SANITY AND URBANITY BLOG
If you are an academic, urban designer, planner, health professional or citymaker, and would like to submit a blog, please see submission guidelines.
By Professor Martin Knöll, Department of Architecture, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany I love people-watching. Most urban designers do. The more people in a public space, the better. The more diverse, active, extroverted, connected, playful, and affectionate people are with each other, the more there is to see and do. In this sense, the more insane a crowd is, the more livable and healthy is a city. My research on people-centered urban design does not aim to eliminate insanity from everyday life in cities. I rather seek to better understand which factors of the urban environment are stressful to pedestrians and particularly vulnerable people and how urban design can better support them in using public space. Figure 1 shows participants rating environmental properties in open public spaces (OPS) using a smartphone app (Halblaub Miranda, Hardy, & Knöll, 2015). Photo credit: Marianne Halblaub Miranda. Current city living has been related to various manifestations of stress and a higher risk for mental health problems (Lederbogen, et al., 2011). Lederbogen et al. (2013) have named a set of influencing factors for urban social stress including infrastructure, socio-economic factors, noise and environmental pollution. These remain open questions:
This blog entry reports on a few findings in two recent publications, in which my colleagues and I from TU Darmstadt have introduced a framework of environmental factors and spatial analysis tools shown to be useful to describe and even predict PUS in open public spaces (OPS). In a first step, environmental properties have been constructed for a sample of OPS in the city of Darmstadt, Germany, using the space syntax framework (Hillier & Hanson, 1984). These were paired to users’ ratings of spatial qualities such as loudness and subjectively perceived safety and stress (figure 2). Isovist vertice density has been shown to be weakly associated to users’ ratings of safety (r=.365, p=.09, Pearson), while global and citywide integration of a street segment have been shown closely related to PUS (r=0.432, p=0.04, Pearson) (Knöll, Neuheuser, Li, & Rudolph-Cleff, 2015). City-wide integration of streets has been closely related to actual amount of car traffic. Our findings may underline the importance of traffic calming, speed limits and walkability for measures to reduce pedestrians’ perceived stress levels. Figure 2 shows an isovist with a high vertices density (vertex number / isovist area2) is shown, which is weakly associated to users' ratings of an OPS as "safe". The map of Darmstadt on the right shows global integration (r=n) values of its street segments (red indicates high global integration). They are significantly related to ratings of OPS as “max. stressful“ (Knöll, Neuheuser, Li, & Rudolph-Cleff, 2015). In a recent journal article, the data has been analyzed using different types of multivariate models with the aim to predict ratings of PUS with a highly explained variance and significance (Knöll, Neuheuser, Cleff, & Rudolph-Cleff, 2017). Open space typologies (park, square, courtyard, streets) were found to be the best predictors for PUS, followed by building coverage ratio, isovist vertices numbers and syntactical characteristics (Figure 3). The isovist characteristics in particular, revealed interesting new insights and research questions. For example, visibility, as the relative size of the area that can be overseen from a given point in a space, was found positively related to users ratings of perceived stress. This was contrary to findings previously reported in indoor spaces. And it is somewhat surprising, since visibility of pedestrians by car drivers is key to reduce traffic injuries and improve overall actual pedestrian safety. In other words, people seem to feel most stressed in those areas of busy squares and streets where, in theory, they should be safest from car traffic. We conclude that to further study the isovist characteristics and their relation to percieved stress should be a priority in future research. Visibility and the geometric shape (“complexity”) of urban environments are factors that can be influenced by urban design measures such as street furniture, trees and facades (Knöll, Neuheuser, Cleff, & Rudolph-Cleff, 2017). Figure 3 lists environmental factors found related to ratings of perceived stress in open public spaces (Knöll, Neuheuser, Cleff, & Rudolph-Cleff, 2017). A model has been presented that uses a combination of environmental properties and achieves a predictive power of R2=54.6% (Knöll, Neuheuser, Cleff, & Rudolph-Cleff, 2017). These results are a first attempt to predict more complex emotions such as perceived urban stress by analyzing factors of the built environment and using standard planning tools such as GIS and Space Syntax. They extend existing models that have predicted tranquility in green spaces (Watts, Pheasant, & Horoshenko, 2014) or activities and spatial experience in streetscapes (Bielik, Schneider, Kuliga, Valasek, & Donath, 2015). The framework may be useful to architects and neuroscientists alike, who seek to identify or visualize urban configurations likely to be perceived as stressful and seek to further investigate pedestrian comfort by pairing environmental factors with geo referenced, psychophysiological effects. References Bielik, M., Schneider, S., Kuliga, S., Valasek, M., & Donath, D. (2015). Investigating the effect of urban form on the environmental appraisal of streetscapes. In K. Karimi, L. Vaughan, K. Sailer, G. Palaiologou, & T. Bolton (Ed.), Proceedings of the 10th International Space Syntax Symposium (pp. 119:1-13). London: Space Syntax Laboratory, The Bartlett School of Architecture, University College London. Franz, G., & Wiener, J. M. (2008, April 3). From space syntax to space semantics: a behaviourally and perceptually oriented methodology for the efficient description of the geometry and the topology of environments. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design , XXXV, pp. 574-92. Halblaub Miranda, M., Hardy, S., & Knöll, M. (2015). MoMe: a context-sensitive mobile application to research spatial perception and behaviour. In Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management (ed.), Human mobility, cognition and GISc. Conference proceedings. November 2015, (p. 29-30). Copenhagen. Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1984). The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge: University Press. Knöll, M., Neuheuser, K., Cleff, T., & Rudolph-Cleff, A. (2017). A tool to predict perceived urban stress in open public spaces. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science. Knöll, Martin, Environmental factors and tools to analyze perceived stress in open spaces. ANFA 2016: CONNECTIONS – BRIDGESYNAPSES. 23rd-24th September 2016, La Jolla, CA: Academy of Neuroscience for Architecture. Video Knöll, M., Neuheuser, K., Li, Y., & Rudolph-Cleff, A. (2015). Using space syntax to analyze stress perception in open public space. In K. Karimi, L. Vaughan, K. Sailer, G. Palaiologou, & T. Bolton (Ed.), Proceedings of the 10th International Space Syntax Symposium (pp. 123:1-15). London: Space Syntax Laboratory, The Bartlett School of Architecture, University College London. Lederbogen, F., Haddad, L., & Meyer-Lindenberg, A. (2013, December). Urban social stress - Risk factor for mental disorders. The case of schizophrenia. Environmental Pollution . Lederbogen, F., Kirsch, P., Haddad, L., Streit, F., Tost, H., Schuch, P., et al. (2011, June 23). City living and urban upbringing affect neural social stress processing in humans. Nature , 474, pp. 498-501. Watts, G., Pheasant, R., & Horoshenko, K. (2014). Predicting perceived tranquillity in urban parks and open spaces. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design , 38 (4), pp. 585-94. Acknowledgments I am grateful to my co-authors Dr. Annette Rudolph-Cleff, Professor of Design and Urban Development, Yang Li, PhD Candidate, both Department of Architecture, Katrin Neuheuser, PhD Candidate, Dept. of Human Sciences, TU Darmstadt, and Dr. Thomas Cleff, Professor of Quantitative Methods for Business and Economics at Pforzheim University, Germany. About the Author
