Missing from the debate so far is much discussion of wider public attitudes, to the whole idea of urban living, its benefits and costs. Much of this debate so far has focussed on the economic and structural impacts on the city, for example the attitudes of workers to the daily commute versus working from home, and whether firms can continue to be productive with a distributed workforce, about whether the suburb and the small city will be more attractive than the huge agglomeration. Are we on the edge of a world-historic change in which the rise of the city is finally checked, and we transition from the BC (Before Covid) era to AD (After Density)? Or will cities respond to the constraints and changes resulting from the pandemic, adapting and growing as they have done in response to other natural and man-made disasters in the past? This has led to a noisy, sometimes enlightening, always interesting debate on the future of the city. The very features that underpin their economic strength and confidence – crowds, proximity, connectivity, openness – have become vulnerabilities. But now, in addition, the global pandemic threatens the basis of these cities’ success. It was already the case that declining air quality, rising costs, traffic congestion and other urban ills were checking the attractiveness of large cities. And a small group of elite cities, characterised by highly skilled populations, global connectivity, good governance and reasonable quality of life are at the apex of the urban hierarchy. By 2020 half the world’s population was already living in cities, projected to rise to two-thirds by 2050. For the last 30 years, the city has been in the ascendancy. ![]() ![]() Covid-19 has cast a shadow over the world’s global cities.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |