Regularly, we feature a Global Roundtable in which a group of people respond to a specific question in The Nature of Cities.
show/hide list of writers
Hover over a name to see an excerpt of their response…click on the name to see their full response.
AustinFor nearly four decades, Austin has enforced tree preservation and replanting ordinances to balance land development with protecting trees and green space that bring so many people to our community.
ChicagoThe Chicago Region Trees Initiative has been working with its partners—including developers, communities, and home owners—to identify solutions to key issues impacting our oak ecosystems.
MiamiWhat is needed to make our natural areas thrive is mostly known and planned for, and implemented (sometimes slowly). Curveballs like climate change highlight the need for adaptive management and, at times, reprioritization.
New YorkDespite New York’s long-standing commitment to natural areas, our forests continue to face multiple challenges. Although 85 percent of our mature tree canopy is native, the next generation of native trees and understory flora and fauna are threatened by existing and emerging invasive species.
SeattleDeveloping and implementing an expanded stewardship timeline is essential to bring Seattle’s forests through the massive environmental and human change expected in this century.
Sarah Charlop-Powers is the Executive Director of the Natural Areas Conservancy, with a background in land use planning, economics and environmental management.
Introduction
Despite representing the largest concentration of nature in cities, natural areas are under-resourced and unprotected.
Often the term “urban forest” refers to all of the trees within a city, including street trees, trees on private property, and forested natural areas. “Forested natural areas” are the “woods” in cities. The forests in cities are more than just trees: they encompass complex ecosystems of soil, microorganisms, trees, and plants in all stages of their life cycle. They are home to insects and animals. These spaces are critical for protecting biodiversity and mitigating the impacts of climate change. And they are important to the humans who live nearby, who visit and recreate in these forests. Natural areas make up 84%, or 1.7 million acres of urban parkland in the United States. Despite representing the largest concentration of nature in cities, natural areas are under-resourced and unprotected.
In the United States, four out of five Americans live in cities and urban parks are the nearest and sometimes only place that they have the opportunity to access nature. The Covid pandemic has further highlighted the importance of urban parks and natural areas as a critical form of infrastructure. Parks in cities across the country are currently receiving historic levels of use, as residents seek forms of respite compatible with shelter in place and social distancing guidelines. Natural Areas in particular offer the dual benefits of open space that allows folks to spread out, and access to the beauty and quietude of nature.
Forested natural areas have limited formal protection from city development and stressors and cannot take care of themselves; they need management and continued investment. The protection and management of urban natural areas requires sophisticated approaches as well as long-term planning and investment. Cities across the country and world are facing these challenges. In this roundtable we are introducing work from 12 US cities. These authors and the organizations that they represent are leading efforts to promote and ensure healthy forests in the complex urban environment.
The Natural Areas Conservancy (NAC) is a non-profit organization devoted to restoring and conserving New York City’s 20,000 acres (8094 hectares) of woodlands and coastal areas. In an effort to strengthen connections with leaders across the United States working in urban natural areas, in October 2019, we hosted a four-day workshop with the goal to strengthen a community of practice, learn from one another and improve management of the places where we work. As a group we discussed and developed case studies on the following topics as they relate to urban forested natural areas:
Assessment
Prioritization and Planning
Climate change Adaptation
Monitoring
Innovations in Restoration and Management
Cross-sector Partnerships
Organizing and Community Engagement
Urban Land Preservation and Policy
A special issue of Cities and the Environment was published as a product of this workshop. The issue contains an in-depth explanation of the themes explored in the workshop, as well as 25 case studies written by the city participants describing highlights of the work being carried out to manage forests in cities across the country.
In this roundtable, we are excited to bring this conversation to the Nature of Cities community.
Sophie Plitt is National Partnership Manager the the Natural Areas Conservancy. Sophie works to engage national partners in a workshop to improve the management of urban forested natural areas.
Clara Pregitzer is Conservation Scientist at the Natural Areas Conservancy.
She led the Forest Assessment component of the Natural Areas Conservancy Ecological Assessment for NYC parkland and the development of the Forest Management Framework.
Keith Mars, AICP, CA, is Community Tree Preservation Division Manager, City of Austin Development Services Department. Keith works for the City of Austin where he manages 35 dedicated public servants that preserve, plan, promote, and study Austin's urban forest.
Austin
For nearly four decades, Austin has enforced tree preservation and replanting ordinances to balance land development with protecting trees and green space that bring so many people to our community.
The City of Austin recognizes the urban forest, including natural areas, provides social, ecological, and economic benefits that enhance the quality of life for Austinites. Just like the parks where we play and the bike lanes we use to commute to work, our urban forest is a community asset. It is an important part of Austin’s infrastructure, but it is not static. The forest’s health, particularly our natural areas, are impacted by insect and disease infestations, invasive plants, aging trees, and wildfire. The City of Austin has long had regulations that protect individual trees and intact forest areas, but one stressor has been contact for the past decade—boomtown land development and how it is impacting individual trees in urban redevelopment and intact forested areas in the suburban areas of Austin.
Austin celebrated Arbor Day with a family friendly event at Austin Nature & Science Center. Photo: Jennifer Chapman, Austin Nature & Science Center.Five year tracking of tree impacts in Austin
For nearly four decades, our city has enforced tree preservation and replanting ordinances to balance land development with protecting trees and green space that bring so many people to our community (see the figure above). Keeping Austin’s tree canopy intact is important for our community’s quality of life.
Protected trees: Thanks to the City’s tree preservation ordinances, we have protected hundreds of thousands of trees from being removed or damaged during development. Complimentary land use ordinances, such as water quality protection zones and limits on impervious cover, protect intact forested areas.
Tree Removals: Trees are removed every year for a number of reasons, including land development and declining tree health. In 2017, more than 80,000 inches were removed because of development (12 percent decrease from 2016) and almost 42,000 tree inches were removed this year due to declining health (8 percent increase from 2016).
Tree Planting: The City tracks tree planting on development sites and city-sponsored initiatives. Trees planted through the development process totaled more than 30,000 inches in 2017. Tree planting on park property, riparian areas along creeks, rights-of-way, and private property has remained consistent over the past 5 years, averaging 6,600 new tree inches per year (6,400 in 2017). Tree species are chosen for ecosystem function and site suitability, and include large shade, small ornamental, and fruit and nut species.
Lydia Scott is Director, Chicago Region Trees Initiative. Lydia is the founding Director of the Chicago Region Trees Initiative (CRTI), a regional collaboration of ~200 organizations, founded by The Morton Arboretum.
Chicago
The Chicago Region Trees Initiative has been working with its partners—including developers, communities, and home owners—to identify solutions to key issues impacting our oak ecosystems.
In the seven county Chicago region we have lost seventy percent of our native oak ecosystems and only 30 percent of what is left is owned by a public entity such as a community, park district, or forest preserve. This means that most of these areas are now in a wide range of unprotected ownerships and conditions including fragmented. Small fragmented sites are extremely vulnerable to external impacts such as invasive species and they are significantly impacted by surrounding land use.
The Chicago Region Trees Initiative (CRTI) has been working with its partners to identify solutions to key issues impacting these oak ecosystems. One that we are currently working on is a collaborative approach to land management to reduce threats. CRTI partners are developing a suite of resources to explain best management practices (BMPs) and make those practices cohesive across land ownerships. These resources are called Healthy Habitats. There are three levels to these resources: Healthy Hedges to eradicate and replace woody invasive species; Healthy Homes to increase planting of native species, reduce use of pesticides and fertilizers, and reduce run off; and Healthy Habitats to explain BMPs that may seem counterintuitive to the general public, e.g. prescribed fire and canopy. The most important aspect of these resources is that they are developed and sponsored by a wide range of partners validating their credibility.
The first effort —Healthy Hedges—is a resource to increase awareness and encourage removal of one of the greatest challenges to our forested natural areas: European buckthorn. Buckthorn is 28 percent of all of the tree species in the region. It creates a monoculture by outcompeting native species and changes the soil composition and chemistry making it challenging or impossible for desirable plant species to grow and inhospitable for some wildlife. For some private landowners, there is a lack of awareness of the existence of this species and its impacts on habitat health. Additionally, for some landowners it is deliberately left in place because it provides a screening buffer for their property. On the flipside, public landowners are well aware of its presence in their landscape and they are spending millions of dollars annually to remove this invasive species only to have it come back as seed is carried from private land to public land by birds.
Outreach and collaboration is needed. CRTI partners from the Illinois Landscape Contractors Association, Illinois Green Industry Association, forest preserve districts, mayors and managers, land trusts, community groups, nurseries, and individuals came together to discuss solutions. The result is a series of resources to guide landowners, managers, and individuals to increase awareness of the impacts of buckthorn, tips on how to remove it (including how to stage removal to keep privacy intact), desirable species to plant as replacement, how to work with a contractor (understanding that management of a manicured landscape is very different from a naturalized landscape), and where to find desirable species.
A webinar and in person presentations were sponsored by the Illinois Landscape Contractors Association to more than 400 individual contractors on how to engage their clients to remove buckthorn from their property. The same presentation was taken on the road for counties and followed up by presentations to smaller groups such as garden clubs and environmental groups. A poster was developed with the nurseries that shows alternatives for buckthorn. This poster has been distributed to garden centers and nurseries and a smaller version is being distributed to individuals and landowners to take with them when they shop. Two additional guides were developed with photographs and descriptions of desirable native and non-native shrub species. Finally, an online survey tool was created to help the landowner identify buckthorn on their property, direct them to management strategies, and then help them map their property and “pin” it as “Woody Invasive Free”. Those who achieve this designation are awarded a sticker for their window, mailbox or a property sign.
Matthew Freer is Assistant Director of Landscape, Chicago Park District.
He serves as Assistant Director in the Department of Cultural and Natural Resources, working on the Natural Areas Team.
Joseph McCarthy is Senior Forester, City of Chicago Dept. of Forestry. Since 1990, Joseph has worked to foster cooperation with other city departments ensuring that all reasonable options are explored to preserve and protect city trees in capital improvement projects.
Karen Miller is Executive Planner, Kane County. Karen is leader in the Chicago region on behalf of trees and the environment. She is a certified planner through the American Institute of Certified Planners and is an executive planner with the Kane County Development Department.
James Duncan is Environmental Resources Project Supervisor, Miami-Dade County. James is an environmental policy expert and coordinates local wildlife issues for Miami-Dade County.
Miami
What is needed to make our natural areas thrive is mostly known and planned for, and implemented (sometimes slowly). Curveballs like climate change highlight the need for adaptive management and, at times, reprioritization.
Urban forests in Miami-Dade County are best described as either protected, fragmented, and/or endangered. The urban and agricultural areas of the county are wedged between two national parks. Between them is a strip of land historically made up of wetlands dotted with tree islands, a higher and drier limestone ridge of upland forests, and along Biscayne Bay, a mangrove coastline. This strip of higher limestone accommodated development during the 20th century. Today, it’s occupied by renowned cities like Miami and important agricultural areas that serve as the U.S. winter crop breadbasket.
Biologically, natural areas in urban Miami-Dade are fragmented, modified through regional drainage, and suffering invasions by non-native species. Currently, less than 3 percent of the upland forest remains. Natural areas in the county are home to seventeen plant and fourteen animal species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) and well over a hundred more species are listed under similar state and county regulations. Many species are endemic. In 1990, Miami-Dade County voters created the Environmentally Endangered Lands (EEL) Program to acquire, preserve, enhance, restore, conserve and maintain native habitats. The habitats listed consist primarily of globally imperiled pine rockland, hardwood hammock, scrub, freshwater glades, and saltwater wetlands. Additionally, local and federal critical habitat designations have been placed on the vast majority of public and private natural areas in the county.
Outside the national parks, the county’s EEL initiative is the most important public lands project in Miami-Dade. EEL preserves support a diversity of species, outstanding geologic and natural features, and are a sustaining component of our ecosystem. Acquiring, protecting, and restoring these habitats benefits the public. These natural areas protect biodiversity and provide places for the public to see many species. These environmental resources recharge our drinking water aquifer, cool urban heat islands and lessen flooding during heavy rains. EEL preserves are a critical stop-over for the winter bird migration and are key in preventing the extinction of many species. The EEL Program, along with partners, has acquired almost 22,268 acres of land in Miami-Dade County from inception through July 2018. In total, EEL currently manages more than 26,000 acres.
Actions needed to preserve these areas have been developed by different agencies, ranging from the federal Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan to local management agreements. EEL efforts are encompassed in plans for all of these natural areas. Some of these restoration initiatives are starting their fourth decade of progress while others are constantly being modified and created. Aside from management, acquisition today is still a critical need.
Climate change poses new challenges and as the Miami-Dade County landscape changes in unanticipated ways, natural areas are needed more than ever to buffer our population from the most severe impacts. Climate change comes with new management and public land acquisition considerations. Many challenges and needs are easily grasped such as strips of buffer lands to mitigate storm surge and recharge areas to hold water during flood times and provide water during droughts. Other issues are nuanced, such as saltwater intrusion causing direct impacts via lifting a fresh groundwater lens into dry areas and its effect on legacy pollution. Some new dangers are biological. One major challenge to the outlook of urban forested areas is short term risks to forest structure from more resilient invasive vines and increased frequency of wind events.
Aroid vines (primarily Epipremnum pinnatum and Syngonium podophyllum) are sensitive to cold temperatures which historically kept them in check to a degree. These ornamental plants are found the world over in offices and malls, but in South Florida the small leaves and pencil thin vines climb up trees with vines as thick as a wrist and leaves the size of a human. Decreasing die back during the winter combined with tropical storm systems, infested forests have begun to collapse. After Hurricane Irma in 2017, preserve managers reported tornadoes touching down in areas infested with these vines. Tornadoes seemed to be the only way to explain the damage caused by this deadly combination. Control of these vines involve either complicated herbicide application or hiring tree climbers to manually remove resilient vines from the canopy. This challenge is increasingly a priority in many preserves.
In conclusion, what is needed to make our natural areas thrive is mostly known and planned for, and implemented (sometimes slowly). Curveballs like climate change undeniably highlight the need for adaptive management and, at times, reprioritization. Finally, the outlook is hopeful as large restoration projects get implemented and increasing attention to even the smallest natural area provides resources and thoughtful analysis to complex ecosystem problems.
Novem Auyeung is a Senior Scientist, Division of Forestry Horticulture & Natural Resources, NYC Parks. Novem guides conservation, research, and monitoring priorities for the Division.
New York
Despite New York’s long-standing commitment to natural areas, our forests continue to face multiple challenges. Although 85 percent of our mature tree canopy is native, the next generation of native trees and understory flora and fauna are threatened by existing and emerging invasive species.
New York City’s forested natural areas cover roughly 10,000 acres across all five boroughs. In addition to NYC’s renowned cultural diversity, the city sits at the intersection of three physiographic provinces—Coastal Plain, Piedmont, and Appalachian—and is home to a wealth of flora and fauna, including globally rare communities such as post oak-blackjack oak barrens. From spotted salamanders (Ambystoma maculatum) to spring beauties (Claytonia virginica), our forests are great places to spot wildlife, wildflowers, and more. Based on USDA Forest Service research, NYC’s forested parkland provide disproportionately greater ecosystem service benefits relative to their size (Nowak et al 2018) and are more likely to provide visitors with a sense of refuge and place attachment than landscaped areas (Sonti et al 2020).
Left: Spotted salamander in Alley Pond Park. Photo: Ellen Pehek Right: Spring beauty in La Tourette Park. Photo: Desiree Yanes
Of the 10,000 acres, roughly 7,000 are managed by the New York City Department of Parks & Recreation (NYC Parks). NYC was ahead of its time and established the country’s first publicly-funded urban natural resources management unit in 1984. Early work involved conducting inventories and assessments of natural areas on city parkland, which provided valuable information on NYC’s forests (e.g., NYC Parks 1995). This information was incorporated into management plans to improve specific parks and kick-started NYC Parks’ early forest restoration work and monitoring program. In addition, the Forever Wild program was created in 2001 to protect the city’s most ecologically valuable parkland. Thus, from the beginning, data from monitoring and assessments have been used to address the unique challenges of urban forest management in NYC.