Psychologist Eric Greene, in his first of a series for Sanity and Urbanity, discusses the links between depth psychology and architecture. “Buildings [today] make you feel like death…[they are] constructed with the absolute intent to destroy emotion…[and] they alienate you” - Alexander in Landy, 1990 With this observation coming from architect Christopher Alexander, I would like to throw my hard-hat of depth psychology into the construction site of urban design and mental health. First, allow me to explain what I do and how this builds upon the discussion, and to sketch the similarities between depth psychology and architecture. A depth psychologist is, simply put, any psychologist who includes the unconscious in their understanding of the mind. The job of a depth psychologist is to analyze dreams, speech, fantasies and images of the mind and the world which function as a kind of subtext to the surface symptom. The founder of this tradition is generally identified as Freud then Jung. The practice of analysis is popularly conceived of as occurring in an office by a therapist with a patient. But the field extends far beyond this practice. Consider this quote from Freud: (1930) in Civilization and its Discontents (a more literal translation is ‘the disease in culture’): “…would not the diagnosis be justified that many systems of civilization—or epochs of it—possibly even the whole of humanity—have become neurotic under the pressure of the civilizing trends?” - Freud , Civilization and its Discontents, pp69 This quote suggests that culture and all that it contains could be the context that makes people sick, and therefore, itself could and should be analyzed. Additionally, both Freud (1895) and Jung (1963) often used the metaphor of a house to describe the mind. Jung, in fact, constructed a literal house and often referred to it as an extension of his mind. Since its inception, depth psychology has been linked to architecture. But how? My thesis is this: The foundation upon which our modern buildings and minds are constructed is the same. This foundation is not a material foundation but rather it is an idea, or image, if you will. The image is characterized by its isolation, alienation, emptiness— all conditions which lead to dis-ease or mental illness. The reification of this image has reached its peak today. In order to change the mental illness of our culture, we need to rethink this foundational idea. Both post-modern critiques of architecture and psychotherapy are pointing the way forward to rethink our cities in terms of its relationality, not its isolation, in order to create a more mentally healthy world. 1. Strip Bare the Patient Since Freud, many depth psychologists continued to analyzed the world in relation to mental health. Freud’s student, Bruno Bettelheim, in The Mental Health of Urban Design, continued with Freud’s thesis: the world can make us sick. Bettelheim (1979) asks: “[t]o what extent does physical design affect the psychology of hope?... Mental health is created or destroyed in the home.” - Bruno Bettelheim, The Mental Health of Urban Design, pp 201 Bettelheim argues that the carelessness with which a home is constructed— in this case, the projects created mostly for the African-American poor in America— becomes internalized in the mind of its inhabitants, and they come to know their first world as one which does not care for them. Then, they lack the hope that beyond their immediate horizon is a world which welcomes them. The construction of the space colonizes the inhabitant’s physical and mental landscapes. Generalizing this theme for our purposes, one could say, that the spaces in which we live project onto us just as we project onto them. It is on this precise notion—that of the world projecting onto us—that the student of Jung, James Hillman, staked an important claim: psychotherapy strips bare the patient’s psychology to its utopian essentials by withdrawing its projections from the world. Hillman (1970) claims that this process exacerbates the disease of isolation or alienation. The problems are not just all in our minds. We have had 100 years of psychotherapy and the world has gotten worse, precisely because we internalize all of the world’s problems as if “the end of the world were an inner problem”(Hillman, 1993; Hillman, 1998, 129). As a result, we have become anesthetized by the subjectivism of psychotherapy (Hillman, 1970). To break free of this emptiness and isolation, in order to restore mental health to the world, Hillman (1970), like Bettelheim, argues that we need to recognize that psychology is everywhere and in everything, that each thing sparks with its “eachness” or particularities. In other words, mental illness is not just in a person’s head. It is also in our cities, our buildings, in the whole of civilization, and these things projects onto us. 2. Strip Bare the Building The progression of architectural design in modernity seemed to follow a similar historical path. Architect Irata Isozaki, in the introduction to Kojin Karatani’s (1995) Architecture as Metaphor, narrates that architecture has passed through three crises. The first occurred when the ‘bible’ of architecture, Vitruvius’ The Ten Books on Architecture, became relativized. The vacancy left from this displacement was filled by a new orientation of “Architecture as Art” (Isozaki in Karatani, 1995, x). The second crisis occurred when that art became institutionalized and oppressive. The new orientation of modern architecture was, then, “Architecture as Construction” (Isozaki in Karatani, 1995, xi). The idea was to strip its subject bare of the projections or decorative elements (i.e., art) and construct buildings from basic elements towards a utopia. This left buildings “skeletal” (Isozaki in Katajani, 1995, xi). The movement reached its fruition in the middle of the twentieth century. We are, according to Isozaki, still in the third crises. Architecture, like so many things in post-modernity, suffers from a loss of the metanarrative, and the orientation is one of a “loss of subject” (Isozaki in Katajani, 1995, xii). This strange characterization means that buildings are seen as projects which are separated from, and indeed colonize, the communities in which they are built; and, they contain no elements of humanity. This is why architect Christopher Alexander (in Landy, 1990) states these “buildings [today] make you feel like death…[they are] constructed with the absolute intent to destroy emotion…[and] they alienate you”. In short, the world we live in projects alienation and mental illness onto us. 3. The Foundation These two monuments of study— architecture and psychotherapy—are founded upon a mutual image. This image is characterized by bareness, isolation and alienation. It has affected the spirit of our culture and makes us feel mentally unhealthy. If the goal is to create sane urban life, we ought to begin with an image of buildings which engenders hope and humanity. They would be constructed with an eye towards beauty, focus on the particularities, consider the relationship to its parts and to the community at large. If we can hope to create a healthier future—a future which promises movement beyond the horizon of our felt sense of isolation and alienation— we can begin by caring for our cities and buildings— the places which we can and should call home. References Bruno Bettelheim, “Mental Health and Urban Design,” in Surviving and other essays. (NY, 1979), pp. 201. Breuer, J. & Freud, S. (1895). Studies in hysteria. New York, NY: Hogarth. Freud, S. (1930). Civilization and its discontents. New York, NY: W.W. Norton and Co. Hillman, J. (1970). Re-visioning psychology. New York, NY: Harper and Row. Hillman, J. (1993). We’ve had one hundred years of psychology and the world is getting worse. New York, NY: Harper. Hillman, J. (1998). The thought of the heart and the soul of the world. Los Angeles, CA: Spring. Jung, C.G. (1963). Memories, dreams, reflections. New York, NY: Vintage. Karatani, K. (1995). Architecture as metaphor: language, number, money. Boston, Massachusettes: M.I.T. Landy. Places for the Soul: the Architecture of Christopher Alexander. (1990). Christopher Alexander. About the Author
