How cities need to adapt to become a new Eden

In many discourses with associates, in my new book, but also this blog, I have often referred to the thought that billions of human beings and especially a growing population has only one way to live sustainably. And that is that the vast majority of our fellow humans live in large urbanizations. Otherwise, we would need to take up too much space, further diminish nature, risk extinction of even more species, and overstretch the consumption of commodities. Building up the infrastructure for a sustainable, cyclical way of life needs the agglomeration effects of a dense and threedimensional way of life.

In today's world, most of the people moving from the countryside to cities do this because of poverty. Unfortunately, this poverty often goes along with low levels of education, which makes those new arrivers having a tough start, and their new environment struggles to integrate them. As a result, shantytowns spring up with conditions that have nothing to do with the dream of modern urban life or smart cities. We need to turn this trend around and make cities a great place to live, rather than the smaller of two evils. It needs to be ensured that cities are a great place also for people who would have the means to live a country house life. That would bring in the skills, tax revenues, and determination to make those cities a place where all inhabitants can thrive.

Over the last two decades, I had the chance to live in several large cities, and each of them had their specific issues, preventing them from being a new Eden, yet. Starting in Zurich, Switzerland, which regularly shows up on top spots in rankings for the highest quality of life. And indeed, security, infrastructure, culture, food security, and environmental conditions are fantastic. But the model is not scalable and is not intended to be. Zurich is almost an order of magnitude too expensive to be a magnet for population growth. And the Swiss have no interest to become that. Zurich is an example of a solution for the few, but not a way out for the millions.

Moving over to Shanghai, which has around three times the population of the entirety of Switzerland. Ever growing infrastructure, controlled immigration, and a booming economy have allowed the city to function in a quite stable and deterministic way. City planners move the pieces on the drawing board, like in a SimCity computer game, turned reality. The only thing that bothers inhabitants is their health situation, due to pollution, and scares around food and water quality. If that problem gets solved, Shanghai could become an example of a smart city over time. And, compared to Zurich already demonstrates that over 20 million people can form a city, as other megapolises in Asia also prove.

I am jumping over to Dubai. One of the most modern cities in the world. Highest degrees of security, modern infrastructure, availability of goods, high quality of food and water, and one of the world's most progressive eGovernment systems. But making that happen in the desert creates a huge CO2 footprint, and the provision of food depends on very high importation ratios. The city has managed enormous growth, without ever losing a step. That in itself is already impressive. But what it takes next, to make inhabitants feel at ease, is to make all this miracle fully sustainable, to shake the image of a high octane space station on earth. It will take a massive expansion of renewable energy, eliminating the CO2 footprint, and supplying CO2 neutral freshwater to build up a much more self-sustaining agriculture and food production. It is on the cards. All it needs is staying the course.

Hopping over to good old Europe. Staying in Brussels, the unsung capital of Europe brings me to a typical historic city. After having been founded over a millennium ago, the town saw fast expansion during the medieval ages, coming to riches in the 17th century with the lace industry, but also experienced some destructive events, like the horrible bombardment by the French in 1695, which destroyed a third of all buildings in the city. The end of that phase is epitomized by the famous battle of Waterloo, just outside the city limits. Brussels did not enjoy long-term planning by one ruling dynasty or regime. The city was governed by Brabant, Burgundy, Habsburg, Spain, Napoleonic France, and the Netherlands, and only in 1831, the first King of the Belgians ascended the throne in Brussels. Only then some grand plans were put into motion, and Brussels got parks, magnificent alleys, sanitation, trams, its stock exchange, and a new wave of wealth. The city bursts with culture and historical monuments and is well networked into multimodal transport systems. It has a hinterland supplying food and water and is relatively safe. But due to the historical foundations of the city, its layout, the ancient elements in all aspects, the city is not designed to grow without risking a productivity infarct. Already today, despite a vast public transport network and an early adopter mentality when it comes to new mobility concepts, the traffic is a drag. The building code, legislation, cultural heritage protection, and scarcity of artisan labor make it questionable if the city can even grow to 2 million from today's 1.2. The town grew from 80'000 to over 600'000 in the 19th century and then doubled again till today. But growth is tapering off, due to the above reasons. The historic setup acts as a straightjacket.

Moving true south to Africa. Living in Johannesburg is the opposite in many aspects, compared to Brussels, not only in terms of hemispheres. The city was founded in 1886 and grew to over eight million in the urbanization. Still, its population density is more than three times lower than Brussels', though hosting almost seven times more people. Except for some main axis, traffic is not a problem yet, and the city's largest budget item is dedicated to the expansion of the integrated transport system. Being an economic hub with no navigable waterway, truck worthy roads are the arteries, and indeed the N1 highway is dubbed the busiest road in the Southern hemisphere. South Africa is blessed with resources, not only minerals but also arable land, producing a sizable surplus of food. The city of Johannesburg is a center of education, pop culture, fashion, and finance. Like the other urbanizations, it has one issue that needs to be tackled: Security. The blatant disparity of wealth and income drives too many people into extreme measures to survive, making the city a place where you look back over your shoulders all the time. That is not only true for those living in precarious living conditions, but even for the superrich. If society could equalize opportunities and distribute income more fairly, and the city could tackle the security situation, Joburg could become a poster child.

Thinking back, I am marveling, how in each of these fantastic cities, there seems to be just one drawback that keeps it from being the ideal launchpad for the urban future. Whether a lack of scalability, too much pollution, missing self-sufficiency, looming traffic collapse, or security situation, it seems to be one issue that isn't very easy to defuse. But not impossible - and that gives me hope.

What are your experiences in the urbanizations you have lived in?