Volunteer planting event in Riverdale Park. Photo: NYC Parks
When the MillionTreesNYC program was announced in 2007, NYC Parks was able to leverage two decades of forest restoration experience and apply lessons learned at a larger scale than ever before. The program brought together public and private organizations, researchers and practitioners, and professional staff and volunteers to plant one million trees citywide by 2017. This effort was led by NYC Parks and New York Restoration Project and was completed two years ahead of schedule, with over half of the trees planted in forested parkland (Campbell 2017). MillionTreesNYC also strengthened NYC Parks’ volunteer engagement in forested parkland through programs like public planting events (pictured above) and Super Steward training. The success of MillionTreesNYC illustrates the importance of building capacity and awareness for urban conservation through public-private partnerships and community engagement.
Social Assessment Field Researcher, Marcos Tellez, taking notes in Pelham Bay Park. Photo: David Chang
In 2012, the Natural Areas Conservancy (NAC), a non-profit organization, was formed and further improves NYC Parks’ capacity to conserve the urban forest. NAC’s kickoff project, a collaboration with NYC Parks and USDA Forest Service, was ecological and social assessments of the city’s natural areas and surrounding parkland. These assessments showed that NYC’s forested parkland is composed primarily of native tree species (Pregitzer et al. 2018) and that natural areas are well-loved and provide nearby nature to many New Yorkers (Auyeung et al. 2016). The assessments also informed the first citywide forest management plan, the Forest Management Framework of New York City, which quantifies the full scope of management actions and costs to improve NYC’s forests—$385 million over 25 years. Thanks largely to New Yorkers for Parks and their Play Fair campaign, the first year of the framework was funded, which enabled NYC Parks to hire new staff dedicated to improving NYC forests and speaks to the importance of planning that is informed by data and supported by diverse constituents.
Clara Pregitzer and Silvia Bibbo conducting the Ecological Assessment in Van Cortlandt Park. Photo: Natural Areas Conservancy)
Nonetheless, NYC’s forests continue to face multiple challenges. Although 85 percent of our mature tree canopy is native, the next generation of native trees and understory flora and fauna are threatened by existing (e.g., mile-a-minute vine) and emerging invasive species (e.g., jumping worms). Forests in the Bronx and Staten Island are under additional stress from herbivory due to the high density of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). NYC’s forests also face problems that affect forests globally like climate change, pests, and development. While the current COVID-19 pandemic has shown that public parks provide a vital service, anticipated budget cuts and decreases in revenue will likely have profound consequences for NYC’s forests and other parkland. What is clear is that continued data-driven management and planning (e.g., King & Auyeung 2020), advocacy and capacity building through public-private partnerships and community engagement (e.g., Forgione 2020, Henderson-Roy et al 2020), and inclusive planning that involves multiple constituents will go a long way towards addressing those challenges to NYC’s forests head on.
Lisa Ciecko is Plant Ecologist, Seattle Parks and Recreation. Lisa works as a Plant Ecologist for Seattle Parks and Recreation, directly managing Green Seattle Partnership restoration efforts.
Seattle
Developing and implementing an expanded stewardship timeline is essential to bring Seattle’s forests through the massive environmental and human change expected in this century.
Seattle is known as the Emerald City, ringed by water, mountains, and at this time of a year, a spring green that can make newcomers dizzy. Skunk cabbage (politely renamed swamp lantern) with its hooded yellow flowers followed by an unfurling of massive green leaves, are a telltale sign of spring in forested wetlands across Seattle. Other early-bloomers in the forest include mid-story species like salmonberry and osoberry, whose names evoke the broader ecosystem connections present in Pacific Northwest forests. Up in the forest canopy reigns Western redcedar, a sacred tree that has provided shelter, transportation, and food for time immemorial.
Skunk cabbage in bloom.
This spring show in the middle of a booming metropolis can be contributed in part to community-powered restoration efforts formalized in 2005 as the Green Seattle Partnership. Our goal is to restore ecological form and function to more than 2,750 acres of forest across 230 parks while galvanizing community stewardship. With Seattle Parks and Recreation as the primary land manager, support from other city departments, non-profit organizations, companies and individuals have built a unique program that is working hard to heal and manage greenspaces long thought to “take care of themselves”. The program model has now been adopted across the Puget Sound Region, with 14 municipalities and 1 county following suit to build Green City Partnerships.
At 15 years old, Green Seattle Partnership is nearing the end of the originally conceptualized 20-Year Plan. This benchmark offers an opportunity to reflect on successes, challenges and next steps. It turns out that 20 years was a bold timeline. Invasive species cover has decreased rapidly, responding to our restoration interventions for the most part and offering a clear signal of success. Sites enrolled early in the program now have maturing conifer trees that optimistically have a lifespan of several hundred years. But even these sites are in the infancy of their renewal. We have lost our “ecological memory”; very basic natural processes like rotting nurse logs and robust wildlife populations are still hard to find in Seattle forests.
Developing and implementing an expanded stewardship timeline is essential to bring Seattle’s forests through the massive environmental and human change expected in this century. Climate change impacts are clearly taking shape in Seattle’s forests. We have to reconcile that the program’s resources don’t always match ecological priorities or timescales. Building understanding of the current program’s status and receiving sustained funding commitments are still our central challenge.
Seattle Needs Forests. Photo: Michael YadrickGreen Seattle Day 2019. Photo: Christine Stephens
A Green Seattle Partnership bumper sticker reads “Seattle Needs Forests” because the research results are loud and clear that human health and wellbeing depends on the multitude of benefits from nearby nature. The program has succeeded in its original intent to spur community involvement, marking a million volunteer hours invested in the program in 2018. Engagement has expanded to include restoration activities for toddlers to elders. Our leadership and job training opportunities, corporate events, school programming and a robust Forest Steward program are actively building community cohesion. Our challenge moving forward is to push harder to address programming inequities. Again, changing our timescale and perspective before and beyond 20 years may help us reconcile the city’s history of racism that is reflected in its greenspace care, use and distribution of benefits.
Green Seattle Partnership successes and challenges are not just our own. Work with the Natural Area Conservancy during the Forest in Cities Workshop confirmed that cities across the U.S. are facing similar issues. As we continue to tackle the task of shifting approaches, plans and methods to chart a course for what lies beyond the original 20-year horizon, learning from peers nationally is increasingly important. Hopefully the lessons in Seattle will be equally as valuable in restoring and supporting forests elsewhere in the world.
Michael Yadrick is Plant Ecologist, Green Seattle Partnership. Michael joined Seattle Parks and Recreation’s Green Seattle Partnership team in 2011. He has also served the land trust community, is a Returned Peace Corps Volunteer (Bolivia ’02-’04) and former AmeriCorps volunteer.
Weston is as a policy and research consultant working on the social dimensions of urban natural resources. He currently chairs the City of Seattle's Urban Forestry Commission and holds adjunct teaching positions at Seattle University, the University of Washington, and Antioch University, Seattle.
The wisdom of nature is the lifeline for our future and our most important ally in finding the pathways to transform the harmful exploitation of natural resources into a regenerative system that balances human aspirations with a healthy planet.
Winter may seem a quiet season when it comes to bird sounds, but when we listen carefully we may hear the starling, one of the most cheerful whistlers in the world. Mozart had a starling for some time and enjoyed the delightful singing of his bird friend, who was able to sing parts of his piano concertos (L. Haupt, 2017).
One of my favourite bedtime stories when I was little, was about two field mice, Millie and Tom. The poppy flower in the cornfield overheard Tom whispering a secret in Millie’s ear that the day after full moon, at 14h00 they would get married. The poppy flower told the little secret to the corn, the bellflowers, the wind and the sparrows, who said we will make the bells sound and sing for them on that day. And so it was, when the clock stroke 14h00, the breeze was blowing confetti of grass, the sparrows were singing and the bellflowers were ringing. At the end of the day Millie said to Tom: “it was a wonderful wedding, but I wonder who has told our secret?” Tom said: “it is not possible to keep secrets here, the flowers and the corn have ears.” And so many times I looked at the cornfields, their flowers and birds with a sense of admiration for their ability to hear our stories.
From book: “Verhaaltjes voor het slapen gaan, De Trouwpartij”
Another sound of nature that humans have hardly noticed is the communication between trees. Backed by a growing body of scientific evidence, Peter Wohlleben, author of the book, The hidden life of trees: what they feel, how they communicate, explains how trees are connected to each other through underground fungal networks, through which they share water and nutrients and communicate. At an international conference on forests for biodiversity and climate change in February of this year in Brussels, he said: “We do not know how many species we have in our forests. There are hundreds of thousands of the smallest creatures like bacteria, which form an indispensable part of the ecosystem. If we harm forests we don’t know what we lose. We have to be extra careful and not log more”. Most bacteria are decomposers that convert energy in soil organic matter into forms useful to the rest of the organisms in the soil food web. Some can even break down pesticides and pollutants (United States Department of Agriculture). Effective protection and management of forests and soil based on understanding the roles of all parts of the ecosystem are the most powerful weapons against biodiversity loss and climate change.
Ants are wonderful creatures, often admired for creating peaceful and highly productive societies. What you may not know is that ants are very strong ecosystem indicators, because they adapt quickly to their environment, interact with many other species, for example by creating homes for fungi and micro-organisms in their nests, and influence important process such as nutrient cycling and seed dispersal (Ensia, 2019). To learn more about the results of restored landscapes altered by agriculture production or mining, researchers distinguish different ant species in undisturbed lands and newly revitalised lands, finding that there is a strong association between ant species and environmental attributes such as the humidity of leaf litter on the ground.
Another fascinating but invisible natural phenomenon is found under water. Kelp forests, consisting of large brown algae, are marine environments that provide food and shelter for species at all levels of the food web and sequester vast amounts of carbon. Researchers Dorte Krause-Jensen and Carlos M. Duarte (Nature, 2016) estimate that around 200 million tons of carbon dioxide are being sequestered by seaweed every year, about as much as the annual emissions of the state of New York. However, they are increasingly threatened by climate change, overfishing, and harvesting.
Bat Conservation International has conducted a two-year experiment in cornfields in Southern Illinois to study the role of bats in agricultural production. The study confirms that bats play a significant role in combating corn crop pests, preventing more than $1 billion in crop damages around the world every year. Bats provide additional value to agriculture by suppressing toxic fungi and reducing the necessity for costly insecticides.
These are only a few of many examples that show the extraordinary wisdom and power of nature and how much we can learn from the natural world that surrounds us. However, in today’s highly urbanised world very often the voice of nature is not heard or not listened to…
Why we need to listen to the voice of nature, more than ever before
The world is watching the 6th extinction crisis, with an average decline in populations of birds, fish, mammals, and amphibians of 60 percent since 1970 (WWF Living Planet Report, 2018). The number of plants that have disappeared from the wild is more than twice the number of extinct birds, mammals and amphibians combined. In response, the global community is preparing to make path-defining choices for the future of our planet. We are embarking on the UN Decade of Restoration (2021-2030), the year 2020 is the UN’s International Year of Plant Health, and 2021, the 196 countries party to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity plan to gather in Kunming, China to decide on a new agreement for the global protection of nature until 2030. Nature is making the headlines in our news like never before, as we are losing forests, soils, wetlands, oceans and all the precious natural systems humans depend on. It is more clear than ever that this generation is the one that has to turn the tide.
Protecting biodiversity should not only focus on pristine habitats in remote areas, but on creating space for nature in the places where we live. If we bring this thinking into our increasingly urban world and the growing momentum for greening and reforesting, it is important to consider for which animal, plant and tree species we create a home in our city streets, roofs, parks and backyards. Cities do not only harbour a significant fraction of the world’s biodiversity, but can also be made more liveable and resilient for all living creatures, through nature-friendly urban design, learning from nature.
Throughout the world, natural ecosystems in and around cities continue to be fragmented or disappear as a result of urban expansion and development, with only modest regard for their function and contribution to the regional community and economy. Natural infrastructure and integration of biodiversity in urban planning, such as pocket parks, urban farming, green walls, tree planting and daylighting of rivers, offer innovative and cost effective solutions that improve quality of life and climate resilience.
London Hyde Park. Photo: Chantal van Ham
One of the London boroughs, Brent, decided last year to create a seven mile long “bee corridor” of wildflower meadows in parks and open spaces to boost the numbers of pollinating insects. More than 97 percent of the UK’s wildflower meadows have disappeared in the last 75 years, but many butterflies, bees, dragonflies and moths rely on these flowers (Powney et al, 2019).
The deep connections between nature and human health have been demonstrated extensively in research.Khoo Teck Puat Hospital in Singapore has applied this knowledge by integrating plants and nature in its design, on the basis of the belief that people relax and heal faster with views of trees and plants, and when hearing birdsong (L. Jones, 2020). The hospital has balconies, planters, waterfalls, green walls, roof gardens and an organic food garden with over 100 fruit trees where local volunteers grow food for the kitchens. This creates the feeling that the hospital is in a forest and provides natural ventilation and has its own microclimate.
Nadezhda Kiyatkina is a researcher and activist and writer for The Nature of Cities, who shared a story about the Cherished Meadow project in Moscow, describing her experiences with the development of a park on a three-hectare plot of land that housed car sheds previously called “barren land”. What is unique about the project is the interdisciplinary cooperation between biologists, architects, landscape architects, and the involvement of residents and local authorities. Residents were asked about their wishes for the landscape near their home, and the three main reasons they gave in response to the question “Why do you go to parks?” were walking with children; meeting other people; and having the possibility to admire and watch nature. 40% of respondents come specifically to listen to the birds sing. As a result, in the design of the park, lawns were ruled out, only native plants were used, bushes were selected based on their quality to provide nesting space for birds, and paths were made convenient not only for the pedestrians, but also for the insects. It became a success story for people and nature, winning the support of over 3000 residents, receiving two architecture awards, and gaining the support of the local authorities.
Field flowers, or “akkerbloemen”, as we call them in Dutch, are among the most threatened plant species in The Netherlands. Their diversity has evolved over thousands of years, but many that were growing in abundance when my mother was a child, living in a small South-Dutch village in the countryside of Limburg, have disappeared. Others are highly threatened, like the poppy flower, camomile and cornflower. Our current agricultural practices completely changed the soil, fertilisation, humidity and temperature. Combined with the use of pesticides and loss of biodiversity-rich field margins, the wild flower diversity in the Netherlands disappeared in less than a century. In 1995 in Limburg, Natuurmonumenten, one of the Dutch nature conservation organisations, bought an estate with agricultural fields and dedicated the land to the protection of field flowers, creating landscapes full of insects, butterflies, life and diversity to enjoy. It would be of tremendous value if farmers could, with support of the EU Agricultural funds, create field margins with indigenous field flowers across Europe (Puur Natuur, Natuurmonumenten, Zomer 2019).
Poppy flowers. Photo: Chantal van Ham
The Tana Delta in coastal Kenya, one of the most important wetlands in Africa, has been facing the growing pressure of commercial crop production of sugarcane, maize, rice and jatropha (for biofuels), as well as plans for the development of a port for further exploiting the natural resources, putting at risk the livelihoods of people and wildlife. Serah Munguti, finalist of the Tusk Award for Conservation in Africa, 2017, has initiated the Tana Delta Sustainable Land Use Plan, which helped in developing community livelihoods projects in the Tana Delta, supporting farmers, fishermen and pastoralist communities to make a transition to sustainable production methods, while increasing their income from crops, honey, fish farming and cattle. She believes that “nature matters to all of us, it is our food, medicine, fuel and clothes and we should all do our part in conserving the natural environment”. Conservation of the Tana River Delta is currently being enhanced through a forest landscape restoration project funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) through the United Nations Environment Programme and with Nature Kenya as implementing partner. The project implements some elements of the delta’s land use plan, which provides for land and water allocation and will enable local communities, civil society, and national and county governments to come up with policy and institutional frameworks to implement restorative land use initiatives.
