PD Smith

Fast-growing fossil fuel construct

“Fast-grow­ing fos­sil fuel con­struct”, Times Lit­er­ary Sup­ple­ment, Feb­ru­ary 10, 2012, p 24

Ricky Bur­dett and Deyan Sud­jic, eds, Liv­ing in the End­less City (Phaidon), 430pp., £39.95. ISBN: 978–0‑7148–6118‑0

Gary Bridge and Sophie Wat­son, eds, The New Black­well Com­pan­ion to the City (Wiley-Blackwell), 768pp., £110.00. ISBN: 978–1‑4051–8981‑1

Review by P. D. Smith

In 1900, just 10% of the world’s pop­u­la­tion lived in cities. Today more than half of human­i­ty are city dwellers, and with each day that pass­es this pro­por­tion ris­es inex­orably. We are liv­ing in a tru­ly urban age. Glob­al cities have become the engines of the mod­ern econ­o­my and deci­sions made in cities touch the lives of every per­son on the plan­et. The chal­lenges faced by the world today, from cli­mate change to pover­ty and inequal­i­ty, are con­cen­trat­ed in cities and often played out on their streets, in demon­stra­tions and riots. The city has become the the­atre of our anx­i­eties as well as our hopes. In a world that is becom­ing increas­ing­ly crowd­ed, suc­cess­ful cities are vital to gen­er­ate the wealth, jobs and indeed the ideas that will make life on our plan­et sus­tain­able and ful­fill­ing in the future.

Since 2005, the Urban Age project has been tak­ing the pulse of cities in the twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry. At a series of con­fer­ences organ­ised by the Lon­don School of Eco­nom­ics and the Deutsche Bank’s Alfred Her­rhausen Soci­ety, may­ors, plan­ners and aca­d­e­mics have attempt­ed to “find a gram­mar for the suc­cess of cities”. The first tranche of papers, pub­lished as The End­less City in 2007, explored six cities: Shang­hai, Lon­don, New York City, Johan­nes­burg, Berlin and Mex­i­co City. The lat­est col­lec­tion of essays focus­es on urban­ism in India, Latin Amer­i­ca and the Mediter­ranean region, as well as try­ing to draw con­clu­sions from the project. Like the ear­li­er vol­ume, it is strik­ing­ly designed, with dra­mat­ic full-page pho­tographs and info­graph­ics that com­mu­ni­cate pow­er­ful­ly the scale of our urban age. There are three sec­tions: pho­tographs and essays on the cities of Istan­bul, Mum­bai and São Paulo; a data sec­tion draw­ing togeth­er sta­tis­tics on all nine Urban Age cities; and a series of reflec­tions on gen­er­al urban themes.

The rate of growth of today’s megac­i­ties is star­tling and indeed unprece­dent­ed, as Ricky Bur­dett and Philipp Rode note in their intro­duc­to­ry essay. Lagos, Del­hi and Dha­ka are grow­ing at a rate of over 300,000 peo­ple a year. Kin­shasa gains one new inhab­i­tant every 75 sec­onds. Twelve new res­i­dents arrive in Istan­bul every hour and in Mum­bai forty-four. In the next few decades, Mum­bai is pre­dict­ed to over­take Tokyo and Mex­i­co City, becom­ing the world’s largest city, with more than 35 mil­lion inhab­i­tants. Istanbul’s pop­u­la­tion has quadru­pled since 1980 to near­ly 13 mil­lion today. Sim­i­lar­ly, São Paulo’s end­less sprawl con­tin­ues to spread out­wards like an oil slick. In this car-depen­dent city, a thou­sand new auto­mo­biles appear on the streets each day and four-hour com­mutes are not unusu­al.