Switzerland-based urban planner Silvia Gugu provides her takeaways from the conference "Happy City - Faire la ville par l’événement" (December 9th 2016 at the Haute École Spécialisée de Suisse Occidentale in Geneva). A collaboration between the Geography Department at the University of Geneva and the Swiss Geographic Association, this one-day conference brought together academics and professional citymakers to explore the potential of one-off events in helping to create a “happy city”. The "Happy City" agenda was famously articulated by geographer and writer Charles Montgomery in his 2013 book Happy City. Transforming our Lives through Urban Design. This book brings together evidence from psychology, neuroscience, public health and behavioural economics to discuss the ways in which urban design affects psychological wellbeing. It has generated spin-offs such as the Happy City Labs in Vancouver and Geneva, where a key focus is on devising urban events that foster social interaction and a sense of ownership of public space. Disrupting the urban rhythm Over the past decades, community, commercial, arts and leisure events have been frequently designed as disruptions of the urban rhythm, temporarily altering urban form, function and social relations. Many are organized by administrations and are primarily attributed to the competitive neoliberal ethos that calls for cities to build their unique brand in the global economy. Others are initiated by individuals or associations, falling into the recent category of tactical (do-it-yourself / guerrilla / lighter-quicker-cheaper / pop-up) urbanism; in other words, grassroots attempts to re-inject agency in the relationship between residents and their environment. Leisurely and convivial, urban events are malleable instruments that can fit neatly into any of the quality-of-life-oriented urban agendas developed since the 1970’s, such as: Cities for People, Participative Cities, Creative Cities, Liveable Cities, and of course, Happy Cities. Event-based urbanism The conference considered both grassroots do-it-yourself interventions, and official policies of ‘event-based urbanism’, highlighting their effects on urban form and function. The talks remained theoretical and exploratory; nevertheless, they opened interesting questions about the way events can mediate the relationship between the urban environment and psychological well being by changing mood and behaviours. Here are a few takeaway hypotheses: Urban events may make us happier by providing additional aesthetic stimuli Several speakers referred to how urban events alter the urban aesthetics and our perception of it, making use of a broad range of props and techniques, from images, lights and installations to highlights, reframing and unexpected vantage points and narratives. Urban events are by definition designed and staged. They are often initiated to beautify and render cities more attractive; and they may be accompanied by physical urban improvements in order to ensure adequate “display windows” (public or private venues). Some are primarily itinerant or episodic ambiances (the circus, the fun fair, the Christmas market, Park(ing) Day – which transforms parking lots into green patches). They play down the familiar and the unremarkable and place the emphasis on memorable, festive choreographies. Events can thus stimulate the senses and create feelings of awe and discovery in an otherwise familiar environment. Lea Sallenave (University of Geneva) showed for example how street art festivals draw attention to neglected corners; stimulate physical and sensorial apprehension of the city through unexpected trajectories and critical commentaries. This temporary increase in aesthetic stimuli and capital seems to be popular with the residents that can directly benefit from them (but less so with the ones that feel left out). While urban form is slow to evolve and adapt to new taste, urban events can quickly respond to current expectations by cladding physical infrastructures with new shapes, colours and accents, thus allowing for a continuous symbolic and material renewal of the environment. Urban events may make us happier by negotiating between social interaction and privacy Many participants stressed the relational logic of urban events, most of which are designed for social interaction, attracting large numbers of people in the public space and providing a reason for eye contact and conversation. The mere collective consumption of an experience fosters bonding and belonging, and the pro-active participation in public life facilitates “eudaimonia”, Aristotle’s idea of happiness as self fulfilment through benefiting others, a fundamental concept in the “Happy City” theory. Importantly, the episodic nature of events allows for equilibrium between the need for social interaction and for privacy. As pointed out by Diego Rigamonti (AIDEC), quality of life is a subjective assessment of a complex environment that has to function for everyone, hence conflicts are inevitable – we desire more events as opportunities to encounter others but we don’t want the mess and risks that come with them; we like densification as long as it does not happen in our neighbourhood etc. The temporary nature of urban events appeases such conflicts by allowing conflicting interests and needs to take their turn. Urban events may make us happier by changing urban uses in favour of desired activities A prominent and much-cited application of the event in city-making is the temporary adjustment of land uses or the subversive reprogramming / occupation of space in favour of activities preferred by the community. Many of these started as DIY, illegal uses enabled by loopholes in legislation or tolerated due to being temporary. Some were adopted as permanent changes, showing how, thanks to its temporary nature, tactical urbanism can negotiate with legal and institutional frameworks. Moreover, examples cited at the conference demonstrated that temporary uses, together with the “tactical” approach, have been embraced by planners and administrations to respond to immediate needs and expectations (small green spaces, beach-volleyball fields, snack bars, community gardens, family spaces or simply loosely-articulated structures that permitted people to assign them meaning and function). Urban events may make us happier by allowing us to exert agency on our environment There seemed to be a consensus among conference participants that, whatever their source, urban events stand in opposition to the 20th century approach to planning cities. The latter presumes a vision: a finite, virtuous state of equilibrium, to be reached through a strategic plan – an instrument that aims to control both internal and external environments, leaving nothing to chance. In contrast, urban events are a way of refocusing the attention on the city as something that happens, as a process not a product, a continuous transformation that we witness and in which we can choose to participate or not. By providing opportunities for participation, they render the city more “open”. The universal appeal of tactical urbanism, which operates primarily through small and temporary, but scalable interventions, lies precisely in presenting urban change as a matter of choice, not of resources or power. Events may keep us happy by appeasing permanent change Throughout the conference, the most iterated role of events was simply taking the edge off drastic urban change brought by new technologies, policies or projects. Speakers from urbaplan noted that events can facilitate the popularization of a technical discourse, rendering it accessible, reframing issues by using play, invitation, celebrations, and appeals to emotion (climate change activism quickly comes to mind as a prominent example). Nicolas Nova (HEAD) talked about events such as fun fairs as itinerant laboratories for testing and diffusing behaviour-altering technologies (the cinema, the automobile, elevators, moving sidewalks etc). Thus, technologies that could otherwise be perceived as unsettling or outright dystopian could be experienced in ephemeral, fun doses, and introduced “tactically”. Primed by marketing, the public is reassured by the ephemeral and fragile nature of temporary installations, and is more willing to test them. Luca Pattaroni (EPFL) noted that events are easily assimilated as experimental, exploratory, pilot changes. In other words, events introduce change without requiring immediate or drastic behaviour adaptation. The same logic was outlined by Giovanna Ronconi from the Republic and Canton of Geneva, who presented a version of the lighter, quicker, cheaper approach to urban change, centred on temporary, reversible interventions to facilitate shared decision making, the legitimization of projects by testing the response to the conflicting needs of residents, and use of little resources, which can stimulate creative solutions. Outdoor cinema event on inflatable screen, Geneva. Picture: Cinetransat Urban events may not make everyone happy The limitations of urban events emerged less compellingly at the conference. However, it was acknowledged that event-based urbanism can be just as frustrating as any other urban development process, particularly if it doesn’t consider participative decision making (even grassroots, guerrilla and tactical interventions are often the initiative of a small group of people or an individual, not of the entire community exposed to them). Urban events can be a source of noise, environmental pollution, stress, and annoying disruptions for those who don’t want or cannot partake in them. These nuisances may extend far beyond the interval when the events manifest, accompanying the preparatory work that goes into assembling and dismantling them. Depending on their nature and scale, they can entail significant security costs and risks; for example, gatherings are a preferred target of terrorist and criminal attacks. Just as these events