How can we reconnect with nature?
In 2018 the Wall Street Journal raised awareness of growing “plant blindness” in the United States, which means that fewer and fewer scientists are able to identify plants. There is less interest among students in studying plants, as they shift towards parts of plant science that have commercial applications, such as molecular biology. This raises the question of whether students can have an adequate understanding of nature without knowing what makes it up. Organizations such as the National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management cannot find enough scientists to deal with invasive plants, wildfire reforestation, and basic land-management issues, and prompted botanical gardens around the nation to raise the alarm (WSJ, 2018).
Sign for tree planted in Leipzig ‘For our little sweetheart Mara Carlotta’s 1st birthday’. Photo: Chantal van Ham
Jane Goodall points out that we have broken the link between intellect and wisdom. Nature has tremendous wisdom, we can learn so much from the most important mind and voice of the planet. It can give us the ideas, creativity, energy, cooperative spirit and joy that can trigger the transition we need to live in harmony with our natural environment. Thankfully, there are some truly wonderful initiatives around the world that help us to hear, see and enjoy the magic of nature.Leipzig responds to the demand of citizens for more green in the city, to improve air quality and reduce noise. One of the ways to do is by increasing the number of urban trees. I noticed when walking near the railway station that many of the trees had a square copper plate with a message and the names of citizens. Through the “Baumstarke Stadt” (“Tree Strong City) initiative, set up by the City of Leipzig in 1997, which gives private people and businesses the opportunity to donate a minimum of 250 euro for the planting and maintenance of one or more trees (“tree adoptions”— Baumpatenschaften), 5,000 trees have been planted, adding 500 trees every year. Part of the beauty is that the tree is dedicated to individuals, and is often planted for a special occasion, like a wedding, anniversary or the birth of a child.
From book by Beth Moon: Ancient Trees: Portraits of Time, 2014
Beth Moon has made remarkable photos of the world’s oldest trees, which give us the power to connect with time and nature, in ways so much greater than ourselves. In 2018, the New York Times dedicated an article to the ancient cedar trees of Lebanon, some of the oldest trees have survived for more than 1,000 years and are World Heritage. They flourish on moisture and cool temperatures, an ecosystem unusual in the Middle East. Climate change is bringing critical challenges to this part of the world, impacting agriculture, water and food supplies and livelihoods. If climate change continues, in the future, cedars will be able to thrive only at the northern tip of the country, where the mountains are higher. The trees that are so symbolic for the country that they are in the center of the Lebanese flag, and existed for thousands of years, are highly threatened. Some years ago, Lebanon’s Agriculture Ministry started, with support of German, Korean and Swedish environmental and development funds, a landscape restoration project to plant 40 million trees, including cedars, aiming at increasing forest cover from 13% to 20% till 2022. Growing cedars back is not an easy task, as they grow slowly, bearing no cones until they are 40 or 50 years old, hopefully these restoration efforts will help to win the race against the climate change clock.
We all know that wolves hunt for their prey, but how wolves can give life to many species is less well-known. In 1995, wolves were reintroduced in Yellowstone National Park, after an absence of 70 years. Vegetation had been grazed away by deer, which had no predators. When the wolves came back, the deer started to avoid valleys and gorges, and these areas started to regenerate immediately, with rapidly growing forests and a great increase in songbirds, migratory and beavers. This created new niches for other species, such as otters, ducks, fish, reptiles and amphibians, more mice and rabbits, leading to an increase in birds of prey, such as hawks and eagles. The bear population also started to rise, because of the increase in berries. The wolves also changed the rivers, reducing meandering, making the channels narrower and reducing erosion, as the forests stabilised the rivers, creating wildlife habitats.
Many rivers have been depleted in most parts of the world. Forty years ago, Bangalore had over 1,020 ponds and lakes and 3 perennial rivers. Today there is hardly a trace of these rivers, as they have all been built over. Only 82 lakes and ponds exist, and about half of them are covered in sewage. A very inspiring leader, Sadghuru, a yogi from India, has mobilised millions of people through one of the largest ecological movements on the planet, a nation-wide campaign “Rally for the Rivers” aiming to implement long-term policy changes to restore India’s depleted rivers and deserted land. Four percent of Indian rivers are glacier-fed, the rest are forest fed. It is recognised that bringing back the forests and restoring the organic content of soil through agroforestry farm management practices will revive and slow the flow of the rivers, create water reservoirs in the soil, and improve the life of people, animals and plants. To turn this into practice, we need cross-regional policies and cooperation as rivers do not stay within country and regional borders. Over 70 percent of the land in India is owned by farmers, and according to Sadghuru, they need support to move from crop-based to tree-based agriculture along the rivers, in a way that marries ecology and the economy. People will only be involved if they benefit economically. The experiences of 70,000 farmers using forest-based agriculture through “Rally for the Rivers” have proved that income from crops can go up by 3 to 8 times. This transition will also increase the ecological quality of the soil and rivers (World Economic Forum, Platform for Shaping the Future of Global Public Goods, there is no planet B, 2019).
Let’s ask ourselves what we can we do for nature
The world’s economic wealth and profits have been created at the cost of the natural world and indigenous and marginalised communities who have always been the stewards of these natural systems. If we go back to the roots of the word corporation, we will see that companies initially developed with environmental and social aspirations at an equal footing with economic gain. It is time for business to go back to its founding principles and make our natural world truly part of the equation by developing regenerative business models and by making natural and social capital part of our economic system.
Listening to the words of living legend, Sir David Attenborough, humans are the mayflies of evolution, in comparison to the complex life forms that first appeared in the oceans around 540 million years ago. But we have evolved into the planet’s most dangerous predator. Considering our dependence on nature as our life support system, it is high time that we listen to the stories nature is telling us, to learn from its millions years of wisdom and to give a voice to the voiceless. Joaquin Phoenix stood up for the voiceless in his Academy Award speech for Best Actor in the film “The Joker”, saying that: “no one species has the right to dominate, control, use and exploit another with impunity. We have become very disconnected from the natural world and plunder it for its resources”. He added that “human beings are so inventive, creative and ingenious, and when we use love and compassion as our guiding principles, we can create systems of change that are sentient to all living beings and the environment”.
As the stories from all over the world demonstrate, the wisdom of nature is the lifeline for our future and our most important ally in finding the pathways to transform the harmful exploitation of natural resources into a regenerative system that balances human aspirations with a healthy planet. In addition, it is time to ask ourselves, what can we do for nature?
We are celebrating our 3-year friendship. Artist-climate activist and ecologist-designer. We met in Portland (a tip of two floral hats, and a gracious thank you to David and The Nature of Cities), a long way from Toronto and longer still from Cape Town. Our conversations have become a multi-media notebook of sketches, photographs, internet memes, poems, voice notes… and lots of botanical discoveries. We walk a creative tension, exploring the blurred boundaries between endangered and emerging ecosystems; we mourn what is lost, rejoice in what is saved, and wonder what is yet to be found.
Where will my broken-heart for nature go? I see pale promise of the novel and the newly-emerging, in places distorted by species dislocated. I take deep pleasure in the weedy and the stray, the forgotten humble plants and the mongrel landscapes of their in-between.
Katrine Claassens (KC:) It is insane, going to “normal work” right now, in the middle of the Sixth Extinction. What for? Why are we doing this? Have we all been so seduced by the idea of normal?
Nina-Marie Lister (NML): Normal work is what caused this. So, what are we working for, if not to save our home, our beautiful planet? We are living out-of-bounds. We are entering a new world of our making. And likely less hospitable for us, no longer the masters.
Advisory: there are pictures below of animals killed on the road.
KC: The camera trap images resonate for me … this feeling has a grip on me, growing since I started living the climate work.
NML: The images are riveting. We use them in research. Combing through them by hundreds, thousands to track movement patterns, hot spots. But I am the one captivated. I realise the animals have character, personality. Do they wonder at us and our voyeurism?
KC: I’m fascinated by the flattened quality of the flash images. At night especially, you lose the resolution, you lose some of the very quality you seek to highlight. It’s a strange and compelling irony.
NML: Then there are the real traps…our house-sitter trapped a weasel in the kitchen compost. It was so angry, spirited, it almost chewed through the wire cage. Was it our home or its home from which we ousted it?
KC: I found this from T.S. Elliot. It has helped shed light … hard poetry for hard times:
What are the roots that clutch / what branches that grow / out of this stony rubbish…
NML: We hit a squirrel in the road today. Had to turn around and run it over again, because it was writhing. Mercy. But why now, when the world seems falling apart? But then I came home to find a swallow in the garden, calling for a mate. It had come home too. Small miracles of migration… signs of life carrying on around us, without us.
KC: A time of monsters perhaps: the old world is dying and the new cannot be born.
NM: What do you suppose we will keep, lose or leave? What we will keep and what will we let go? I hope it is with a breath of kindness, as the chaff is blown from the grain…
Photos: Katrine Claassens (L) and Vanessa Rieger (R)
~ ~ ~
One in the hand
I heard the sickening thump while tap-tapping at my keyboard. Looked up and saw him? her? lying prone, wings spread wrong, legs kicking, head lolling. I reach out, gingerly, my breath coming shallower and faster, hoping. My heart thud-thudding. My fingers trace the silky feathers, warmth radiating through the impossible rosy hue that stains the breast. A tiny heart tick-ticking. I exhale and bring the bird to rest, inside a crude and makeshift nest, a box, a towel an hour. Dark and quiet. Deeper breaths. I cannot bear another one lost to my vitrine vanity. Deadly windows, too close to the shores that beckon the birds home to recover, feed and breed. I wait, I peek and am relieved. So is the Rose-Breasted Grosbreak—who rose, shat, fluffed, and in a blink, flicked and flit away. One more survives to sing the song of spring.
Photos: Nina-Marie Lister
~ ~ ~
Dislocated
I am running, sweating, panting, and late. It’s unseasonably hot for June. Summer dress sticking to my legs, impractical heels catching in the cobblestones, clack clack. My overstuffed briefcase weighed down by books and the umbrella, contorted and clumsy, smack smack. I stop and check my Metro map. Am I lost? Surely they won’t start without me. I duck around the corner in hopes of a shortcut. I hear a distinctly tropical squaw-squaw, an avian laugh, just out of sight. Squaw-squaw, tongue-clicking, tsk tsk. Mocking me. Where am I? I stop, turn and listen again, moving away from the meeting I’m missing. Squaw-squaw ha-ha tsk tsk. I am at once pulled and propelled by that seductive taunt. The heat is oppressive, the air humid and swollen with the threat of rain. I look up nervously, scanning the darkening sky. Wet grey wooly wads against the hazy, fading blue. Then, an improbable flash of emerald—an iridescent green between the grays. I squint and then stare. There they are, a mocking flock of parakeets come into focus, alighting in the London plane trees. African ring-necked parakeets. They look at me curiously, a clumsy sweaty human, staring open-mouthed in wonder as the skies open. I am a stranger in Paris. And they are, quite unnaturally, at home.
Photos: Nina-Marie Lister. Right: Paris street art by Ruben Carrasco
~ ~ ~
Emergence
Night time, rain-slicked road, headlights fuzzy in the fog. The droplets plop-plopping on my windscreen become waves. I can’t see. Slowing down to wish-wash through the river that was the road. Everywhere there are frogs. Hop-hopping between the yellow lines, black tracks my tires make. I can’t bear to look at the carnage the car is wreaking. Which is the water? Where is the road. The tempest has washed them into one. Water is everywhere before it is somewhere1as rains gather to form rivulets, rivers that now ravage roads. I am in the impossible terrain of rain2, watching as the frogs move like fish, overtaking the road in the storm. The headlights now blurry eyes, peering into the pouring. Rain. And in a flash, there is white, strobe-light bright and rising. Swiftly, silently, up, up into the forest overhead. Her wing tips stroke the windscreen, their span dwarfing the tin-can car. An owl on her prowl is undeterred by weather, water or the whimper of the human barely breathing in her shadow.
Photos: Nina-Marie Lister
~ ~ ~ ~
Trapped
Measurements are made. The camera carefully placed. Hidden in the brush. Track pads raked clean of prints made by paw, hoof and claw. The infra-red eye staring. Waiting. But silent stalkers and quiet walkers will make movements however slight. Rustle, bustle, chase and burst forth into its view. Click-click. (Com)motion triggers shutter. Click-click, the creature’s ears prick-prick. Ears hear, head turns and the gaze is caught by the eye. Who has been here? More than we see, the night creatures, hidden in plain sight. Where do they walk, rest and roost? Silently slinking, quietly creeping, boldly bounding they are caught and held, their grainy, ghosted images trapped. Voyeurism as research. They leave us this trace, a tiny tease. Prints on paths that intertwine invisibly with ours.
Photos: ARC Solutions
~ ~ ~ ~
Promise
There is so much beauty in the biodiversity of this blue marble. Breath-taking, heart-stopping, mind-numbing. We cannot ever count it all. The library of life is bleeding away, lost to us before it is ever found. Can it be loved when it is not counted, classified, or named? I hope so. We lament the loss, but we do nothing. I mourn the crushed egg, fallen from the nest, life leaking into my hand3. I feel the sharp pull of my insides when I pass the slumped shape by the roadside, fur matted, a rusty pool staining the pavement. I walk among still-warm feathers at the toe of the towers, counting the mounting carnage each spring and fall. I await the return of winged migrants, breath held each spring, through weird and wacky weather. Their numbers, like their bodies, plummet. Vital, vernal and eternal, the insects hatch, the buds burst, but where are those who feed, forage and feast on this bounty? In the midst of this crash, I look for signs of life among the ruins.
Photos: Nina-Marie Lister
Some species surprise us, emerging as if from fairy-tale slumber, blinking into city light. Others appear here, then are gone, vanished overnight. The racoons and rats are thriving, but the whip-poor-wills gone silent. Parrots in Paris, boars in Rome, coyotes and foxes in Toronto, New York and Montreal too. In cities, the swifts spiral around collapsed and abandoned chimneys. But what is the barn swallow without the barn?4 Our cities grow bigger, consuming countryside, slipping into wildlands beyond. The wolves have been returned to Yellowstone but remain far from their ranges, pushed out and corralled in a park. It is easy with a full-heart to be lulled into to love with the wild and sacred large landscapes of our protected places. But if you fall in love with the marginal landscapes of sacrifice and suffering, then (as Jedidiah Purdy laments), “your love prepares your heart for breaking”5.
Where will my broken-heart for nature go? I see pale promise of the novel and the newly-emerging, in places distorted by species dislocated. I take deep pleasure in the weedy and the stray, the forgotten humble plants and the mongrel landscapes6 of their in-between. I hope fervently and fiercely for connections made among the fragments, for remaking the ruins, and re-weaving and re-wilding. For the moment though, I am stuck between lamenting what is lost and learning patience for what is yet to be found.
Photos: Katrine Claassens (left and centre), Nina-Marie Lister (right)
After / Spring
NML: I find myself wandering around derelict lots and storm drains in this sad city… they are bizarre beacons of hope, life emerging among the ruins. Weeds and waste, where escaped pets have become feral. A new urban nature.
KC: I realise what a soft spot I have for these “damaged” landscapes. There is something I relate to, something that mirrors what is inside. When I see weeds peeping through, it brings me such joy, and it just sucks me in.
NML: Light along with life emerges from the cracks. The weeds destroy the pavement we laid down.