While some cities in the devel­oped world – such as Berlin, Detroit and Seoul – are shrink­ing, those in the devel­op­ing world are expand­ing rapid­ly. In these new megac­i­ties, there are slums more vast than any cre­at­ed in Vic­to­ri­an cities. A third of all city dwellers now live in slums – a shock­ing sta­tis­tic. Some 6 mil­lion Mum­baikars live in slums – more than half the city’s pop­u­la­tion, the high­est pro­por­tion for any city. Nick­named Slum­bai, 2.5 mil­lion peo­ple live here on less than $13 a month. Sev­en out of ten Mum­baikars live in a sin­gle room. Yet Mum­bai is also the city where a wealthy oil bil­lion­aire has just built the world’s most expen­sive res­i­dence, a $1 bil­lion glass and steel, mul­ti-storey palace. Cities are becom­ing “more spa­tial­ly frag­ment­ed, more social­ly divi­sive and more envi­ron­men­tal­ly destruc­tive”, warn Bur­dett and Rode, high­light­ing key themes that are explored in detail in both these vol­umes.

Urban life has become “the most desir­able com­mod­i­ty on the plan­et”, writes Ale­jan­dro Zaera-Polo in his essay for Liv­ing in the End­less City. From the ear­li­est civ­i­liza­tions, cities have been places of eco­nom­ic oppor­tu­ni­ty. As Deyan Sud­jic puts it in his typ­i­cal­ly illu­mi­nat­ing piece on urban archi­tec­ture: “The city has been the most effec­tive vehi­cle ever devised for lift­ing huge num­bers of peo­ple out of the count­less gen­er­a­tions of pover­ty that have over­shad­owed many forms of rur­al life.” The streets of the big city are still paved with gold in the minds of many rur­al dwellers. The city does, indeed, offer peo­ple more jobs, as well as bet­ter access to edu­ca­tion and health care. But the cease­less flow of migrants to the city is about far more than this. “Mum­bai is a bird of gold”, a man in a Mum­bai slum tells Suke­tu Mehta, author of Max­i­mum City. The city holds out the promise of earn­ing a liv­ing, yes, but it is not just about mon­ey. It is, as Mehta right­ly says, about free­dom.

In her essay on “The Economies of Cities”, Sask­ia Sassen points out that cities often out­live the nations in which they are built: “With­in a giv­en peri­od of time – cen­turies or mil­len­nia – enter­pris­es, king­doms and nation-states are born and die in their thou­sands. With rare excep­tions, cities go on. At best, they change names. The mate­ri­al­i­ty of the city itself allows it to sur­vive. Once there, it stays.” She argues com­pelling­ly that in the era of glob­al­iza­tion, the impor­tance of the deep eco­nom­ic his­to­ries of cities has been for­got­ten. There is much talk nowa­days about the role played by the “cre­ative class­es” in the knowl­edge econ­o­my of cities. Sassen seeks to recon­nect this to the mate­r­i­al prac­tices of old­er economies, such as tra­di­tions of urban man­u­fac­tur­ing. The knowl­edge econ­o­my will indeed be vital to the suc­cess of cities in the twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry. But glob­al suc­cess may come through exploit­ing a city’s unique and endur­ing eco­nom­ic his­to­ry, not just its abil­i­ty to attract the cre­ative class­es.

The data sec­tion of Liv­ing in the End­less City pro­vides fas­ci­nat­ing insights into the devel­op­ment of urban­ism around the world. Mum­bai has the high­est pop­u­la­tion den­si­ties of any city. The dens­est part is the red-light dis­trict of Kamath­ipu­ra with 121,312 peo­ple per square kilo­me­tre. By con­trast, London’s dens­est area is Not­ting Hill with a mere 17,324 peo­ple per square kilo­me­tre. Of the nine cities stud­ied by the Urban Age project, Mum­bai is the largest, the poor­est and the fastest grow­ing. The data also sug­gests it is the most sus­tain­able. Mum­bai is “the very mod­el of a green city”, says Justin McGuirk in his help­ful essay inter­pret­ing the raw data. It has the low­est car­bon emis­sions of the Urban Age cities, the low­est ener­gy and water con­sump­tion and pro­duces the least waste. The Dhar­avi slum is prob­a­bly the most effi­cient recy­cling cen­tre in India. Mum­bai also has the low­est lev­el of car own­er­ship and the high­est lev­els of walk­ing to work. Sur­pris­ing­ly, despite the con­ges­tion charge, Lon­don has the high­est num­ber of car jour­neys (36% of all trav­el) among Urban Age cities.