may create the illusion of safety, they can also instil the fear of crime. Besides, it was pointed out, not everyone feels happiness is the ultimate banner for urban action. Are these potential negative effects justified by the happy city aspirations? After all, urban events cannot claim to actually improve most day to day living conditions that affect psychological wellbeing (housing quality, work conditions, commuting time): they are based in the public space, tend to be leisure-related and reserved for free time. This also means that they favour the segments of society with ample leisure time. Concluding thoughts The current practice of seeking to transform cities through events acknowledges that people have evolving and conflicting needs: for varied cultural and aesthetic stimulation, for different urban uses, for social interaction as well as for privacy, for freedom as well as structure and control, for change as well as stability. It promises to lead to happier cities by addressing these needs on a rotating basis, by temporarily altering urban form, function, and social interactions. The approach is used by both grassroots organizations and administrations to test and diffuse urban change gradually. As we are running out of space in cities, perhaps a key to our mental wellbeing could be better use of our time through cyclical or nomadic opportunities. About the Author
By Layla McCay, Director, Centre for Urban Design and Mental Health At the World Health Organization’s 9th Global Health Promotion Conference in Shanghai last month, WHO director Margaret Chan pronounced: “Health can no longer be addressed by the health sector alone”. In doing so, she set the tone for this interesting event, which, as Chan stated, meant "changing the living environments in which people make choices about their health-related lifestyle." Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) were of particular interest, with the Health Minister of Mauritius, Anil Gayan, stating that "NCDs are the modern weapons of mass destruction”. The Lord Mayor of Cork, Ireland further proposed: “It’s our responsibility and obligation as city managers to promote good mental health.” It was in this context that I was invited to speak about urban design and mental health to an audience of international city mayors and other policymakers and experts (see slides). I explained the central place of mental health within the WHO’s definition of health, and that good mental health is integral to achieving thriving, resilient, sustainable cities. I discussed how the city wears away many of our protective factors for good mental health, such as access to nature, strong social networks, sleep, security, privacy, and more. But conversely, the city has the potential to strengthen our mental health and wellbeing, leading to happier healthier citizens with increased education, employment, health and economic potential. But how? We discussed the Centre for Urban Design and Mental Health’s Mind the GAPS framework: any urban design policy can (and should) be assessed for its basic impact on mental health depending on the extent to which it creates access to green, active, pro-social and safe space. The presentation received a great deal of interest from cities around the world interested in integrating mental health into their policymaking and design. UD/MH Director Layla McCay speaks at the World Health Organization’s 9th Global Health Promotion Conference, Shanghai Interestingly, the potential of designing the built environment to promote and support good mental health is still not widely recognised. The other speakers at this session focused less on structural and system opportunities to improve population mental health, and more on important but traditional issues: access to treatment and rehabilitation, and changing attitudes to reduce stigma and improve social inclusion. However, built environment innovation did feature strongly in a session on physical activity. Robert Geneau from Public Health Canada led the way, stating that ‘the built environment can improve physical activity’ (the A of UD/MH’s Mind the GAPS framework) and described the shared training that Canada’s public health and urban planning professionals undertake to help make this a reality. While some ideas in the session focused on sports participation, there was a clear wider understanding that promoting physical activity is not simply about sports: walkability and bike infrastructure in cities were at the heart of these discussions, culminating in a call for us all to make better cases for city investment – and for setting shared targets owned by several government departments to improve leadership and accountability. Speakers at other sessions had further interesting ideas. For example, if people are increasingly using shopping malls, how can we target their physical activity and mental wellbeing in that setting (a question that was also raised at Tokyo's Innovative City Forum a month ago)? The question of how to build ‘liveable, beautiful, safe cities’ started to emerge – along with the conviction that health is a political choice. But politicians must be supported with better health literacy and social mobilization if we are to systematically integrate health promotion into all policies – and build better mental health into cities. Layla McCay's real time graphic notes of relevant sessions. About the Author
UD/MH Associate Charlotte Collins from Freie Universität Berlin and University College London summarises the mental health implications of the recent World Health Organisation report on Urban Green Spaces and Health. Policy makers, planners, researchers and urban dwellers are beginning to understand that health issues in cities are increasingly found in the ‘noncommunicable disease’ realm of mental health. The recent (2016) report by the World Health Organisation aims to address the link between this public health issue and the potential of open, green spaces to have a remedying effect. There has been sustained historical interest in the links between green spaces and improved health, but the mechanisms and reasons behind such links have not always grounded in empirical evidence. Interest in how green spaces can improve health has recently encountered a resurgence, especially in the context of finding practical urban approaches. Rather than explicitly offering solutions, the new WHO report gathers evidence from studies that have been conducted all over the world to establish similarities and patterns and set the groundwork for a new research toolkit to update this field of study in the context of the 21st century – and importantly, to influence policy and practice. What does the report say about mental health in cities? The report identifies the potential for the urban environment to engender mental health problems and a lack of general wellbeing as a ‘major public health issue’. Mental health problems can affect anyone in society, at any time in their life, with effects that can be short-lived or have a life-long impact. While it is clearly important to ensure people can receive support and treatment for mental health problems, this is not the only approach, and nor should it necessarily be the first approach. We should look to providing sustainable, preventative measures that reduce the risk of developing mental illness and help maintain good mental health. As Morris et al. (2006) suggests, at the personal level this approach not only improves people's wellbeing; it also reduces the strain placed on healthcare facilities in cities. Furthermore, the report recognises wider socio-economic benefits of good mental health such as a healthier, more productive workforce needing less sick leave due to disorders like depression or anxiety. Green space in the centre of Tokyo. Photograph by Layla McCay, UD/MH. The role of green spaces in cities The UN Sustainable Development Goals aim to provide “universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilities” by 2030. This recognises the substantial link between green spaces and the improvement of general health - but what exactly are ‘green spaces’ and what qualities lead them to have an ameliorating effect on mental wellbeing? In reality, urban green space is highly variable in its definition and can range from trees planted in the street, to children’s play areas and even extends to ‘blue spaces’ such as water features. The WHO report describes how these natural spaces facilitate improved mental health through a series of pathways: Enhanced Physical Activity
Stress Reduction
Social Contact/Cohesion