KC: I wonder what happens when we lose patience and hope but keep the compassion?
NML: Compassion and humility. They are all we have got to make meaning life in a ravaged beautiful and emerging new world.
NML: Today I saw a lone trumpeter swan fly overhead and land in the bay. It was breath-taking to see this magnificent and rare creature, all white, with a black face and black legs. It swam with some geese, honking for a mate that may never come. The geese flew away, and it remained alone. Honking plaintively, or hopefully?
KC: My brother found that last recorded call of that extinct bird, and I was listening to it while I worked. It awakened this awful private (or maybe lonely?) sense of loss. I just listened and listened … and then a bird landed on my balcony. A little sparrow.
NML: This evening I heard a whip-poor-will sing in our hedgerow at dusk. I held my breath and waited to be sure I’d really heard, and not just imagined it. My eyes brimmed and leaked, and my heart stirred and opened. I had not heard that song in a decade at least.
Legends say that the whip-poor-will can sense a soul departing and can capture it as it flees. I wonder, does the whip-poor-will sing for the soul of our departing world? Or does it capture ours, before we are lost?
Let us hold onto the birds of the earth with as much hope as we have for the songs they sing.
~ ~ ~
Nina-Marie Lister Toronto
Endnotes
Dilip da Cunha, 2018. The Invention of Rivers: Alexander’s Eye and Ganga’s Descent. University of Pennsylvania Press. 352p.
Ibid.
With thanks to Kat Claassens for her poem (Egg, broken by cat’s teeth), pers. comm. 2020.
With thanks to Jeremy Guth for asking the question, pers. comm. 2020
Jedidiah Purdy, 2015. After Nature: A Politics for the Anthropocene. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press (page 206).
Richard Weller’s term in “World Park”, in LA+ Wild. Vol 1 (10-19).
Humans find natural scenes restorative. But what within natural scenes make them easier to process, leading to stress recovery or attention restoration? Green. Scenes with water. And even a picture of these things.
More than half the world’s population now lives in cities, where nature, at the best of times, can seem hard to find and enjoy. The restorative value of nature has long been acknowledged but how can we access it in these strange times of social distancing and isolation as COVID-19 sweeps the globe? We can look out our window at a nearby tree, a patch of green, or even a water feature!
Robert Ulrich, in 1984 (View through a window may influence recovery from surgery), showed that surgical patients recovered more quickly if they had a view of nature. He compared two groups of patients in a suburban hospital in Pennsylvania, USA. One group could see a small stand of deciduous trees through their hospital ward window. The other group looked out on to a brown brick wall. Patients with the view of the trees spent less time in hospital, seemed brighter during their stay, required less pain relief, and had fewer post-operative complications. Wisely, Ulrich cautioned us that we can’t necessarily generalise these results to all built views or all patient groups. The results might have been different if the alternative to a view of trees was a dynamic view of the city, especially for patients who had been in hospital for a long time or were bored. But subsequent studies have supported these findings: nature is restorative and a substitute such as a natural view through a window or paintings, photos, videos or computer-generated virtual reality, can also be effective. Immersive computer-generated virtual reality might even be a surrogate for experiencing real nature (Restorative effects of virtual nature settings).
Green oasis in the densely settled inner-city suburb of South Melbourne. Photo: A. Miller
Ulrich and his contemporaries Stephen and Rachel Kaplan produced seminal studies in the 1970s and 1980s, exploring landscape perception, landscape preference and the restorative capacity of nature. They concluded that people prefer natural views over urban views lacking natural vegetation. Views of vegetation, especially with water, held interest and attention more effectively than urban views. This was despite both types of view containing equivalent visual information, i.e. the same amount of content to process. Ulrich proposed that natural views elicited positive feelings, reduced fear in people that were stressed, held their interest and reduced stressful thoughts. He focused on nature restoring people’s physiological stress and anxiety and developed Stress Recovery Theory. In contrast, Stephen Kaplan interpreted the restorative capacity of nature in terms of attention fatigue, and developed Attention Restoration Theory.
Non-urban nature Photo: M. Dobbie
Of course, some nature can be threatening. Just think of an African savannah with a pride of lions stalking zebra, or an Australian nature reserve that is a red-belly black snake sanctuary. So Ulrich believed that the restorative power of unthreatening natural landscapes relieved psycho-physiological stress (Stress Recovery During Exposure to Natural and Urban Environments). Stress has been defined as the condition that results when people find themselves in a situation that demands more of their biological, psychological or social resources than they feel are available. This leads to increased physiological arousal and negative emotions. Ulrich posited that recovery from psycho-physiological stress requires a positive change in emotional state. His research, and that of others since, using self-ratings of emotions of respondents and physiological measures of heart rate, muscle tension, skin conductance and blood pressure, found that exposure to natural environments does, indeed, produce positive mood changes, mediating the negative effect of stress, reducing negative mood states, e.g. fear, anger, sadness and aggression, and enhancing positive emotions, such as feeling carefree, friendly or affectionate. Even exposure to a small amount of nature is beneficial: urban environments with trees generated more positive emotions, fewer negative emotions, and positive physiological responses compared with urban environments with no natural features. Exposure to environments with no natural features evoked anxiety, anger, frustration and sadness.
Landscape painting: “Broad Acres, Western District, Victoria”, by William Dargie (1947). Photo: M. Dobbie
In contrast, Kaplan in 1995 argued that restoration of attention fatigue underlay favourable responses to nature (Restorative Benefits of Nature: Toward and Integrative Framework). He did not dismiss Ulrich’s theory but rather argued that stress and mental fatigue were related: stress could lead to mental fatigue, and mental fatigue could increase vulnerability to stress. He studied attention, distinguishing voluntary attention from involuntary attention. He argued that voluntary, or directed, attention is essential for human effectiveness in everyday life. It is required for clear thinking, planning and follow-through, positive emotions, and, most importantly, inhibition of inappropriate behavior. Thus, loss of directed attention could lead to negative emotions, irritability, impulsiveness, impatience, reduced tolerance for frustration, insensitivity to interpersonal cues, decreased altruistic behaviours, reduced performance and increased likelihood of taking risks. Sleep is generally required to restore directed attention, but insomnia can accompany the loss of directed attention. Kaplan posited that the cure for loss of directed attention is “another mode of attending that would render the need for directed attention temporarily unnecessary” (p. 172). That cure, he suggested, is through involuntary attention.
He described involuntary attention as having four components: fascination, being away, extent, and compatibility. Fascination can be “hard”, e.g. watching car racing, or “soft”, e.g. bird watching. Being away and extent can be conceptual rather than physical. For example, a change in the direction of one’s gaze can be sufficient to “be away”; extent must be sufficient to offer the tired mind another world in which to escape. The compatibility must be between the new environment and its intended purpose for the person. So, in viewing nature we are taken away from our current situation, engaging with the soft fascination of birds, plant life, waterbodies, etc. The natural view suggests something beyond what we see, a broader extent, and is compatible with our need for respite from the everyday. The restorativeness of a setting is determined by assessing the performance of tasks that require mental attention and self-rating on four scales of fascination, getting away, extent and compatibility.
View of a leafy green courtyard in a Melbourne suburb. Photo: S. Keyes-Pearce
In a study similar in concept to Ulrich’s study of surgical patients, published 11 years later in 1995, Carolyn Tennessen and Bernadine Cimprich (Views to nature: Effects on attention) found that students living in dorms with all natural or partly natural views were more able to direct attention than those with partial or full views of built landscapes. They concluded that looking through a window on to a natural scene might be “an easily accessible ‘micro-restorative’ activity” (p. 78). Again, the authors were cautious about extending results to other population groups, e.g. office workers and elderly people, but the evidence is mounting.
Stress Recovery Theory and Attention Restoration Theory are now viewed as complementary rather than in competition and offer two perspectives on understanding our favourable response to nature, and in fact our human need for it. Rita Berto wrote a good review of them in 2014 (Literature review on restorativeness), which provides more detail than given here.
Nature from a balcony in inner Melbourne. Photo: E. Walker
But why do humans respond so positively to nature, to the extent that we need it for our psycho-physiological well-being? Both Ulrich and Kaplan believed that the restorativeness of nature had an evolutionary basis. Ulrich argued that human preference for natural landscapes and their restorative quality is a consequence of human evolution in natural landscapes. We feel most comfortable in the landscape in which we evolved. Edward Wilson described this as biophilia: humans have an innate connection with and love for nature and natural places. Kaplan’s theory assumed that humans have an inherent predisposition to pay attention and respond positively to natural content and to landscape configurations that are characteristic of settings that supported human survival through evolution.
But these ideas are not accepted without challenge. In a fascinating paper published in 2011, Yannick Joye and Agnes van den Berg dissect all the arguments for an evolutionary basis of the restorative capacity of nature (Is love for green in our genes? A critical analysis of evolutionary assumptions in restorative environments research). They conclude that biophilia cannot be supported by empirical evidence. They do acknowledge the evidence supporting the importance of unthreatening nature, and especially green vegetation, in the restorativeness of natural landscapes. But, in place of biophilia, they propose Phytophilic Response Module. They don’t dispute that a green vegetative setting is restorative but argue that this is not necessarily hardwired in humans through evolution. Rather they suggest that the ease with which a green vegetated landscape can be visually processed is critical to restorativeness. Processing fluency is the ease with which a person feels able to process a visual stimulus or sight. Fluent processing is often accompanied by positive emotions. So, the Perceptual Fluency Account of restoration states that unthreatening natural scenes are evaluated more positively than unthreatening urban scenes because our visual system processes certain aspects of the visual structure of natural scenes more easily than those of urban scenes. Restoration, thus, lies in the ability of positive emotions to undo stress. The positive emotions are due to processing fluency rather than evolutionary memory. Processing green natural settings would require less mental effort than processing urban scenes, which is consistent with the findings within Attention Restoration Theory that viewing natural scenes is better than viewing urban scenes to restore directed attention. So, we can see that both stress reduction and attention restoration can be related to processing fluency. In proposing this, Joye and van den Berg remind us that processing fluency relates to the effortless processing that Kaplan attributed to fascination, and also to the ease and efficiency of processing natural scenes that Ulrich attributed to the evolution of the human brain and its sensory systems in natural environments.
Seasonal variation in a leafy inner Melbourne courtyard. Photo: A. Miller
So, humans find natural scenes restorative. But what within natural scenes make them easier to process, leading to stress recovery or attention restoration? The components of restorative landscapes, in a study of small parks in Oslo, Norway, conducted in 2011, were trees, grass and the presence of other people. Decorative elements such as flowers and water features were less important to people looking for somewhere to rest (Assessing restorative components of small urban parks using conjoint methodology). However, in another study published the previous year, the presence of water was restorative, even in urban scenes. In fact, built landscapes with water were as restorative as entirely green natural landscapes (Blue space: The importance of water for preference, affect, and restorativeness ratings of natural and built scenes).
Joye and van den Berg suggest that it is the coherence of a landscape that is important to it being restorative. Coherence is the way that a landscape “hangs together” and can be viewed as a whole. Natural landscapes have been found to be more coherent than urban landscapes. More coherent landscapes might be easier to process visually, leading to greater processing fluency and restorativeness. Joye and van den Berg attribute this coherence to the fractal structure of natural landscapes. Fractals predominate in nature, in which patterns repeat themselves at different scales. They give the example of a tree, in which branches are scaled-down versions of the whole tree. The fractal structure of nature provides perceptual predictability. This pattern repetition facilitates fluent processing of the landscape, and fluent processing is often accompanied by positive emotions.
So, as we remain in isolation, some of us will be lucky enough to have green leafy gardens in which to restore our positive emotions and relieve mental fatigue. Those of us who live in dense urban locations might have a leafy balcony to retire to, or a window on to a park or perhaps street trees. The rest of us should not despair, though. Stress recovery and mental restoration are still possible through viewing pictures of green vegetated landscapes on our walls or even virtual reality. Whatever our circumstances and wherever we are, the restorative benefits of nature can still be enjoyed.
Those engaged in the native versus non-native debate should perhaps avoid becoming too polarised. While some non-native plant species certainly have proven highly invasive and damaging to native habitat, the impact of the vast majority appears to be (so far at least) relatively benign. Indeed, many non-native species can be beneficial for native wildlife and provide other functions.
When evaluating or seeking to enhance the biodiversity interest of an urban greenspace, a key attribute to consider is its floral composition. Floral composition can be native, non-native or a variable mix of the two. A species is defined as native to a given region or ecosystem if its presence is the result of only “natural” processes; that is to say, not by human agency. A non-native species by contrast is one that has been introduced by human action, either accidentally or deliberately, outside of its natural range.
The relatively high prevalence of non-native species is a key defining feature of urban floras (McKinney, 2006). Non-native plants are valued in residential gardens and urban parks for various reasons including colour and foliage qualities, flower size, culinary and cultural attributes, and sometimes also as discussed here, their value to wildlife. However, in seeking to maximize biodiversity value, there appears to be growing momentum behind selecting native over non-native plant species when designing both public greenspaces and residential gardens (McKinney, 2006; Hulme et al., 2018). In favouring native species, it is also argued that various potential adverse impacts associated with non-native planting can be avoided. In this respect, the harmful effects resulting from the introduction of non-native species that then become invasive is claimed to be one of the most significant threats to global biodiversity (IUCN 2000; Simberloff, 2015). The IUCN further asserts that urban centres and ornamental horticulture are principal pathways for the introduction and spread of invasive plant species (Ham et al., 2013).
Award-winning linear wildflower meadow (biannually managed), created in Crest Nicholson’s Harbourside development in the heart of Bristol, UK; design by Grant Associates and Biodiversity by Design. Photograph courtesy of Grant Associates.
Nevertheless, a scepticism about the scale of this impact has been simmering for some time, and quite recently has been emphatically reemphasised by a relatively small but vocal element (Hobbs et al., 2009; Davis et al., 2011; Luscombe & Scott, 2011; Pearce, 2015). In their opinion, long-established place-based management approaches that focus on maintaining historical floral and faunal assemblages need to change. They contend there should be greater recognition of emerging “novel ecosystems”, often consisting of many non-native plant species, which better respond to climate change, as well as various environmental transformations occurring due to urbanization, including micro-climatic variation, compacted and contaminated soils, and altered drainage patterns. These commentators assert that the risks associated with non-native species are overstated, and that a more balanced approach is needed that embraces them alongside native species as an integral element of the urban landscape.
This article is concerned primarily with the pros and cons of native and non-native planting, specifically with respect to their biodiversity value within publicly accessible greenspaces (excluding large-scale urban habitat restoration projects) and residential gardens. The relationships that native and non-native plants have with pollinators and phytophagous insects is particularly emphasized. The former insect group is, inter alia, critical in providing pollination services, while the latter is crucial in conveying energy up the food chain to a multitude of birds, reptiles, amphibians and mammals.
It is recognized that landscape designers and gardeners aim to achieve many other goals when devising planting schemes, including providing aesthetic/visual interest, a sense of place, multicultural appeal, ground-cover, multi-seasonal colour, legibility, and ease of management. Discussion on these additional aims is abundant elsewhere in the literature and so is not discussed further here.
Relatively formal courtyard planting, consisting of ornamental but nectar-rich herbaceous cultivars, within the Crest Nicholson Centenary Quay development in Southampton, UK; design by Allen Scott Landscape Architects and Biodiversity by Design.
The case for native planting
Opportunities for native insect fauna
It is frequently claimed that native plants generally support greater faunal diversity and biomass than non-native planting. For example, a US study by Burghardt et al. (2008) found that caterpillar and bird abundance and diversity was significantly higher in urban gardens with predominantly native planting compared with gardens dominated by non-native planting. Many birds of course rely on caterpillars for feeding their nestlings.
