providing guidelines for the market to operate.
According to Rutten, it is possible when the government prioritises three issues: clear communication on what is expected from the market, independent development of services to gain back control, and to facilitate initiatives that emerge directly from the city, through citizens or education, for example. “This remains an issue in Rotterdam. There are civil servants of good will, yet the big decisions on how to shape digitalisation are too politically dependent.
Public, layer by layer
During the following panel talk, one of these civil servants takes the floor. Roland van der Heijden is the program manager Digital City for the municipality of Rotterdam and recognises the arguments presented by Rutten. “Digitalisation plays a minimal role in politics. It is barely mentioned in the coalition program. It is key to integrate the topic in electoral programs.”
According to Van der Heijden, the situation calls for this urgently. “As a city, we lost control, and as a government, we became a customer in our own city. We must increase control over our digital infrastructure. It is now completely owned by private companies, whilst the physical domain is completely public.’’
"We must reintroduce technology as a public good layer by layer, or at least apply it in such a manner that it is of service to the public and not to companies. We should take inspiration from how legislation helped to make sustainability a permanent element of the system. “If there is political will, there is a way."
Anne Fleur van Veenstra, scientific director of TNO Vector and endowed professor for the Centre for BOLD Cities, concludes with possible improvements. The city is essential, according to her, because it offers the ideal scale to function as an experimental space on how it should go. “We must reintroduce technology as a public good layer by layer, or at least apply it in such a manner that it is of service to the public and not to companies. We should take inspiration from how legislation helped to make sustainability a permanent element of the system. “If there is political will, there is a way.”
She focuses on four parties. “Politicians, this is your domain, so take this with you when doing your jobs. Administrators, re-evaluate the impact of technology and integrate this into your purchasing conditions. Education, broaden your focus from solely streamlining the efficiency of technology to its values in the broadest sense. And civil society, make more noise about the activities you are undertaking in this field, and unite with others to increase strength.