Quantity or Quality? The report stresses that quality of green spaces is preferential to quantity. Parks in particular can have certain sensory dimensions that greatly affect emotion and mood. As Grahn and Stigsdottir (2010) note, parks can have connotations of serenity: “a holy and safe place, which is a calm environment, undisturbed and silent” that can lead to feelings of calmness and reduced stress. Alcock et al. (2014) meanwhile conducted studies in the UK, which found that overall surrounding ‘greenness’ is more beneficial than proximity to green spaces. In a practical sense this means that even the visibility of nearby trees and vegetation from urban dwellings has the potential to lower levels of mental fatigue, aggression and stress. Contrastingly, the mismanagement of vegetation can connote feelings of neglect, and increase anxiety levels due to fear of crime. Therefore the initial design and sustained upkeep of open spaces is a crucial factor. Green space in a busy thoroughfare in Nakameguro, Tokyo. Photograph by Layla McCay, UD/MH. Key mental health-specific recommendations for architects and urban planners Urban planners are faced with conflicting demands to accommodate an ever-growing population density in cities, whilst maintaining the provision of urban green spaces. The WHO report calls for greater interaction between urban planners, policy makers and public health specialists, and aims to inform them on the “benefits of providing urban residents with green space access”. Emphasis is placed on the need for small-scale, local green spaces that can be a point of encounter for urban dwellers on a daily basis, alongside larger green areas such as parks to offer a space for recreation, physical exercise, and solitude, through contact with nature. At the same time, their design should be sympathetic and scale-appropriate to local contexts, as well as take a dimensional approach to look at potential needs and vulnerabilities of certain groups in society, in order to promote health benefits on a universal basis. Conclusion The report provides a reassuring reminder of the broadening field of interest and research in the field of urban design and mental health. The call for greater co-working between public health workers and urban planners provides an opportunity to inform urban policy, as well as to implement practical mechanisms into the urban environment to prevent the continued increase of mental health problems in cities. Read the full Report Click here About the Author
By Layla McCay, Director, Centre for Urban Design and Mental Health The New Urban Agenda is an ‘action-oriented document which will set global standards of achievement in sustainable urban development, rethinking the way we build, manage, and live in cities through drawing together cooperation with committed partners, relevant stakeholders, and urban actors at all levels of government as well as the private sector.’ It was adopted at the Habitat III conference in Quito in October 2016 and one of its stated priorities is to improve human health. So what does this mean for mental health?
The Shared Vision for the New Urban Agenda: equal use and enjoyment of cities The ‘shared vision’ proposes that all inhabitants, without discrimination, are able to inhabit and produce just, safe, healthy, accessible, affordable, resilient and sustainable cities that foster prosperity and quality of life for all. The vision prioritizes people-centered, age and gender-responsive, and integrated approaches to urban development that specifically take into account the needs of women, children and youth, older persons and persons with disabilities, migrants, indigenous peoples and local communities. This is summarised in the document's principles which talk about enhancing liveability, health and wellbeing, safety and public participation, eliminating discrimination, and ‘adopting healthy lifestyles in harmony with nature'. Where is mental health explicitly mentioned? Within the implementation plan for the New Urban Agenda, commitment 67 for sustainable urban development states: “We commit ourselves to promoting the creation and maintenance of well-connected and well-distributed networks of open, multi-purpose, safe, inclusive, accessible, green, and quality public spaces; to improving the resilience of cities to disasters and climate change, including floods, drought risks and heat waves; to improving food security and nutrition, physical and mental health, and household and ambient air quality; to reducing noise and promoting attractive and liveable cities, human settlements and urban landscapes, and to prioritizing the conservation of endemic species.” What commitments within the New Urban Agenda will specifically help address urban mental health in the context of urban design? While a wide range of the commitments will benefit population mental health, some of the key commitments include:
The supportive network to deliver the New Urban Agenda: further commitments
With a focus on integrated work between planning, transport, and other departments, clear support for multi-stakeholder partnerships, and an explicit acknowledgment of the impact of cities on mental health, the New Urban Agenda offers interesting potential for investments and action in urban design to improve mental health. Further Reading: New Urban Agenda Jonce Walker, urban planner and sustainability professional at Terrapin Bright Green, articulates the need for biophilic interventions in urban places, offers examples found in New York City, and suggests solutions to integrate biophilic design into urban projects. Biophilia is our deep-seated connection to nature. It helps explain why the rhythm of crashing waves and the crackling of fire captivate us; why a view of nature can enhance our creativity; why shadows and heights instill fascination and fear, and why gardening and strolling through a park have restorative healing effects. Routine connections with nature can provide opportunities for mental restoration, during which time our higher cognitive functions can sometimes take a break. Cognitive functioning encompasses our mental agility and memory, and our ability to think, learn and output either logically or creatively. For instance, directed attention is required for many repetitive tasks, such as routine paperwork, reading and performing calculations or analysis, as well as for operating in highly stimulating environments, such as when crossing busy streets and navigating urban places. The mental health benefits of nature are important to understand as our world continues to rapidly urbanize and our cities simultaneously expand and densify. In less than fifteen years more than 60% of humans will live in urban places and there will be thirteen new megacity regions according to the UN. As we continue to select urban places to live, urgent attention must be given to embedding nature and natural systems into urban design to connect people to nature and safeguard our health and wellbeing. If we are not careful, our commute and daily experience within these urban places will be nothing more than glass, steel, and concrete. Biophilic Urban Acupuncture On approach to this is urban acupuncture, a socio-environmental theory that combines contemporary urban design with traditional Chinese acupuncture, using small-scale interventions to transform the larger urban context. Just as the practice of acupuncture is aimed at relieving stress in the human body, the goal of urban acupuncture is to relieve stress in the built environment. Urban acupuncture is intended to to produce small-scale but socially catalytic interventions in the urban fabric. No needles necessary. Biophilic Urban Acupuncture (BUA) is the theory that threads and nodes of biophilic interventions in specific urban places can help improve people’s moods, connect people to place, and help improve mental health. Biophilic urban acupuncture blends two very important design concepts, biophilia and urban acupuncture. BUA has higher levels of effectiveness in dense cities versus suburban places due to the ease of pedestrian mobility. A resident that lives in a dense city will spend at least some time each day outside just by the fact that they will be walking to transit stations, walking to work, or walking to get a meal. (Though BUA is also of benefit in suburban places, the auto-centric street design and sprawled land-use in suburbs typically does not lend itself to high quality biophilic opportunities.) Small BUA interventions Biophilic interventions do not need to be grand in scale to be effective. Positive impact on self-esteem and mood has been shown to occur in the first five minutes of experiencing nature (Barton &Pretty, 2010). Daily, unintentional exposure should be a priority when planning a BUA intervention. The intervention should be placed in a location that receives a large number of users but is embedded into an everyday habitat or commute. Smaller BUA interventions should be placed in locations throughout the city in a web-like structure, so that users with different destinations will encounter biophilic experiences, no