The apparent preference of native fauna for native flora is often explained by their long history of association, the two having coevolved over millennia. While plants have evolved a variety of physical and chemical means to defend themselves against attack by insects (and other species), those insects that have co-evolved with them are believed to be much more likely to have the specialized behavioural and physiological adaptations to overcome these defensive barriers, allowing them to consume, grow and reproduce on their host plants (Tallamy, 2004).
While both a greater diversity and abundance of herbivorous insects are generally considered beneficial from an ecological perspective because of their importance in the food web, many people, if not most, appear to consider such species as pests, revealing an awkward philosophical contradiction in wildlife gardening. Unlike plant-devouring insects, however, pollinators appear universally cherished (although some species can both pollinate and consume plants dependent on their life-stage). A number of studies have found a negative association between the degree of urbanization and both pollinator abundance and species richness (Hernandez et al., 2009). While the high coverage of impervious surfaces in urban areas is important in explaining such relationships, it is also suggested that the high proportion of non-native species might also be a key contributing factor.
While a co-evolutionary explanation may again partly explain the apparent differences in pollinator preference between native and non-native plant species, the degree of horticultural modification of the latter might also be important, as selective breeding can result in reductions in floral reward or changes to flower structure that inhibits pollinator access (Comba et al., 1999). For example, the double-flowered trait constrains access for insects to pollen-bearing centre parts, and in some cases is produced at the expense of reproductive floral components such as anthers or carpels.
Invasion by non-native flora at the expense of native flora
The close relationship between native plants and co-evolved herbivorous insects is believed to partly explain the “invasion paradox”. This is the ability of exotic plants to colonize and spread more readily than native species, contrary to intuition that would suggest that native species would be better adapted to local conditions. Certain alien plants are believed to proliferate in their new environments partly because they have become unshackled from coevolved herbivores and other natural enemies—the so called “enemy release hypothesis” (Tallamy, 2004).
An additional factor that might cause non-native species to spread beyond their intended confines relates to the reduced competition that they face from native species in urban sites that have experienced high levels of anthropogenic disturbance, such as brownfield sites (previously developed land that is not currently in use), and along transport corridors and watercourses (McKinney, 2006). The disturbed early successional conditions found in such sites are often highly unrepresentative of those occurring across the wider landscape and thus may be inhospitable to many localized native species and communities (hardy native ruderals being an exception).
It has also been suggested that the ‘high performance’ traits of invasive non-native plant species, which for example relate to physiology, various size characteristics, growth rate, fecundity and adaptiveness, confers an advantage over many native species, thereby helping them to rapidly colonize such environments (Jauni et al., 2015). Plant breeders may have specifically selected for such traits in many invasive ornamental species to facilitate ease of cultivation.
In spite of such processes seemingly favouring the spread of non-native plants, Williamson (1996) has estimated that only 1% of alien plant species are self-sustaining outside of cultivation, while only 0.1% can be considered invasive. However, such estimates have not gone unchallenged. Certainly, where non-native species do become invasive, they have potential to dramatically transform native biodiversity, many examples of which are provided by Ham et al. (2013). Simberloff (2015) also argues that because modern invasion biology is still in its infancy, many non-native species have yet to be studied in detail and therefore it is premature to assume their effects are only benign, particularly as global warming unshackles species that are currently being contained by climatic limits.
Biological Homogenization
The proliferation of invasive non-natives is also said to be causing ‘biological homogenization’, i.e. the same urban-adapted plants are becoming progressively dominant in towns and cities across the world (McKinney, 2006). The high number of invasive species shared between cities is in part related to people’s shared preferences for particular ornamental species. While an influx of non-native plant species may diversify local biodiversity, global biodiversity is said to be reduced by these species as they outcompete more uncommon localized plant species.
Native plantings can be effective analogues of more valuable semi-natural or natural habitats
While most wildlife gardeners face spatial constraints, park managers have more opportunity to establish native plant species together in large numbers to form recognizable native plant communities, thereby contributing to local biodiversity strategies (Plate 1). While complicated large-scale urban ecological engineering projects are not discussed here, it is relevant to reference the opportunities for smaller-scale native habitat analogues that can be achieved relatively easily. In the UK two-thirds of publicly-managed urban green infrastructure consists of amenity grassland, i.e. regularly mown (virtual monoculture) grassland (Forestry Research, 2006), while in Chicago in the US, amenity grassland (or “turf grass” as Americans refer to it) covers 21% of the city (Davis et al., 2017). In many cases, relatively substantial areas of amenity grassland have potential for conversion to native wildflower meadow (or other native habitat types) without unduly compromising sporting and other amenity interests, which in turn has been shown to increase the abundance and diversity of pollinating insects (Garbuzov et al., 2015).
The case for non-native planting
Enhanced opportunities for insects
Influenced by the various studies discussed above, the consensus in invasion biology and ecological thinking more generally, has been that non-native species are generally harmful, impoverishing biodiversity and even upsetting the benign “balance of nature”. As with a great many things, consideration of the research in its entirety actually reveals a more nuanced picture, with some research challenging ecological orthodoxy regarding the relative ecological benefits of native and non-native planting, and also the underlying causes behind the patterns.
Studies suggesting a negative relationship between the abundance of non-native plant species and the prevalence and diversity of pollinating insects are often based on a limited sample of plants and certainly do not tell the whole story. There are thousands of plant varieties available to landscape designers, a large number of which are not double-flowered and are in some cases rich in pollen and nectar, and thus highly beneficial to insects (Garbuzov & Ratnieks, 2014) (Plate 2). Indeed, in the UK the Royal Horticultural Society operates the “Perfect for Pollinators” certification scheme, championing wildlife friendly cultivars on sale in plant nurseries.
Some studies have found that certain non-native planting can actually attract a greater abundance of pollinators than many native species (Morales & Traveset, 2009; Matteson & Langellotto, 2011). It is even suggested that some non-native plants may be too effective at attracting pollinating insects, reducing visitations to native plant species and thereby threatening their reproductive success (Bjerknes et al., 2007).
The success of some ornamental plantings might partly be explained by the fact that many species have been selectively bred to have extended flowering periods and large flowers, features that are associated with increased nectar and pollen production (Matteson & Langellotto, 2011). Possibly due to these enhanced qualities, some studies are suggesting that bee species-richness might actually be higher across urban areas compared with neighbouring countryside (Baldock et al., 2015). In adjoining intensively farmed rural landscapes, crop species are only in bloom for a limited period, many trees and hedgerows have been removed, and herbicides have greatly reduced the abundance of wildflowers.
Such urban/rural comparisons of species richness can depend heavily on the specific nature of the sites being compared. Certainly, brownfield sites that are often rich in non-native species, can help sustain a high-level of biodiversity, clearly surpassing that of many neighbouring farmland areas. In the longer term such novel ecosystems can also set the stage for ecological recovery, helping to gradually repair degraded soils and ultimately lead to the re-establishment of more recognizable native habitats (Ewel & Putz 2004; Pearce, 2015). Pearce (2015) further contends that non-natives generally do not compete with or displace native species from established habitats but instead fill empty niches in disturbed environments that may be unsuited for colonization by localized native species and/or communities.
Other research from the UK is indicating that there is little difference in pollinator abundance between native and near-native plant mixes, which is perhaps unsurprising given that many of the UK’s native pollinators are also present on the European continent, and so will have coevolved with and readily identify many near-native plant species as a feeding resource (Salisbury et al., 2015; Brodie et al., 2017). Smith et al. (2006) suggests that a much larger proportion of native phytophagous insects could be utilizing non-native plants as hosts than previously recognized for the same reason.
Climate change adaptation, disproportionate cost, low extinction risk and risk of botanical xenophobia
Those objecting to the focus on ‘nativeness’ further assert that: non-natives could be nature’s saviour as climate change renders conditions unsuitable for many native species; that estimated eradication and confinement costs for non-natives are greatly exaggerated and that such programmes are sometimes unjustified; non-natives generally pose a negligible risk of native species extinction (island populations being the main exception); and the militaristic style of language used in describing non-native species, e.g. as ‘alien invaders’, is non-scientific, pejorative and even xenophobic. All of these additional objections are in themselves sizeable topics for debate and so readers are directed to Davis et al. (2011), Luscombe & Scott (2011), Pearce (2015) and Thomas & Palmer (2015) for further discussion, but also to Simberloff & Strong (2013) and Simberloff (2015) for robust counter arguments.
Conclusions
When designing greenspaces to enhance biodiversity, a key consideration relates to plant species selection and the particular mix of native and non-native species. This article has focussed on the respective values of native or non-native plants to insects, which perform various critical ecosystem functions, including pollination and providing a primary food source for other taxa. While some of the evidence is contradictory and there are confounding factors, on balance a preference for native species in planting schemes is likely to achieve the greatest benefit for biodiversity. Large scale planting (or seeding) of native species into recognizable communities can also create impressive habitat analogues that can make important contributions to biodiversity targets.
Moreover, some non-native plant species have proven highly invasive and damaging to native habitat, and so care must always be taken to assess invasion risk when designing planting schemes, especially when adjoining habitat is closer to natural than semi-natural, or next to river corridors.
However, those engaged in the native versus non-native debate should perhaps avoid becoming too polarised. It should also be acknowledged that a great many non-native species are also valuable for wildlife and provide other functions. The vast majority of ornamental plants appear, so far at least, to have had little negative ecological impact, and where they have spread it is frequently as opportunists, filling gaps in disturbed environments unsuited to many local species and/or communities. Often novel environments such as brownfield sites, including heady mixtures of both native and non-native ruderal species, can develop into rich and valued havens for native fauna.
While there are many opportunities for including more native plants and communities in urban planting schemes, some pragmatism is also required amongst conservationists, recognizing that unadulterated native habitat creation is not always optimal in many urban contexts. Non-native plant species will have a continued role to play in planting schemes, bringing vibrancy and joy, and sometimes also considerable value to native fauna.
This article is an abridged version of a chapter included in Routledge’s forthcoming Handbook of Urban Ecology. [Douglas, I; P. Anderson; D. Goode; M.C. Houck; D. Maddox; Harini Nagendra; and T.P. Yok (Editors). 2020. Handbook of Urban Ecology, 2nd Edition. Abingdon: Routledge Press. In press.]
References
Baldock, K.C.R., Goddard, M.A., Hicks, D.M., Kunin, W.E., Mitschunas, N., Osgathorpe, L.M., Potts, S.G., Robertson, K.M., Scott, A.V., Stone, G.N., Vaughan, I.P. & Memmott, J. (2015). ‘Where is the UK’s pollinator biodiversity? The importance of urban areas for flower-visiting insects’, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 282: 20142849
Bjerknes, A., Totland, Ø, Hegland, S.J. & Nielsen, A. (2007). ‘Do alien plant invasions really affect pollination success in native plant species?’ Biological Conservation, 138: 1–12.
Brodie, J., Hitchmough, J. & Livingstone, M. (2017). ‘Planting for pollinators’, Landscape: The Journal of the Landscape Institute, Summer 2017: 45-51.
Comba, L., Corbet, S.A., Barron, A., Bird, A., Collinge, S., Miyazaki, N. & Powell, M. (1999). Garden flowers: insect visits and the floral reward of horticulturally-modified variants’, Annals of Botany, 83: 73–86.
Davis, A.Y., Lonsdorf, E.V., Shierk, C.R., Matteson, K.C., Taylor, J.R., Lovell, S.T. & Minor, E.S. (2017). ‘Enhancing pollination supply in an urban ecosystem through landscape modifications’, Landscape and Urban Planning, 162: 157–66.
Davis, M.A. Chew, M.K., Hobbs, R.J., Lugo, A.E., Ewel, J.J., Vermeij, G.J., Brown, J.H., Rosenzweig, M.L., Gardener, M.R., Carroll, S.P., Thompson, K., Pickett, S.T.A., Stromberg, J.C., Del Tredici, P., Suding, K.N., Ehrenfeld, J.G., Grime, J.P., Mascar, J. & Briggs, J.C. (2011). ‘Don’t judge species on their origins’, Nature, 474: 153-4.
Forestry Research (2006). Grassland Habitats, Roslin: Forestry Research.
Garbuzov, M., Fensome, K.A. & Ratnieks, F.L.W. (2015). Public approval plus more wildlife: twin benefits of reduced mowing of amenity grass in a suburban public park in Saltdean, UK. Insect Conservation Diversity, 8: 107–119.
Garbuzov, M. & Ratnieks, F.L.W. (2014). ‘Quantifying variation among garden plants in attractiveness to bees and other flower-visiting insects’ Functional Ecology, 28: 364–74.
Ham, C.V., Genovesi, P. & Scalera, R. (2013). Invasive Alien Species – The Urban Dimension: Case Studies on Strengthening Local Action in Europe, Brussels: IUCN European Union Representative Office.
Hernandez, J.L., Frankie, G.W. & Thorp, R.W. (2009). ‘Ecology of urban bees: a review of current knowledge and directions for future study’, Cities and the Environment, 2: Article 3.
Hobbs, R.J., Higgs, E. & Harris, J.A. (2009). ‘Novel ecosystems: implications for conservation and restoration’, Trends in Ecological Evolution, 24: 599-605.
Hulme, P.E., Brundu, G., Carboni, M., Dehnen‐Schmutz, K., Dullinger, S., Early, R., Essl, F., González‐Moreno.P., Groom, Q.J., Kueffer. C., Kühn, I., Maurel, N., Novoa, N., Pergl, J., Pyšek, P., Seebens, H., Tanner.R., Touza, J.M., van Kleunen, M. & Verbrugge, L.N.H. (2018). ‘Integrating invasive species policies across ornamental horticulture supply chains to prevent plant invasions’, Journal of Applied Ecology, 55: 92–8.
IUCN (2000). IUCN Guidelines for the Prevention of Biodiversity Loss Caused by Alien Invasive Species, Gland: IUCN.
Jauni, M., Gripenberg, S. & Ramula, S. (2015). ‘Non-native plant species benefit from disturbance: a meta-analysis’, Oikos, 124: 122–9.
Luscombe, G. & Scott, R. (2011). ‘Creative conservation’ in I. Douglas, D. Goode, M.C. Houck and R. Wang (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Urban Ecology, London: Routledge, 221-32.
Matteson, K.C. & Langellotto, G.A. (2011). ‘Small scale additions of native plants fail to increase beneficial insect richness in urban gardens’, Insect Conservation Diversity, 4: 89–98.
McKinney, M.L. (2006). ‘Urbanization as a major cause of biotic homogenization’, Biological Conservation, 127: 247–60.
Morales C.L. & Traveset, A. (2009). ‘A meta-analysis of impacts of alien vs. native plants on pollinator visitation and reproductive success of co-flowering native plants’, Ecology Letters, 12: 716–28.
Pearce, F. (2015). The New Wild: Why Invasive Species will be Nature’s Salvation. London: Icon Books.
Salisbury, A., Armitage, J., Bostock, H., Perry, J., Tatchell, M. & Thompson, K. (2015). ‘Enhancing gardens as habitats for flower-visiting aerial insects (pollinators): should we plant native or exotic species?’ Journal of Applied Ecology, 52, 1156–64.
Simberloff, D. (2015). Non-native Invasive Species and Novel Ecosystems, F1000Prime Reports, 7.
Simberloff, D. & Strong, D. (2013). ‘Counterpoint: scientists offer a dissenting view on Ascension Island’, Yale Environment 360, September 11.
Smith, R.M., Thompson, K., Hodgson, J.G., Warren, P.H. & Gaston, K.J. (2006). ‘Urban domestic gardens (IX): Composition and richness of the vascular plant flora, and implications for native biodiversity’, Biological Conservation, 129: 312–22.
Thomas, C.D. & Palmer, G. (2015). ‘Non-native plants add to the British flora without negative consequences for native diversity’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112: 4387–92.
Williamson, M., (1996). Biological Invasions. London: Chapman and Hall.