Mum­bai may be “one of the most sus­tain­able big cities on the plan­et”, but this is large­ly due to its rel­a­tive pover­ty. With afflu­ence comes high­er car­bon emis­sions. A per­son liv­ing in New York emits 20 times the amounts of car­bon diox­ide as does a Mum­baikar. But urban liv­ing, whether in a wealthy or a poor city, is still more effi­cient and sus­tain­able than life in the coun­try­side. Dense cities with good pub­lic trans­port have low per capi­ta emis­sions. For instance, New York­ers pro­duce about a third of the car­bon diox­ide of the typ­i­cal Amer­i­can.

Nev­er­the­less, there is much more cities can do to reduce their eco­log­i­cal foot­print. The increas­ing use of cars in cities encour­ages hor­i­zon­tal expan­sion and brings with it prob­lems of pol­lu­tion and con­ges­tion. Between 1990 and 2000, devel­oped world cities grew in pop­u­la­tion by just 5%, but their built-up area expand­ed 30%. In the devel­op­ing world, urban pop­u­la­tions have increased 20%, but cities have spread by 50%. The met­ro­pol­i­tan area of Mum­bai has increased in the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry by 1,978%, São Paulo by 7,916% and Istan­bul by 1,305%. Lon­don has grown by just 16%. On aver­age each res­i­dent of Los Ange­les – the orig­i­nal car city – spends a hun­dred hours a year wait­ing in traf­fic. In August 2010, Bei­jing expe­ri­enced a traf­fic jam that was 100 km long. Accord­ing to Charles Cor­rea, the dom­i­na­tion of the auto­mo­bile “is a tragedy that pre­vails in almost every one of our cities”. Effi­cient, cheap pub­lic trans­port, such as Bogotá’s Trans­Mile­nio bus sys­tem, and high-den­si­ty liv­ing – the com­pact city – are the keys to mak­ing our cities sus­tain­able.

The Urban Age project has also com­mis­sioned opin­ion polls to dis­cov­er what peo­ple think about their cities. It is strik­ing that only 58% of Lon­don­ers have lived in the city for twen­ty years or more. This com­pares to 96% of Mum­baikars and 78% in São Paulo. Giv­en the con­sid­er­able rate of in-migra­tion, this fig­ure will almost cer­tain­ly increase. Giv­en the city’s rich cul­tur­al her­itage, it is also sur­pris­ing that, when asked what they liked most about their city, Lon­don­ers placed the capital’s shops top of the list. In Istan­bul, jobs and health ser­vices topped the rank­ings, where­as in Mum­bai it was schools.

In all cities, crime was high on people’s list of con­cerns, even in rel­a­tive­ly safe places such as Istan­bul where the homi­cide rate is just 3 per 100,000 inhab­i­tants, only slight­ly more than Lon­don. In São Paulo, vio­lent crime has fall­en – as it has in many cities – from 60 per 100,000 in the late 1990s to 11.3 in 2009. Yet fear of crime has trans­formed this city: “walls are now every­where”, cre­at­ing an oppres­sive cli­mate of social ten­sion. São Paulo is, says Tere­sa Caldeira, “a city at the lim­its of sur­vival”. An icon­ic pho­to­graph by Tuca Vieira (includ­ed in the book; online here) por­trays the gulf between rich and poor here. It shows a view across the ram­shackle roofs of the Paraisópo­lis favela, with a wall sep­a­rat­ing it from a gat­ed devel­op­ment. Here, tow­er­ing above the shacks, stands a lux­u­ry apart­ment block with a pri­vate swim­ming pool on every bal­cony. Many fave­las in São Paulo do not even have run­ning water.