matter their destination or purpose of travel. Larger BUA interventions The larger biophilic experience should be placed in an area of the city that can serve a substantial proportion of the population and should include as many biophilic patterns as possible. These are typically parks such as the Olmsted designed Central in New York City or the Tommaso Francini designed Luxembourg Garden in Paris. Large parks that are centrally located within a city and connected by good transit will provide a robust BUA experience to a greater number of residents than parks located in the periphery. The High Line Park in New York City is a converted disused elevated railroad tracks into a much-loved biophilic intervention. Image courtesy of Dean Shareski via Flickr. BUA Examples In the urban environment, there are two ways to capitalize on the multi-sensory attributes of water to enhance the experience of a place. First, simulating or constructing water features (water walls, fountains, or falls; aquaria; water imagery) in the built environment—indoors and out—creates positive effects for inhabitants. Although, it is worth mentioning that water and energy-intensive installments may create other issues. Second, it is possible to amplify the presence of naturally occurring water (lakes and ponds; streams, creeks, and rivers; rainfall; arroyos) to help inhabitants become increasingly aware of the surrounding environment. The Fountains and Water Features of NYCA space with a good Presence of Water condition feels compelling and captivating. Fluidity, sound, lighting, proximity and accessibility each contribute to whether a space is stimulating, calming, or both. The water wall at Paley Park is a wonderful and captivating intervention. Image courtesy of Wally Gobetz via Flickr. The Trees of NYCA space with a good Visual Connection with Nature feels whole, it grabs one’s attention and can be stimulating or calming. It can convey a sense of time, weather and other living things. MillionTrees NYC is a citywide, public-private program that has planted one million new trees across the City’s five boroughs over the past decade. Beyond the numerous ecological benefits, strengthening New York City’s urban forest plays a positive role in helping inhabitants reduce stress and bolster self-esteem, mood, and parasympathetic activity. PopUp Forest: Times Square is emulating the pop-up restaurant experience by transforming a public plaza in Times Square into a large-scale, temporary urban forest installation. The goal is to foster a movement to re-define cities with nature in mind and to create an urban oasis for wildlife while helping New Yorkers get more familiar with nearby nature. A proposed art installation, PopUp Forest, will bring a forest into the ultra dense Times Square. Image copyright http://www.popupforest.org/ Biomorphic subway art Biomorphic forms & patterns are symbolic references to contoured, patterned, textured or numerical arrangements that persist in nature. A space with good biomorphic forms & patterns feels interesting and comfortable, possibly captivating, contemplative or even absorptive. Biomorphic subway art illustrates how this concept has been implemented in New York City subway stations. The passageway between 42nd Street and 5th Avenue includes artistic depictions of natural systems such as tree roots and animal burrows, and the Jay Street/Metro Tech Station depicts glass mosaic art with various animal species, including starlings, sparrows, lion fish, parrots, tiger beetles, and koi fish. Natural scenes and biomorphic forms and patterns can transform a dreary subway passage. Image courtesy of Wally Gobetz via Flickr. Brooklyn Bridge Park Tidal Wetlands A space with a good connection with natural systems evokes a relationship to a greater whole, making one aware of seasonality and the cycles of life. The experience is often relaxing, nostalgic, profound or enlightening, and frequently anticipated. The tidal wetlands at the recently expanded Brooklyn Bridge Park offers a prime example of connecting an urban landscape with the local ecosystem. The wetlands heighten awareness of natural properties of the East River and hopefully promote environmental stewardship of the Park and surrounding area. Tidal wetlands at the Brooklyn Bridge Park integrate natural with built systems. Image courtesy of Julienne Schaer for Brooklyn Bridge Park. DIY Biophilic Urban Acupuncture Biophilic Urban Acupuncture does not need to hinge on large budgets or city agencies to have dramatic impact. You can play a role in integrating BUA elements in your neighborhood now. Here are a few strategies to help you get started: Seed bombs are balls made from volcanic red clay or compressed soil containing different varieties of native species seeds that can fit in the palm. Usually other additives are included in the ball such as compost or humus to provide microbial inoculants. They can be dropped or tossed onto vacant lots or public places that are in need of beauty and vegetation. Seeds that support pollinators such as honey bees or butterflies are better as they will reinforce the Visual Connection to Nature and Connection to Natural Systems biophilic patterns. WHERE: Seed bombs work well in places that have exposed soil and in places that are difficult to access. HOW: What was once strictly a DIY project, seed bombs can now be purchased online, in stores, or even from vending machines. Tree pits are areas around urban trees that provide a small pervious surface for the roots to breath and absorb water. These can be transformed from a small often neglected patch of soil into a strong BUA intervention. If done with care, you can plant flowers or root bulbs in the pits. Additional interventions could be small benches around the tree pit which will create a reason for people to linger under the tree reinforcing the biophilic response. WHERE: Most trees that are located in public right-of-way (ROW) are the responsibility of the community to take care of. Check with your neighbors about which tree pits are available to improve. HOW: Using a hand cultivator, loosen the topsoil as this is usually compacted. Spreading a thin layer of mulch will help the tree absorb water and reduce evaporation. Plant in-season flowers and enjoy! Guerilla gardening is the act of planting vegetation in spaces that the gardeners do not have the legal rights to use. These sites are typically abandoned or areas that are be substantially neglected. BUA can have large impacts in these neglected areas via guerilla gardening because the intervention is typically noticed and appreciated by the community regardless of who did it, and taken care of for years. This intervention supports the connection with natural systems, visual connection with nature, and non-visual connection with nature biophilic patterns WHERE: Typically, guerrilla gardening occurs in spaces that are vacant or underutilized spaces. This intervention originated in NYC in the 1970’s by residents throwing balloons filled with local seeds, water, and fertilizer into empty lots. HOW: This BUA intervention is best done with a group of neighbors and/or friends. Locate the site that is in need of the garden and make a plan for the plantings and improvements. Pre-planting site work may need to be done such as cleaning up junk, trash, and debris. Conclusion We know that cities will continue to morph. We also know that we enjoy listening to a water fountain, seeing a butterfly, or watching leaves shake with the help of a slight breeze. Let’s work to ensure that Biophilic Urban Acupuncture is part of the toolkit to help shape the places where we want to live. About the Author
Insights on the future of urban design and mental health from the Tokyo Innovative City Forum10/24/2016