The truth is, we will never know what the future holds. This lack of certainty implies that we are engaged in an ethical, if not spiritual, dilemma. We are part of the dance of life and our actions have consequences.
Behind the scenes of pandemic, and long before, we have been quietly witnessing the planetary-scale annihilation of life-supporting systems, the Earth’s “6th mass extinction”. Unlike the previous five, this is the first time a mass extinction is caused by a single species, in this case Homo sapiens. Along with the other crises we’ve initiated (climate, desertification, ocean acidification, etc), this mass extinction event is projected to reach the tipping point of no return within ten or twenty years. What is at stake is a nothing less than the “survival of human civilisation”. Assuming we survive Covid-19, what can we do to help other species survive, and thereby reduce the risk of “living in an empty world”?
Although you’d expect an emergency of this calibre to hold the highest ratings of public awareness that unites cooperative mobilisation of global proportions, the 6th mass extinction is quietly happening with little fanfare. (Did you hear the giraffe is listed by IUCN as a threatened species?) Acknowledgement of the unfolding catastrophe does exist, but air time is restricted to headlines of scientific updates, which are both terrifying and framed by an oddly boring medium. Even so, in the year ahead, according to the World Economic Forum, biodiversity loss is the third biggest risk to the world, ahead of infectious diseases, terror attacks and interstate conflict (WEF 2020).
The UN recently warned member nations that, unless drastic measures are taken to curb the ongoing destruction of life-supporting ecosystems, a biologically impoverished planet awaits present and future generations. Since 2017, a decade after reports began suggesting that a mass extinction might be imminent, numerous scientists have begun reporting evidence that the earth’s life support systems have already begun to unravel. Apparently, nature is disappearing at a rate tens to hundreds of times faster than the average of the past 10 million years.
Recent research has shown that birds and insects have declined in significant numbers since the 1970s. Insects play a central role to a variety of processes (pollination, herbivory, detrivory, nutrient cycling) and are important food sources for higher trophic levels such as birds, mammals and amphibians. A large-scale loss of insect diversity and abundance will likely provoke trophic cascades and jeopardize ecosystem services. In September 2019, the most comprehensive bird survey ever conducted in Canada and continental United States reported that 76% of breeding birds (529 species) declined in population 29 percent between 1970 and 2018 (click here to view the figure). The long-term surveys analysed, which accounted for both increasing and declining species revealed a net loss in total abundance of 2.9 billion birds across all species and almost all biomes. Birds are the canaries in the coal mine that is the Earth’s future. Severe declines in both common and rare species indicate that something is wrong.
In the case of birds, and likely the same for other taxa, the causes for continent-scale declines include habitat loss and degradation, unsustainable agricultural practices, pesticides (including, but not limited to, neurotoxic neonicotinoids), climate change and pollution. The authors of the bird study comment that “landscapes are losing their ability to support bird populations”. However, they also highlight the conservation success stories from the same timeframe that brought some birds back from the brink, demonstrating life’s resilience.
For this essay, I adopt the premise that human settlements have a role to play in addressing the 6th mass extinction. If 60% of the area projected to be urbanised by 2030 had yet to built in 2012 (CBD, 2012), then we have a precious window of opportunity to future-proof cities and their hinterlands to support life. Certainly, cities are only weakly relevant to some of the leading causes of extinction, like overhunting, toxic pollution, and climate change. However, they are not insignificant to other causes, notably habitat destruction, invasion by alien species, and human population growth. This moment is also poignant for its juncture between the UN Decade on Biodiversity (2011-2020) and the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021-2030). Add to this the climate justice movement that has captured the world’s attention, and our window of time is rich in opportunities and rewards.
So, what is the most skilful and effective response or attitude we can adopt to this tragedy? For those of us dedicated to the evolving field of urban ecology, whether thinkers, citizens, designers, policymakers, artists, or practitioners, how do we proceed with our programs and projects when we sense that Armageddon is raging outside our sphere of influence? To set the tone and perspective, I will borrow Greta Thunberg’s analogy that our house is on fire. If we consider biological annihilation akin to our burning house; if we take on board both the evidence and the unknowns; and if we allow ourselves to think outside the box of “expertise” and into the expanse of “we are talented, compassionate, creative human beings”, what might an appropriate response look like?
How to respond when your house is on fire
If our house is on fire and it’s too late for the fire extinguisher, what is an appropriate response? Well, if we want to survive, if we want others to survive, and if we want to emerge with a decent chance of recovery afterwards, then we’ll get out. Not only that, we’ll get out fast, leaving valuables behind and closing doors stop the spread of fire. We’ll raise alarm by notifying the fire department and enlisting all possible help to douse the flames. Mentally, we’ll want to be alert, responsive and careful. Physically, we’ll want to embody vitality and clarity of mind. In short, we’ll do our best. By treating it as an emergency and putting all other concerns and worries to the side, we will dedicate our full presence and attention to the matter at hand.
Wildfires of the Unites States. Modified photo by tonynetone. Credit: CC By 2.0
What might it look like—to dedicate ourselves to the matter of the extinction crisis—when we live in cities? Urban living tends to disconnect people from the natural environment, and the lack of iconic species or ecosystems locally can dampen the proverbial flames beneath our bottoms.
I will use my home as the location for this thought exercise, starting with a brief introduction for context.
Vancouver, BC, is Canada’s 3rd most populous city (2.4 million, Sept 2019). Since 2007, it has consistently been one of the most liveable cities in the world, largely because of its location. The ocean to the West, mountains and fjords to the North, and a multicultural city in between, Vancouver’s high standard of living is closely tied to the quality of its natural environment. As a city, it is also famed for its sleek style of urbanism (“downtown living”, eco-density) and, let’s not forget, for its West coast chillax vibe.
In many cases, and certainly by contrast with other cities, the shiny expectations about this city are true. The quality of life is excellent for many, and the backdrop and access to nature is amazing. Cracks in the veneer have begun to appear, however, partly due to the city’s hasty transformation into a mega-city, with direct implications on its natural environment. The decline in liveability in recent years has been attributed to air quality from wildfires, but also difficult issues like combined sewer overflows, lack of affordability, and polarizing class dynamics.
The land now occupied by the City of Vancouver was once a rainforest and marshland, with over 50 streams that flowed either to the sea or the mighty Fraser River. The oceans and mountains have shaped the humid coastal climate, and First Nations sustained themselves, the land and the water since time immemorial. That changed with exceptional speed after the first settlers arrived in the late 1800s. The seemingly endless forests and innumerable streams and wetlands were cleared, filled and industrialized within a matter of decades, rather than centuries as on the east coast before. Rather than recharging aquifers and supporting local ecosystems, rain that used to be absorbed by the ground or flow through salmon-bearing streams is now intercepted by roofs, drain tile and paved surfaces and directed into an underground pipe network.
This mural of early Vancouver grants perspective (with future-Stanley-Park centre-left, and current-day downtown at centre-right) on how the landscape has changed in the last century. Photographed at 2490 Marine Drive in Dundarave Village, West Vancouver. Photo: Christine Thuring
With regards to the extinction crisis, lush and liveable Vancouver is not exempt. Until its ambitious Rain City Strategy is implemented, the city continues to send direct toxic runoff and sewage into the Salish Sea, with massive implications to biodiversity. Shockingly, it appears that one of the region’s apex predators, the iconic killer whale (Orcinus orca), is on track for extinction. Evidence is mounting that the southern resident pod is starving, its population numbers in decline. In 2018, when yet another calf died soon after being born, the pod captured the world’s attention by communicating what is at stake, both for them and for us. Despite public outcry and demonstration, the drivers of this ecocide are not being resolved quickly enough, if at all.
When an ecosystem loses its apex predator, we can expect a ripple effect through all trophic levels of prey, right down to the primary producers (plants). Everything is connected. Compared to the plight of the orcas, however, the signals we receive from the terrestrial environment are subtle, maybe because we don’t notice when something small has gone missing. Still, Pacific Northwest ecosystems are famous for their astounding inter-connectivity, so if a highly intelligent, apex species is at risk then our terrestrial ecosystems are undoubtedly also under pressure.
Since cities are expressions of human dominance over the natural environment, it can be a stretch to imagine how or where to begin restoration efforts. Well, if our house is on fire, then we must act with courage and fearlessness, in collaborative consensus and harmony. In this precious decade ahead, we have no time to lose. It’s valuable to recall that we have much in our favour! We have technology, tools, knowledge and shared language at our disposal. The majority of humanity has “woken up” and aware of the crises at hand, to some degree or other.
In Metro Vancouver, eight municipalities have declared a climate emergency, and a number of ambitious strategies are in process of development and/ or implementation. In these, the term biodiversity is used often but without any detail. For all intents and purposes, I interpret this to mean that biodiversity is a piece of jargon. Recalling the inferno at hand, I will humbly don the warrior’s cloak (as “Captain Well-what-would-you-do?”) and suggest some things we can do to support life in this beautiful part of the world. I will undoubtedly miss some important points and invite you to use the comment section below.
Reconciliation and stewardship
Indigenous peoples (or “First Nations” in Canada) have lived on and cared for the lands and waters since time immemorial, and indigenous stewardship may be the key to global conservation goals. At the time of writing, Canada and B.C. were momentously poised with the opportunity of a generation to demonstrate its acknowledgement of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Reconciliation in this context honours indigenous rights to territory and tradition, to self-determination and to respect and understanding. Politically it’s been a bumpy road, and I won’t get into that here. Suffice to say that we settlers live on unceded, stolen lands, and we have treated them very poorly. If we were to return these lands and waters to the rightful owners, then restoring them is the least we can do. Fortunately, this will also benefit biodiversity.
Empowering the spirit of respect and reconciliation would also involve exploring the traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) and indigenous cultural practices that allowed millennia-old societies to thrive in symbiosis with nature. These time-tested practices were established through ingenuity, creativity, spirituality, ecological understanding and resourcefulness. Allowing First Nations people back to their traditional lands, supporting the revival of traditional knowledge and practices, and/ or restoring degraded lands can heal the land and all people. In this era of nature-deficit-disorder and loneliness, connecting with nature and with other beings will significantly enhance individual and social well-being (however urban). Whether joining a conservation group, adopting a local green space, or connecting with First Nations on indigenous-led campaigns, we have much to gain.
Biodiversity-led landscapes
Building on a foundation of reconciliation and respect for indigenous tradition and knowledge, an appropriate response to the extinction crisis will also involve multi-functional landscapes. This means that every surface is relevant to both biodiversity and humans, while also repairing links to the damaged hydrological cycle, improving air quality, providing shade, etc. With regards to plantings, cultivated forms lacking value for wildlife will be replaced with species or cultivars that provide food that is nutritious. For example, the red-flowering currant is an early flowering shrub that provides nectar for hummingbirds fresh in from migration and for newly awakened bumblebee queens. The City of Vancouver and partners have been installing pollinator gardens, often featuring nest boxes and wildflower meadows, for demonstration and education. Someday, let’s aim for healthy and viable pollinator habitat to be everywhere!
Similar to plant selection, the management and maintenance of landscapes must take into account the nesting requirements of native bees, of which there are nearly 500 in BC. For example, willows are essential host trees for certain specialist species of solitary mining bees, conifers provide resins for bees that construct resin nests, and elderberry is great for stem nesting bees. Wildflower meadows designed for native pollinators must ensure the soil specifications and maintenance regime are all aligned with nesting needs, and that they take entire life cycles into consideration. It goes without saying that pesticides are not appropriate during an extinction or a climate crisis, especially given the “evidence that these treatments have little to no benefit in many crops.” One of the province’s youngest societies, the Native Bee Society of BC, is assembling resources that identify the needs of native pollinators, e.g. , soil specifications.
Replacing hard with soft
Heavily manicured landscapes must be re-oriented to the needs of healthy ecosystems and healthy communities. Parks and green spaces featuring expanses of lawn must be diversified with mosaics of habitat, including groves, meadows, ponds, wetlands and constructed ecosystems like bioswales and rain gardens. Native trees and shrubs will be planted to benefit native pollinators and birds. Wetlands must be restored, of which the massive dividends to biodiversity will also benefit access to nature, climate resilience, carbon sequestration and much more. There are countless opportunities to de-pave the hardscape of the region, what with its high water table and proximity to salty, fresh and brackish waters (salt marsh, mud flats, peat bog, riparian streams, rivers). The sky’s the limit, so to speak!
As sea level rise weakens Vancouver’s recreational sea walls, these hard surfaces can be replaced by floating paths that allow for restored intertidal zones beneath and associated habitat for shellfish, clams and more. The terribly polluted waters of False Creek can be improved with floating vegetated islands designed for phytoremediation, i.e., planted with species that remove, transfer, stabilize, and/or destroy contaminants. We must also restore and maintain inter- and subtidal estuarine habitats, like eel grass, which provide important spawning and nursery habitat for numerous fish (and therefore serve as important feeding areas for marine birds and mammals). Such interventions will concurrently improve water quality by trapping sediment, pollutants and nutrients.
Reducing combined sewage outflows is an urgent priority of the moment for the City of Vancouver, and much hope is hinged on the Rain City Strategy, which aims to capture and clean 90% of urban stormwater. In areas where “reverse engineering” and de-paving the landscape is not feasible, multi-functional green infrastructure must be implemented that not only fulfils the requirements of water sensitive design but also provides habitat for wildlife, beautiful nature experiences for residents, thermal comfort and improved air quality, etc. All that being said, let’s not forget to refer to indigenous practices and technologies before seeking high-tech solutions from other parts of the world.
Engaged citizenry must inform political will
We have a huge range of options for speaking on behalf of beings without voices and rights. As individuals, we can strive to be ethical consumers and divest out of life destroying institutions. We can connect into supportive communities by campaigning on issues close to our hearts. We can express our wishes by contacting political representatives and signing petitions. As citizens of the earth, we might heed the call of former UN climate chief who recently stated that “civil disobedience is not only a moral choice, it is also the most powerful way of shaping world politics”.
We can support the development and adoption of effective policies, too. For example, the Ecocide Project is working to establish ecocide as international crime, alongside other crimes against peace of (i.e., genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, crime of aggression). Making ecocide a crime could serve as a brake on the few companies responsible for the majority of destruction while reaping profits. We can each contribute to halting reckless industrial activity by discouraging government ministers from issuing permits, banks from lending, investors from backing it, and insurers from underwriting it. As such, we can help weaken the infrastructure that silently sanctions acts of large-scale environmental destruction.
Ten years ago, the world’s governments pledged to stop subsidizing activities that drive species to extinction, opening the UN Decade on Biodiversity. This has had little effect. Meanwhile, trillions of dollars are awarded annually for subsidies that contribute to the drivers of extinction! In a recent paper, Dempsey and colleagues (2020) discuss methods for holding governments to account, namely subsidy accountability. They envision interdisciplinary teams working together to track subsidies and to forecast the environmental and social effects of their redirection or elimination. “To advance transformative economic change, we need to build country-specific lists of policies in need of reform and, crucially, to amass the political power necessary to persuade governments of all stripes to implement such changes. Big, public money is out there. We need to redirect these funds towards efforts that support ecologically sustainable economies and full pockets for nature” (p. 2).
In closing
We have a choice on the story lines we wish to adopt. In our minds and collectively, we have an opportunity to envision and manifest the world we wish to inherit. Nature will never give up on life. Just as wildfires of apocalyptic intensity burn out and new life emerges, we are part of the dance of life and our actions do have consequences. The truth is, we may read countless papers and reports, but we may never truly know what the future holds. To my mind, this lack of absolute certainty, combined with unprecedented phenomena, implies that we are enlisted in an ethical, if not spiritual, dilemma. Whether or not the orca benefit from our de-paving the region and restoring fragmented habitats and food webs is, in a way, beside the point. The resilience of life is forever affirming, and this can be our cue. On the one hand, any action other than freezing like a deer in the headlights is better than nothing. On the other, if we have the wherewithal to remain present, alert, kind and compassionate, inside or near a raging inferno, we may find that taking care of ourselves and caring for other beings are one and the same. Think global and act local. Life will thank us for it.