Unfor­tu­nate­ly, the fear of crime and ter­ror­ism is prompt­ing many cities to erect walls and bar­ri­ers rather than demol­ish them. Writ­ing in the New Black­well Com­pan­ion to the City, Stephen Gra­ham sur­veys the secu­ri­ti­za­tion of cities and what he has termed the “new mil­i­tary urban­ism”. Secu­ri­ty solu­tions are increas­ing­ly sold by the indus­tri­al-secu­ri­ty com­plex to city author­i­ties as “sil­ver bul­lets to com­plex social prob­lems”. Glob­al expen­di­ture on home­land secu­ri­ty is expect­ed to grow from $231 bil­lion in 2006 to $518 bil­lion in 2015. As cities become increas­ing­ly “smart”, with every­thing from traf­fic lights to CCTV cam­eras con­trolled by cen­tral com­put­ers, the threat of “infra­struc­tur­al ter­ror­ism” looms large: the fear of city-wide black­outs and grid­lock. As a result, the basic expe­ri­ences of urban life are becom­ing increas­ing­ly con­trolled, lim­it­ing the free­doms that are so fun­da­men­tal to urban life.

In their pref­ace to this new edi­tion of the Black­well Com­pan­ion to the City, Gary Bridge and Sophie Wat­son note that the rate of urban­iza­tion and the scale of both the prob­lems and pos­si­bil­i­ties this cre­ates is “breath­tak­ing”. The first Black­well Com­pan­ion was pub­lished in 2000 and it’s an indi­ca­tion of the pace of change that a new 700-page vol­ume is thought nec­es­sary. Of the 65 con­tri­bu­tions only 7 have been car­ried over from the ear­li­er vol­ume. The essays are gen­er­al­ly more the­o­ret­i­cal in tone than those in Bur­dett and Sudjic’s vol­ume, as well as cov­er­ing an impres­sive­ly wide range of sub­jects, from the his­to­ry of urban polic­ing, infra­struc­ture, dis­eases, and urban nights, to the homo­sex­u­al­i­ty of cities and Wong Kar-Wai’s post-met­ro­pol­i­tan Hong Kong. Read­ers will also undoubt­ed­ly be relieved to learn from Har­vey Molotch’s piece about the inter­ac­tion of peo­ple with urban arte­facts that “pub­lic toi­lets, albeit only halt­ing­ly, are final­ly gain­ing some trac­tion in schol­ar­ly cir­cles.”

The impli­ca­tions of China’s aston­ish­ing rate of urban­iza­tion are explored in sev­er­al essays. Increas­ing­ly, city regions such as the Pearl Riv­er Delta (home to 60 mil­lion peo­ple) and the Yangtze Delta-Greater Shang­hai region (where more than 80 mil­lion live) are becom­ing the eco­nom­ic and indus­tri­al pow­er­hous­es of Chi­na. Edward Soja focus­es on this phe­nom­e­non, argu­ing that it is a new urban form and that “the era of the mod­ern metrop­o­lis may be end­ing”. Sub­ur­bia is being urban­ized, becom­ing more dense and less homo­ge­neous. Edge cities and tech­noburbs are part of this new urban form: “the expan­sive, polynu­cle­at­ed, dense­ly net­worked, infor­ma­tion-inten­sive, and increas­ing­ly glob­al­ized city region”. Soja sees these urban agglom­er­a­tions as the nat­ur­al result of glob­al­iza­tion and of infor­ma­tion and com­mu­ni­ca­tion tech­nolo­gies. There are cur­rent­ly some 500 city regions of more than one mil­lion peo­ple in the world, com­pris­ing a third of the glob­al pop­u­la­tion.

The largest city region in the Unit­ed States is Mega­lopo­lis, as Jean Gottmann termed it in 1961. It com­pris­es the four major metro regions of Boston, New York, Philadel­phia and Wash­ing­ton-Bal­ti­more. This vast conur­ba­tion is respon­si­ble for 20% of America’s gross domes­tic prod­uct and is home to 50 mil­lion peo­ple (1 in 6 of the pop­u­la­tion). As John Short explains in his fas­ci­nat­ing essay, “Mega­lopo­lis is the dens­est urban agglom­er­a­tion in the Unit­ed States, one of the largest city regions in the world, and an impor­tant ele­ment of the nation­al and glob­al econ­o­my”. Such “mega­lopoli­tan region” are, says Short, “liq­uid” because they are typ­i­cal­ly unsta­ble and spread­ing across polit­i­cal bound­aries – the twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry will be the age of the post-bor­der city when urban regions increas­ing­ly ren­der nation­al bor­ders irrel­e­vant.