by Layla McCay, UD/MH Director Last week I attended the Innovative City Forum 2016 in Tokyo. Bringing together designers, artists, thinkers and citymakers to imagine our future of our life in the city, I was fascinated to see what themes and ideas would emerge from my first Tokyo-based city event. Amid the talk of self-driving cars, various uses for drones, and designing for a lifestyle in space, I extracted some insights into urban design for better mental health over the next 35 years. The most interesting theme that emerged was an understanding that the purpose of urban spaces is changing. With the increasing digitalization of our lives, our physical urban space needs to assert new roles and meanings. If we can sit in the comfort of our own bedroom and use digital and networked tools to conduct our work (emails, teleconferences, etc) and play (streaming music and movies, shopping, etc), then what exactly is the purpose of going outside at all? How do 21st century urban places need to update to deliver more relevant functions for this increasingly digital population? The consensus seemed to be the need to nurture better pro-social functionality of space: the communal experience and face-to-face interactions that facilitate positive social connections and support our mental health and happiness. Public outside spaces and buildings alike need to be designed in ways that extend better invitations to draw the public into them and encourage social interactions. New technologies like augmented reality to create communal public experiences that engage people with place might emerge as part of an evolving approach to delivering place-based entertainment that cannot be obtained at home. The other main function of public spaces that was recognized was the opportunity to access nature. There was some discussion of integrating more trees and grass into the exteriors and sightlines of building design (including the design of the first human habitat in Mars!), as well as the design opportunities offered by trees and nature to help bring taller buildings down to the human scale. Following on from recent thinking on the mental health impact of 'boringness', I was intrigued to hear from various speakers opposing the trend of ‘faceless perfection’, where homogenous, unchanging materials are used to create boring, sterile urban landscapes which people struggled to connect with. There was much discussion of the potential benefits of exposing and embracing imperfections as part of the design, rather than trying to correct them, and using new technologies like 3D printing to expand our design paradigms. Associated with that theme was the question of urban identity in a world where cities are becoming increasingly homogenous. With chain shops and restaurants dominating many city center, the speakers argued that urban design needs to better reflect and promote the intangible culture of a place to help people feel part of a shared local identity, and the question of how to build a city’s heritage into its new developments (while remaining dynamic and avoiding the trap of getting trapped in a particular era of a city’s heritage). The surge of shopping centre popularity came up, and with it, a question: since people’s wellbeing benefits from pedestrianized, walkable, pro-social, safe green spaces, how can we better design shopping center to deliver these components, and can they promote better mental health as much as similar design features within a city center? Technology advances Hiroo Ichikawa (pictured) believes will drive changes to our urban life by 2035. Photo by Layla McCay At the start of the event, the 365 participants were asked what would make Tokyo the best city in the world. Almost half (48%) voted for improved cultural power; a fifth called for infrastructure improvement; technological power was next, and economic power was the least voted-for option. This sentiment was reflected throughout the forum. And yet technological power was at the heart of many of the presentations. It is perhaps more helpful to think of technology as a tool for delivering the other improvements. Since technology is driving an evolution of our habits, lifestyle and what we need from physical places, we must evolve our traditional thinking around designing cities. One of the Forum's most interesting conclusions: as technology matures, we need to recognise that optimising for efficiency does not mean optimising for happiness. Even though it was not a primary theme of the event, is encouraging that the Tokyo speakers recognized that at the heart of this design revolution is the opportunity for design that promotes mental wellbeing and happiness.
Jorunn Monrad, Cultural Heritage Manager in Odda, Norway, considers how urban design might contribute to the risk factors that motivate people to commit terrorist attacks - and how urban design can help facilitate coexistence. We have been shaken by the terrorist attacks which have recently occurred in Europe. There is no doubt that terror organizations have inspired or helped, if not recruited, many of the perpetrators. Of course many motivators can contribute to these types of attacks: inspiration provided by other perpetrators, violence in the media, the ease with which weapons can be acquired... The list could go on, and these factors undoubtedly play an important role. And yet, we are also reminded of the attacks staged by angry young men in the US and other countries who shoot at strangers without any motive other than their own resentment, marginalization and alienation. To understand what has motivated this spate of terrorist attacks, it is hard not to wonder about the roles of frustration, a wish to get even, or the desire of the perpetrator to not only to commit suicide, but to take others along with them. And in considering how these motivations may have developed, it is important to consider the built environment in which these feelings germinate. If we look at where many perpetrators of terrorist attacks in Europe come from, we discover that peripheral urban areas as the Parisian banlieu or districts as Molenbeek in Belgium are somewhat overrepresented. Many such dormitory towns have become ghettoes where a particular social and/or ethnic identity may predominate. Of course there are many positive aspects of people embracing their cultural identity and forming communities with others who share their language, culture and religion: these types of communities can support people's wellbeing. It is also perfectly possible to be part of such a community, and still be an active and well-integrated part of wider society. But the design of many of these dormitory towns may be making this less likely. Many dormitory towns offer bleak views of identical high-rise apartment blocks surrounded by lawns in a sorry state, parked cars, and empty streets, and their design helps preclude the wider integration that we see in the traditional city. Residents of these towns may have few opportunities to see, meet or interact with people outside of their immediate social circles, other than children in playgrounds and people hurrying to or from their apartments. This setting can create feelings of isolation that can turn to segregation - and with this comes resentment, suspicion, alienation, and a feeling of 'us and them'. No meeting places, no division between public and private sphere, and one feels like trespassing. Photograph by J Monrad. The sign says welcome, the fences tell a different story. Photograph by J Monrad. On the other hand, city residents are more likely to find themselves regularly interacting with people of different ethnicities and social classes. They meet in the streets, squares, offices, banks, cafes and parks. While these people may not become friends in the course of their daily business (the invisible line dividing the public sphere from the private is seldom crossed) they learn the unwritten rules of urban coexistence. They come to feel part of a loose-knit community of diverse strangers. And through this daily, routine personal exposure to a diversity of people, the urban environment gives residents a setting in which to recognise that people of different origins are more similar to themselves, and less threatening, than one may be led to believe from watching the news. People are brought together in dense cities with varied streetscapes that combine dwellings on the upper floors with businesses on the ground floor Photograph by J Monrad. This particular feeling of belonging may not make any difference to a determined terrorist. But to someone in the category of “angry young man” the small acts of kindness and courtesy which you may witness in a city street across socioeconomic, ethnic, and other divides may make all the difference. While waiting for the tram in a street in Milan, I witnessed a badly dressed man sitting on a windowsill and begging passers-by for a cigarette. The neighbourhood is inhabited by a mixture of Italians, Chinese, Latin Americans, North Africans, Indians and many other nationalities of people. The man was desperate for a smoke, as he loudly announced. A stylish lady in high heels stopped and offered him one from her pack, with an elegant gesture. He straightened up and thanked with similar dignity, as if recalling past and better times. The lady was not afraid: there were others waiting for the tram, and the man in need of a smoke was sitting there alone. When someone offers a destitute person a cigarette, a coffee or an ice cream, it is a way of saying “it could have been me”. Life is uncertain, and nobody is quite safe from misfortune. Such small gestures can make difficulties easier to bear, and avoid resentment towards those who are more fortunate. Urban designers can create essential opportunities for people from all walks of life to meet, to interact. Members of ethnic groups must feel that they belong both to their ethnic community, and to the community formed by the inhabitants of their neighbourhood or city. We must avoid creating a feeling of an “us” and “them”, and we must facilitate opportunities for everyone to learn the unwritten rules of urban co-existence. Creating urban spaces that set the stage for more interaction, and trying to counteract the desolation of some of these dormitory towns, may not be sufficient to tip the balance. But when we design new urban spaces, we should try to bring people from all ethnicities and social classes together in the same public spaces. It is, amongst other things, a matter of creating attractive, upscale public areas with a wide range of businesses and other activities on street level, and combining them with a variegated offer of dwellings. Changing the Parisian banlieu may be a more daunting challenge, but even in such areas it is possible to create inviting urban areas, and in doing so, perhaps reduce the marginalization and resentment that can motivate people to make destructive choices. This is how German architect and urban planner Ludwig Hilbersheimer envisioned cities in the 1920’s. His efficient, homogenous, and anonymous buildings that preclude social interaction have helped inspire today's dormitory towns. About the Author