Ceballos, G, Ehrlich, PR and Dirzo, R. 2017. Biological annihilation via the ongoing sixth mass extinction signaled by vertebrate population losses and declines. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 114 (30) E6089-E6096 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1704949114
Dempsey J, Martin TG, Sumaila UR. 2020. Subsidizing extinction?Conservation Letters 13. DOI: 10.1111/conl.1270
Figueres, C and Rivett-Carnac, T. 2020. The Future We Choose: Surviving the Climate Crisis. Knopf Publishing Group. ISBN 0525658351
Gauger, A., Rabatel-Fernel, MP., Kulbicki, L., Short, D. and Higgins, P. 2013. The Ecocide Project: Ecocide is the missing 5th Crime Against Peace. Human Rights Consortium, London. ISBN 978-0-9575210-5-6
Macy, J. and C. Johnstone. 2012. Active Hope: How to face the mess we’re in without going crazy. New World Library, Novato CA.
Román-Palacios, C. and JJ Wiens. 2020. Recent responses to climate change reveal the drivers of species extinction and survival. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1913007117
Rose, C. 2019. Devastation in the Skies.Wingspan. A publication of the Wild Bird Trust of British Columbia. 8-11 https://wildbirdtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Wingspan-2019-Fall-Winter.pdf
Rosenberg, KV., Dokter., AM, Blancher, PJ., Sauer, JR., Smith, AC., Smith, PA., Stanton JC., Panjabi, A., Helft, L., Parr, M., Marra, PP. 2019. Decline of the North American avifauna. Science. 366 (6461): 120-124. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaw1313 https://science.sciencemag.org/content/366/6461/120
Watson, J. 2020. Lo-tek. Design By Radical Indigenism. Taschen.
Whyte, D. 2020. Ecocide: Kill the corporation before it kills us. Manchester University Press. ISBN: 978-1-5261-4698-4
World Economic Forum. Jan. 2020. The Global Risks Report 2020. 15th edition.
Using Google mobility data, Urban resilience researchers in New York, Barcelona, Berlin/Halle, Oslo, and Stockholm provide local perspectives on the importance of access to greenspace. While we hope the pandemic and its suffering soon will pass, understanding the importance of greenspace for urban resilience must continue with renewed force.
There is now plenty of evidence on the benefits of local access to greenspace and greenviews on physical health and mental well-being. Lockdowns and social distancing advisories have placed restrictions on citizen normal access to public spaces. Google community mobility statistics from February-March revealed varied patterns of reaction to Covid-19 in cities where we work. While residential mobility increased everywhere, change in mobility in parks varied from city to city.
Beyond the direct effects of the pandemic on mobility, and the effects of indoor time on health, Covid-19 sheds a strong light on challenges to urban resilience. Our research was—pre-pandemic—focused on the role of urban greenspaces for ecosystem services and environmental justice. The variation in restrictions and reactions to the pandemic across our cities shows a gradient from Barcelona and New York to Stockholm. This reinforces the importance of comparative research on resilient urban development, while triggering new questions.
Mobility changes during the pandemic in 5 cities emphasizes research findings on the importance of green space and raises new research questions
The severity of the lockdowns on workplace mobility has been stronger in Barcelona and New York than Berlin/Halle and Oslo, which in turn have had stronger restrictions than Stockholm. The severity of the pandemic and restrictions seems roughly to coincide in the case of our cities with urban density and greenspace availability per inhabitant (see below).
Urban greenspace availability for selected European cities in ENABLE
The reactions to Covid-19 and impacts on access to greenspace raise a number of questions which cast previous research results “in a pandemic light”. Is the loss of access to greenspace larger in areas hit the hardest by the pandemic? Are other environmental problems correlated with the incidence of Covid-19 and its restrictions? Is the distribution of greenspace and the loss of access equitable across neighbourhoods? Are new open spaces such as brownfields being used, and does the lockdown increase the importance of green roofs in dense cities? What is the effect on children and public health of indoor confinement? What of a pandemic lockdown in a future climate change scenario with heat waves?
The Google mobility data for residential area and parks triggers questions about the importance of greenspace during the pandemic. Can the resolution of the mobility data be improved and compiled specifically for the urban areas hardest hit by the pandemic? In the following we look at some of these gaps and questions city by city.
The Google mobility data describe only partly what you can observe on the streets of large German cities like Berlin, Leipzig, or Halle. People limit shopping (retail, grocery, pharmacy), but our general impression is that more people seek being outdoors, meaning walking in their residential area as shown in the Google mobility data, but also in green spaces. You see many more people jogging compared to pre-corona times. People are innovative in lawn-based activities, since playgrounds and sports fields are closed, which highlights the importance of lawns as recreational places. Interestingly, there is evidence for the importance of open spaces other than parks, such as brownfields. Previously, they were basically for walking the dog, but are now also used for family activities and jogging more than before. One reason might be that brownfields are less observed and visited by the police and thus people feel more free. Another relevant type of non-park green space is urban forests, where similarly it can be more difficult for the police to control people’s behaviours.
There is evidence that important urban forests like Grunewald in Berlin are intensively used.Reasons to use such spaces have to do with people finding them relaxing and calming, wanting to enjoy their beauty or experience wilderness, or believing that they have a positive influence on their well-being. For the coming weeks, namely until 3 May when restrictions will be re-discussed in German government, if numbers of infected further decrease and the r-value remains below 1, more and larger shops will reopen, walks for shopping will most probably increase, while those in residential neighbourhoods and parks might decline (being replaced by shopping walks/ways). In terms of existing inequalities in the uptake of ecosystem services from green spaces in German large cities, it is still hard to judge without monitoring data, but existing evidence indicates that there is unequal socio-spatial distribution of urban green space, translated in differences in the quantity and size of green spaces, the structure of vegetation, and their quality. These inequalities and their negative effects on the worse off can become very important in situations like the corona lockdown.
We think those inequalities remain more or less the same when it is about parks, they only become much more visible due to the mobility restrictions in place. Of course people with residential / private green definitely can draw more benefits (like enjoying fresh air or gardening)than those without. Those with a view into urban green also draw some benefits, particularly if they have a balcony, allowing them to “go outside” or do some gardening. These factors are related to existing inequalities in the housing market but, of course, now they become simply more evident. The Corona situation has highlighted the need to put more emphasis in developing high quality green spaces in all districts and areas of the cities, as in times of such mobility restrictions both short distances (as public transport is not advised) and good quality of urban greenspace would be urgently needed.
Finally, in terms of this pandemic, the virus occurrence and the reaction to it brought two things onto the desk of Leipzig and Halle’s urban greenspace development: First, as mentioned above, a more equal (fair) distribution of high quality green spaces for recreation across the entire town. Second, to develop more “wild” areas where people have NO access and wildlife can develop and form independent biocenosis and thus prevent zoonoses as best as possible. This point is particularly important for the joint planning of cities and their wider peripheries.
As Covid-19 infection rates started to increase, Spain declared a countrywide state of emergency and put in place and restricted people’s mobility and especially activities in public space drastically (see decree here). As a consequence, in Barcelona as in other Spanish cities—but in sharp contrast to all other cities considered here—the accessibility of public green spaces has been limited to dog walking (though restricted as well, this benefits a substantial share of the population, as the ratio between dogs and people in Spain is about 1:4). Other highly appreciated recreational activities like outdoor running or cycling are penalized by high fines, while most urban parks have been closed since mid-March. As a consequence, park use drastically dropped by about 90%, as shown by the Google mobility data.
Despite broad scientific evidence for the health and wellbeing benefits from green space exposure, the lockdown measures in Spain are strongly tailored to restrict leisure activities in public spaces. Entering already the sixth week of confinement, this poses multiple important questions that extend on our previous research on urban resilience.
First of all and most generally, it is relevant to question whether there is a general underappreciation of particular nature values among decision-makers and the broader Spanish society compared to other European countries. This could constitute an important general barrier for the implementation of nature-based solutions and other greening strategies in cities (lacking trust people’s responsible behaviour could be another explanation). Interestingly in this context, in Catalonia, the strict initial regulations have been rapidly softened for accessing vegetable gardens (positively affecting about 10,000 gardeners in the metropolitan area of Barcelona) once more showing the importance of gardens in moments of crises, while softening access to urban parks, e.g. for individual exercising as in other European countries, has hardly been in the discussion.
Secondly, and maybe most discussed right now, at least in Barcelona, are potential negative physical and psychological health effects primarily on children due to lacking outdoor recreation, also long term. Despite relatively low scientific evidence for the effectiveness of children’s isolation, the Covid-19 restrictions in Spain are even more severe for children than for adults—apart from a few exceptions children were not supposed to leave the house at all during six weeks (after strong public pressure relaxations in the regulation have been implemented from 26 April onward). Yet, potential negative health effects such as obesity and anxiety, which could be mitigated by access to urban nature, are not limited to children but affect adults similarly.
Thirdly, and related to the previous points, the lockdown can be assumed to affect already vulnerable social groups unequally higher, and reproduce existing environmental injustices. Given that low income residents generally live in smaller apartments and are assumed to have less access to private green spaces, the privation of access to benefits from public green spaces is likely affecting low-income groups disproportionately stronger than more affluent citizens. At the Barcelona Lab for Urban Environmental Justice and Sustainability (BCNUEJ) we are currently investigating this unequal accessibility to greenery under lockdown conditions in relation to unequal health impacts through a Spain-wide online survey.
Fourthly, the lockdown puts Barcelona’s about 2700 ha rooftops in the spotlight of future urban resilience strategies, which have become an important gathering and recreational space for neighbours during the lockdown. In an extremely dense city like Barcelona (at least for European standards) unused rooftops bear an important transformative potential. This has more classically been discussed in the context of solar energy production, while more recently mitigating peoples’ needs for ecosystem services through green roofs is gaining relevance in the debate. This debate must be reshaped considering multiple and potentially interacting drivers of change.
Finally, the severe lockdown might indicate potential solutions for one of Barcelona’s most pressing environmental issues before Covid-19: Air pollution. Which might even have increased the lethal effects of Covid-19. Regarding the Barcelona Public Health Agency, air pollution is causing over 350 premature deaths each year in Barcelona (in comparison, the number of deaths by Covid-19 between 1 March and 10 April has been estimated at 2,236). For Barcelona, we observed that air pollution has dropped by more than half, compared to the same period in 2019, showing a much wider effect than the recently implemented low emission zone. In this context we are starting to question, to which extent we are capable of avoiding a return to the pre-Corona “normality”, at least with regard to emission intensive transport.
New York City is unique among ENABLE cities in that under the weak federal system of the United States, significant responsibility for Covid-19 response falls to states and municipal governments. NYC current caseload (180k confirmed cases as of this writing), has labeled it as both the current “epicenter” and the “vanguard” of the pandemic in the US.
In order to rapidly learn how NYC’s experience may inform response efforts elsewhere, the Urban Systems Lab at The New School has been examining patterns of Covid-19 spread and relationships to multi-dimensional vulnerability. For instance, we have noted that the mobility restrictions put in place by NY State Governor Andrew Cuomo’s Executive Order “NY on PAUSE” (Policies, Assure, Uniform, Safety, Everyone), reflected in the Google mobility data, appear confirmed by transit, electricity use, and geo-coded tweets across the city. The USL has also begun to aggregate additional mobility data from Twitter to examine covid responses.Given the magnitude of the difference in increased residential mobility and decreases across all other sectors, these data suggest that most public realm activity in the city is driven by non-residents now restricted to their home jurisdictions, which may be true across ENABLE cities. However, data on testing totals and confirmed cases also indicate that social vulnerability to Covid infection and mortality may be driven by socio-economic and racial disparities, existing issues of environmental justice (e.g. air pollution), and workforce hierarchies. For example, the historically low transit ridership declines (87% down according to the MTA), are not uniform across the 5 New York City boroughs, highlighting equity, access, and socio-economic issues. In low-income neighborhoods ridership is more consistent with data from this time last year, with reports of overcrowding as service is disrupted.
There is also strong reason to suspect that the mobility data also do not accurately reflect the uses of parks by local residents, who have observed local parks becoming much more crowded than usual. NYC being a dense megacity (population density averaging ~2800 residents per sq km), with a relatively low greenview index, private and community green spaces providing numerous ecosystem services, were already highly sought after, and the city’s extensive green roof programs may become increasingly important. Additionally, ongoing efforts to make more of the streetscape useful for pedestrian, bicycle transit, while managing stormwater and heat hazards at a finer scale, may also gain in importance, although existing USL research (in preparation) shows that planning remains fragmented in these domains. For example, the city’s nascent attempt at a city wide bicycle network could be expanded to integrate nature-based solutions and green infrastructure. Aside from NYC being an international and regional destination, much work remains to be done on how extending NY on PAUSE will affect the vulnerability of residents to the oncoming extreme heat and flooding season.
Oslo’s Covid-19 mobility to non-essential workplaces decreased by 45% in March and increased residential mobility by 14%. Outdoor recreation was advised within one’s municipality in Norway, following social distancing advisories. We wonder whether physical exercise has been more spatially distributed during the period of mobility restrictions. Oslo is surrounded by continuous boreal forest cover with public right of access. Data from automatic counters indicate that people use new entrance areas and are dispersed over large forest areas on marked and unmarked paths. Oslo has plenty of room for recreation in the city’s peri-urban forests. However, with the advisory against public transport, those who live in the city center without a car must use urban parks and open spaces for recreation. While there is a small reduction in use of parks (-7%) since February as a whole, there was a large increase in park use following the shock of the March 12th announcement. Oslo’s citizens may have compensated for mobility restrictions by increasing outdoor recreation in parks, streets and forests close to home. The density of vegetation in streets may also be an incentive to exercise close to home.
Unfortunately, the Google community mobility data does not identify mobility in streets and undesignated greenspaces such as Oslo’s peri-urban continuous forest cover, the Marka forest. Neighbourhood green spaces accessibility, size and quality, as well as tree density in general have shown to have positive impacts on mental and physical health. Street level greenviews in Oslo are high compared to other capital cities, and green spaces are relatively equally distributed across the city, although some differences in exposure to green and other environmental quality still exist.
The importance of residential tree canopy may literally grow if a pandemic lockdown occurs during a heatwave. In Oslo each tree canopy reduced average excess heat exposure to the elderly by one day during the heatwaves of 2018. We speculate that urban tree canopy’s importance for public health and urban resilience can only increase, with Oslo’s summer temperatures in 2050 expected to be over 5 degrees warmer. Ease of access to cool, large, low recreation density areas in the Marka peri-urban forest and Oslofjord should increase the value of urban ecosystem services in futures with climate change and pandemics. These peri-urban areas may also serve a spectrum of different opportunities for activities and nature experiences for the urban populations, as they include an environmental gradient from intensively managed service areas towards untouched wilderness areas within short distances. This means that people do not need to travel far near Oslo to achieve experiences such as silence and solitude.
Despite authorities assurances of food security, the announcement of Covid-19 restrictions 12 March saw an approximate 50% spike in grocery & pharmacy visits in Oslo. Although this brief hoarding was probably focused on non-perishables, we wonder whether this behaviour will be lower in cities with better access to urban gardening and local agriculture.
The next Google mobility report will cover the period including Easter. Easter is traditionally a time for outdoor activities in Norway, mainly skiing activities in the mountains. Many people go to their cabins, but since this was prohibited, we expect the use of urban greenspace will show an increase in mobility—at least to the extent that people have adhered to the advice from the Government to walk from home, and avoid crowded car parking spaces and public transport. Local newspaper reports also indicated that the peri-urban Marka forest was extensively used during Easter, perhaps covering similar recreational needs of outdoor life as going to the cabin, while also offering more space for social distancing than the city streets and parks. Oslo’s peri-urban forests provide for resilient outdoor life during the pandemic, complemented by local access to parks and high quality urban spaces with street trees.