Mega­lopo­lis is cer­tain­ly not a mod­el of sus­tain­able urban­ism. The low-den­si­ty liv­ing here means it has “the great­est envi­ron­men­tal impact per head in the his­to­ry of the world”, says Short. In his essay, Peter Droege observes that today’s city is “a fos­sil fuel con­struct in search of rapid restruc­tur­ing”. In an age of cli­mate change, ris­ing sea lev­els and dwin­dling fresh water sup­plies will final­ly force cities to make major changes to wean them­selves from their depen­den­cy on oil and coal. Droege pro­pos­es sev­er­al inge­nious ways in which cities could help save them­selves and the plan­et, includ­ing mak­ing all new build­ings ener­gy autonomous, solar-pow­ered charg­ing sta­tions for elec­tric cars, con­vert­ing unused urban waste­land to gar­den coop­er­a­tives, allow­ing cities to take con­trol of their ener­gy sup­plies by invest­ing in wind­farms and solar ther­mal plants, and con­vert­ing park­ing lots and rooftops to solar pow­er gen­er­a­tion. Some cities are indeed adopt­ing such advice – Munich, for instance, is tak­ing steps to make itself ener­gy self-suf­fi­cient. How­ev­er, Droege is con­cerned that the pace of change is too slow. He thinks a peri­od of deur­ban­iza­tion may lie ahead, although it has to be said that there is lit­tle evi­dence of that.

There is often a vast gulf between our expec­ta­tions of what city life should be and the real­i­ty. In his essay for the Black­well Com­pan­ion, Richard Sen­nett elo­quent­ly express­es his frus­tra­tion at this: “the cities every­one wants to live in would be clean and safe, pos­sess effi­cient pub­lic ser­vices, sup­port a dynam­ic econ­o­my, pro­vide cul­tur­al stim­u­la­tion, and help heal society’s divi­sions of race and eth­nic­i­ty and class. These are not the cities we live in…Something has gone wrong, rad­i­cal­ly wrong, in our con­cep­tion of what a city itself should be.” Sen­nett argues that to cre­ate more live­able, vibrant cities, urban plan­ners need to focus more on revi­tal­is­ing life at the bor­ders between com­mu­ni­ties: “the plan­ning of the last cen­tu­ry was hope­less at cre­at­ing or pro­mot­ing bor­der­lands”. Plan­ners need to make “the stim­u­la­tion of dif­fer­ence” their pri­or­i­ty by focus­ing on the “liv­ing edge” of com­mu­ni­ties and mak­ing the city a more open and flex­i­ble sys­tem.

It is inspir­ing, how­ev­er, that even a city with as many prob­lems as Mum­bai can offer hope for the future. Despite its pover­ty and inequal­i­ty, after the ter­ri­ble flood of 2005, which claimed many lives in Mum­bai, there was no break­down of civic order as there was in New Orleans fol­low­ing Hur­ri­cane Kat­ri­na. Instead, Mum­baikars helped each oth­er rather than wait­ing for the state to come to their aid. As Mehta says, “on a plan­et of city dwellers, this is how most human beings are going to live and cope in the twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry.”

These weighty tomes both offer fas­ci­nat­ing and author­i­ta­tive views of the chal­lenges fac­ing cities in the twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry as well as glimpses of some of the solu­tions. Cities are unique­ly placed to har­ness the human and eco­nom­ic forces that will allow us to cre­ate sus­tain­able and hope­ful­ly more equi­table soci­eties on what is an increas­ing­ly crowd­ed plan­et. Both books should be required read­ing for may­ors of cities every­where.

N.B. This ver­sion is sig­nif­i­cant­ly longer than the piece pub­lished in the TLS.