by Jaime Izurieta-Vareaby, architect and urban designer, Quito, Ecuador Rosa works about six miles away from her home. On a typical day she walks for 20 minutes to the nearest transit stop, where she takes two 45-minute buses followed by an additional 15 minute walk to arrive into work. Rush hour public transit rides can be stressful, with packed buses, thick smog, dangerous crossings, unfit bus stops and aggressive drivers. And that is when the weather helps. The design of the city that will host Habitat III in a few days time seems to deliberately neglect the more than 70% of citizens who do not travel by private car. The city is preparing for the big event by encouraging private actors to implement placemaking projects within the La Mariscal neighbourhood, located right at the urban core. This settlement, dating from the early 20th century was the first local attempt of building a Garden City, and it has retained its scale and charm, although it concentrates a disproportionate part of the tourism and entertainment industries for the whole metropolitan area and is home to most bars, nightclubs and restaurants. Many placemakers will install street furniture, plant trees and build parklets and bike parking. Artists will create open air galleries by painting over facades and walls. Food vendors will show up with happily designed trucks selling local and international dishes, restaurants and bars will contribute to the neverending block party and business owners will dress their shop fronts in their best wares. That is what most of the twenty- or thirty thousand visitors who come to Quito during the week of 17 October will see - and that will be the mental postcard of Quito that they take home. Most of the people attending Habitat III will not have to make Rosa’s two-hour trip to get to the venue and afterparties. They will walk along streets that were designed when we still valued urban life and that have been renovated to meet current standards. They will most likely ignore the few glitches that make sidewalks hard to cruise and they will be able to enjoy the sunny walks that can be torture for those who have to work outside on tree-deprived streets. The bones of La Mariscal. Photographs by author. La Mariscal has about 20,000 residents and a daytime population of over 180,000. People flock daily to work, to school, or to grab a bite and a beer. The neighbourhood has enormous potential of becoming a centre of educational urbanism. Good practices within La Mariscal would raise awareness and recruit almost two hundred thousand neighbourhood ambassadors who would go back home every evening to the farthest reaches of Quito's metropolitan region thinking about lessons learnt and, with the right kind of encouragement, about how to share them. The potential is there, and it does not require billion dollar investments in infrastructure and services. What we need is to turn every resident and visitor to La Mariscal into a potential citymaker. And, as it turns out, this will be less of a feat than one would otherwise think. Quito is sitting on a gold mine, urbanistically speaking. The bland cityscape of underserved neighbourhoods (or wealthy ones with security concerns) that boast endless perimeter walls and deserted sidewalks miraculously disappear when you enter La Mariscal. Close proximity between people is pervasive on mostly open facades built with non-residential uses on the ground floors. The human scale of stores, food stalls and shopfronts adds to the ease of walking and keeps the trail interesting. The experience is part of an adequately designed, properly scaled, outside 'living room' where public space is open, inclusive and ready to be shared by all. Only it currently doesn’t work quite that way. Violent crime is not unheard of and petty thefts occur daily in the area. Old diesel engines battered by the low oxygen in this city at an altitude of 2800 metres above sea level spew black smoke on every street, and noise is well beyond acceptable limits. Storefronts are not inviting and people rarely say hello, let alone chat about the weather with strangers. We can safely affirm that La Mariscal has the bones, but still has a long way to go before it is able to set an example and recruit its floating population as unconscious citymakers and ambassadors of good urban practice. Typical Quito streets with endless perimeter walls and deserted sidewalks. Photographs by author. I strongly believe that public space that gives out the right messages can transform the urban experience and motivate urbane and civic behaviour for all sorts of people. Experiments conducted by the Happy City Lab and the University of Waterloo tell us of the power of good urban environments in building strong, connected communities and curbing antisocial behaviour. The lessons that a city with the conditions of Quito can learn from those experiences and implement as part of a regional educational programme are countless. We even have a neighbour with similar problems that has done this quite successfully. Medellín, Colombia is well known around the world as a back-from-the-brink, urban renaissance case. It has relied on a strong vision for transformation from the crime-ridden site of drug wars to a global leader for innovation and best urban practices. Millions of dollars have been invested on improving the built environment and on inclusive policies to weave together the social tissue. But there was one aspect of the renewal that could not have been bought with any amount of investment: the power of a well-designed educational campaign that relied on both urbanism and children. Medellín bet on using every part of the experience within rehabilitated urban environments as an educational tool. They speak of “educational urbanism” as an instrument to teach citizens how to share public spaces, embrace diversity, respect one another and take care of the Commons. The strides that this city of three-million people, and roughly the same conditions as Quito, has achieved are an international example of urban reinvention. It has taken, literally, a village. Change would have come at a much slower pace had they not prioritised the educational component and the power of children to spread progress to all corners of the metropolitan area. Quito has the bones but is lacking the software. Habitat III will bring tens of thousands of urban thinkers to the city, almost ten times the amount of visitors that we normally receive every day. It will put Quito's citizens to a test of tolerance, its systems to a test of resilience and its government to a test of efficiency. The city, its people and its administration will be dissected and analysed. Problems and solutions will be discussed and proposed, Our disposition to learn lessons and incorporate the key aspects of the New Urban Agenda to urban life will establish the path that Quito will tread in the coming years. How we respond and what we learn from the big event will shape our ability to create an exemplary urban environment one shopfront at a time and inspire the hundreds of thousands of citizens that come to La Mariscal on a daily basis to be ambassadors of good urbanism. By creating a critical mass of potential city makers we can spread the best practices on a metropolitan scale. Good city form and an appropriate interface will not only impact our behaviour in a positive way. In the long run, it will create better interactions between citizens, build better urban networks and contribute to a happier, more sustainable city life for Rosa and all three million residents. About the Author
|
Sanity and Urbanity:
|