Stockholm residents have compensated for mobility restrictions, and restricted access to urban services like gyms, museums, concerts, sports events etc. by increased outdoor recreation in parks, streets and perhaps especially forests close to home. Similarly to Oslo, density of vegetation in streets may also be an incentive to exercise close to home. Stockholm has over the last few years rolled out a system of outdoor gyms to increase the multifunctionality of the city’s green spaces, and these have seen increasingly heavy use. Unfortunately, the Google community mobility data does not identify mobility in streets and undesignated greenspaces such as Tyresta national park, nature reserves and remnant green spaces embedded in Stockholm’s green wedges—only a smaller portion of these are designated as “parks”. Stockholm has ample access to water, and as we move into spring/summer this will open up additional opportunities for being out while keeping a distance from other people. Neighbourhood green spaces and tree density are shown to have positive impacts on mental and physical health. Street level greenviews in Stockholm are high compared to other capital cities, and green spaces are relatively equally distributed across the city, although some differences in ‘direct’ exposure to green and other environmental quality exist.
Ease of access to cool, large, low recreation density areas in the green wedges, nature reserves and national parks, together with the archipelago and lake Mälaren should increase the value of urban ecosystem services in futures with climate change and pandemics. The importance of residential tree canopy will also grow in Stockholm if a pandemic lockdown occurs during a heatwave. Soft restrictions and social responsibility, together with a generally high availability of larger open spaces have made it easier for Stockholmers’ to shift activities and time to open space rather than the more built up parts of the city. However, restrictions for the use of public transportation means that the larger scale regional system of open spaces is primarily available for people with their own cars, skewing the distribution of opportunity across the population.
This is not the end
We hope the Google mobility data will soon show access to urban greenspaces increasing everywhere as restrictions are lifted, coinciding with the green views of spring. While we hope the pandemic and its suffering soon will pass, preserving, restoring and understanding the importance of greenspace for future urban resilience must continue with renewed force.
David Barton1, Dagmar Haase2, Andre Mascarenhas2, Johannes Langemeyer3, Francesc Baró3, Christopher Kennedy4, Zbigniew Grabowski4, Timon McPhearson4, Norum Hjertager Krog1, Zander Venter1, VegardGundersen1, Erik Andersson5
1—Oslo, 2—Berlin, 3—Barcelona, 4—New York, 5—Stockholm
Dagmar Haase is a professor in urban ecology and urban land use modelling. Her main interests are in the integration of land-use change modelling and the assessment of ecosystem services, disservices and socio-environmental justice issues in cities, including urban land teleconnections.
André Mascarenhas is a Post-Doc researcher at the Lab of Landscape Ecology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and the Museum für Naturkunde Berlin, Germany. He is interested in human-nature interactions, especially regarding the links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and spatial planning in urban environments, under a sustainability science lens.
Johannes Langemeyer is a senior researcher at the Institute of Environmental Science and Technology at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain. He is trained as a geographer and environmental scientist. His interdisciplinary research focuses on urban social-ecological systems, at the interface of ecosystem services, resilience, and justice.
Francesc Baro is a postdoctoral researcher at ICTA/Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, and member of the Barcelona Laboratory for Urban Environmental Justice. He is an environmental scientist trained in landscape and urban planning and explores the operationalization of ecosystem services in urban social-ecological systems.
Christopher Kennedy is the associate director at the Urban Systems Lab (The New School) and lecturer in the Parsons School of Design. Kennedy’s research focuses on understanding the socio-ecological benefits of spontaneous urban plant communities in NYC, and the role of civic engagement in developing new approaches to environmental stewardship and nature-based resilience.
Dr. Zbigniew J. Grabowski (Z or Zbig for short) is an Extension Educator in Water Quality at UConn’s Center for Land-use Education and Research (CLEAR). Z’s primary work is to support just transformations of land systems. His work focuses on green infrastructure, just transitions, and systems approaches to address intersecting social and environmental challenges.
Dr. Timon McPhearson works with designers, planners, and local government to foster sustainable, resilient and just cities. He is Associate Professor of Urban Ecology and Director of the Urban Systems Lab at The New School and Research Fellow at the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies and Stockholm Resilience Centre.
Norun Hjertager Krog, PhD, is a Senior Scientist at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health in Oslo, Norway. She is a sociologist and environmental epidemiologist, with research on associations between urban environment and health, including green space and built environment, but also noise, air pollution, climate and socioeconomic factors.
Zander is a spatial ecologist based at the Norwegian Institute for Nature Research in Oslo, Norway. His interests lie in finding creative ways to monitor and visualize urban ecosystem services. His recent research has focussed on the relation between urban green infrastructure, climate mitigation and public health benefits.
Vegard Gundersen, NINA, has long research experience both within social and ecological fields, currently focusing mostly on visitor monitoring methods, nature conservation and management implications of human use of mountain areas. He is trained as forester, did a PhD in urban forestry in 2005, and much of his research is about people’s perception of forest environment, and adaptations of silviculture and management methods for urban woodlands.
Regularly, we feature a Global Roundtable in which a group of people respond to a specific question in The Nature of Cities.
show/hide list of writers
Hover over a name to see an excerpt of their response…click on the name to see their full response.
Pippin Anderson, Cape TownThe differences in the lives of our students is stark. With everybody heading home for lock down, the somewhat levelling experience of a shared campus has gone like Cinderella’s carriage at midnight. Some get to leave the ball as they arrived, and others are left with pumpkins and rats.
Isabelle Anguelovski, BarcelonaThe balance between keeping but delaying essential community engagement meetings, moving them online, or cancelling them all together, will be some of the many difficult decisions we will have to make in the near future.
Janice Astbury, Buenos AiresI hope that many people around the world are enjoying the sounds of voices and birdsong, and the experience of cleaner air flowing into their homes, and will want this to continue.
Carmen Bouyer, ParisI will keep dancing half an hour a day on Zoom with people from all over the world, and join the direct local actions that bring wonder, trust and care among people and among species, learning from the ways of trees and the songs of bees, together.
Lindsay Campbell, New YorkFor those of us privileged to be sheltering at home, the crisis has created a new sense of simplicity and attention to place. May we carry that forward wherever the future takes us
Sarah Charlop-Powers, New YorkWhile we’re all navigating through this extremely stressful—and sometimes downright scary—moment, I can’t imagine what my life, and the lives of all New Yorkers, would be like without our local parks.
Katrine Claassens, MontrealThe pandemic teaches us this: rapid, coherent change is possible. It has also laid bare that there is much to be actively dismantled, and much to be actively built.
M’Lisa Colbert, MontrealI am confronted with how much I need trees, grass, and fresh air to remain a sane human being. Being stuck between the four walls of my apartment all day feels foreign and unnatural.
Marcus Collier, DublinI have a new resolve to overcome my despondency and try harder to find a means to engage urban communities with wild nature. In this case, the first step is literally on the doorstep!
Paul Currie, Cape TownCovid has surfaced a key reality for me: choice. I will be paying more attention to how cities increase the promise and attainment of choice for their citizens, who are so often restricted by cost, geography or demography, to one option.
Samarth Das, MumbaiBeing locked up in the comfort of our homes is certainly a privilege. Social distancing in a time like this is a luxury afforded by a few—over 55% of Mumbai city’s 13 million inhabitants live in slums where 6-7 people share a single room.
Gillian Dick, GlasgowWe definitely need to take the opportunity to build back better, but we also need to pause and not rush when we hit the reset button. We need the right rebuilding, in the right place, at the right time, for the right communities.
Paul Downton, MelbourneCOVID-19 has forced changes that have given nature a breathing space, but I’m betting when the capitalist engine of destruction returns to “normal” it will raid the stores of nature like a selfish bully in a candy shop. It won’t be pretty.
Emilio Fantin, BolognaTalking about coronavirus, egoism needs to be switched into solidarity and sharing, but this cannot be done as a reaction to contagion fear or daily body count. It has to be the result of a long path towards the achievement of a new existential consciousness.
Todd Forrest, New YorkA garden feels empty and pointless without people to enjoy it. So does nature. While I have always felt strongly about the importance of nature to a person’s well-being, I have never been so keenly aware of the essential partnership people have with the natural world.
Andrew Grant, BathI have learned to take time to notice, and perhaps I have learned that however devastating Covid-19 is being, it has taught me to reflect on my Life, my Art, and my Nature.
Eduardo Guerrero, BogotáThe dilemma for a healthy planet is not: nature or people? The right approach must be people in nature, planning, and building resilient cities following ecological principles. Quoting Garcia Márquez: “I believe it’s not too late to build a utopia that allows us to share an Earth on which solidarity could become a reality”.
Bram Gunther, New YorkInstead of opening the streets up to cars again, muscling each other and spewing their nasty exhaust, we should keep the cars where they are now, inert. The city would transform itself, streets into nature trails lined with aster, sweet pepperbush, and oak trees. Our world-class electric-powered mass transportation system would connect all our neighborhoods as one equal family.
Dagmar Haase, LeipzigCOVID-19 is not just a natural, virus, or health crisis, it is a societal crisis. The response has to be given by the whole humankind. Urban nature, its maintenance, care and fair use, forms an important part of this global response.
Annegret Haase, BerlinThe crisis also sheds light on existing inequalities and injustices of our urban societies—in terms of how people can adapt to and cope with restrictions: It is much easier to stand restrictions in a large flat with balcony, garden or rooftop access and close to green spaces than in a small flat packed with people.
Fadi Hamdan, BeirutWhat we need is a value change in order to effect a paradigm shift in the way we produce, consume and live as societies.
Cecilia Herzog, Rio de JaneiroI am investing my time in isolation to improve my capacity to contribute to a wide discussion about urban nature, how it is important to sustain healthy lives and adapt to the ever-growing threat of extreme weather events.
Alex Herzog, Rio de JaneiroI believe there will be a strong enhancement of circular economy, increasing the value of local, its people and its businesses. Consequently, waste will decrease, and much of what before was seen as such, will begin to be reused. In other words, a syntropy in restauration.
Mike Houck, PortlandI will spend more time, personally and professionally, focusing on the green interstices of our city, the small, often scrappy, bits of nature nearby for my own psychological and physical health, and that of my city.
Matthew Jensen, New YorkBut who hasn’t dreamt about snapping their fingers and making air pollution go away? And all of a sudden we realize it is optional. Those scroll bar images are fun. Before. After. Before. After. What else is optional?
Panagiota Kotsila, Barcelona The balance between keeping but delaying essential community engagement meetings, moving them online, or cancelling them all together, will be some of the many difficult decisions we will have to make in the near future.
Gilles Lecuir, ParisThe confinement makes me feel intimately what I have known and said for many years now: the presence of nature in the city is not a decoration, it is a vital need for the city dweller. // Le confinement me donne à ressentir intimement ce que je sais et dis depuis de nombreuses années maintenant : la présence de la nature en ville n’est pas un décor, c’est un besoin vital pour le citadin.
Nina-Marie Lister, TorontoFor now, I take solace in the routine of daily bread. The measured pace of the knead, the proof, and the rise offers structure to my blurry days. Ultimately, it is the realization that this simple, measured act and its alchemy are both literally and figuratively what sustains us in its slow and patient way.
Kevin Lunzalu, NairobiThe COVID-19 curfew has given me the space to reflect on viable alternatives to my common practices: I am rethinking my food, modes of travel, entertainment, and forms of meeting people. Working from home for certain days may prove to be one of the best environmental practices. These ideas will greatly shape my post-crisis personality.
Patrick Lydon, OsakaWhat will be the new normal? Perhaps now is our chance to slow down, take care of ourselves and our fellow living beings a bit better, look to nature, and figure it out.
Yvonne Lynch, RiyadhI remain positive regarding a post-virus era because, notwithstanding the gravity of this situation, crisis always presents opportunity for positive transformation. Professionals in my field have always struggled to convince decision makers of the benefits of urban greening and climate adaptation. Not so much now.
Antonia Machado, PortlandThe coronavirus has exposed deep structural weaknesses, reinforcing the notion that working across silos and centering equity is imperative to building resilience and moving towards transformative change.
François Mancebo, ParisHidden behind any disaster, there always is a cost-benefits analysis that went wrong. Yet, more than often those who decide on the acceptability of a risk are not those who will be most exposed once the disaster happens. For the future, it is crucial to decide now who and what actions should be priority in the aftermath of Covid-19, and by whom these choices should be made.
Rob McDonald, WashingtonI have often been someone who threw himself at work, who saw work as not just a job but as a calling, who perhaps spent too much time working and not enough time at home. So, it is humbling to realize that, at this moment in time, perhaps the most important thing I can do in the universe is be with my family.
Brian McGrath, New YorkI with others have recently postulated a metacity framework—a more flexible and adaptable form of architectural space—for the future adaptation of cities as we face a global climate crisis—such as the current pandemic. My hope for a positive outcome of this tragic virus is the development of new infrastructures in solidarity towards a just transition based on the feminist/ecologist metacity matrix.
Siobhán McQuaid, DublinWe are facing now into a pivotal moment in time where it is possible to contemplate an alternative recovery plan. Governments and decision-makers need to take time out to reflect on the importance of small business, local business and nature-based business for community resilience.
Ragene Palma, LondonI call for urban practitioners and legislators to immerse in the daily lives of those who have been sidetracked for the longest time, and work from there to begin championing spatial equality—visit slums, converse with the homeless, and know what it’s like to live on the verge of the city. Our previous “normal”should not be recreated. // Hinihikayat ko ang mga nasa larangan ng pagpaplano at mambabatas na pananaliksik ng pamumuhay ng nakararami—bisitahin natin ang mga iskwater, kausapin natin ang mga walang tirahan, at alamin natin kung ano ang kalagayan ng mga namumuhay sa loob at labas ng mga lungsod.
Diane Pataki, New YorkWhat about poverty, inequality, food insecurity, lack of access to clean water, climate change, and pollution? Now that I know we can act in response to COVID-19, there’s no turning back. Our society can change – completely and rapidly. The next time we have a daring solution, let’s not take “no” for an answer.
Mitch Pavao-Zuckerman, College ParkNot all of our students have the desire to learn online, and not all have the resources to do so. There is talk about impacts to university budgets and student enrollments. This experience is teaching many about the real lives and experiences of our students, and we need to be sure that any transformations in the new normal reflect on inequities in access to time, technology, and privacy.
Steward Pickett, PoughkeepsieThis changes everything … again. Will those of us who survive learn this time? All of us are on some verge.
Mary Rowe, TorontoI think the most profound challenge for any of us working in urbanism through and after COVID, is now that we have seen how our cities truly function at their most vulnerable, what possible excuse do we now have to not emerge solely committed to fixing it?
Andrew Rudd, New YorkI am frequently in mourning that after this crisis the world will never be the same. I am also hopeful that after this crisis the world will never be the same.
Eric Sanderson, New YorkWhat is life, if not hope? What are our cities, if not an investment in our future? Great things will come again. Take care, my friends; hold on; and invest what you can into the long now.
Olivier Scheffer, BordeauxWe are standing at the edge of the cliff, and the coronavirus is right behind us…So how do we urgently change the urban metabolism to something highly resilient?
Huda Shaka, DubaiI have been reminded of the privileges I have which others do not: having the option to work remotely, having access to quality public space and amenities at my door step, having a choice about how I travel and where I spend my leisure time—and having leisure time. I will work harder personally and professionally to bring those privileges to others, I hope.
Laura Shillington, MontrealWhile we may be sharing a global experience of living in a pandemic, how we experience it is very specific to place, age, class, race, and gender. Can we use this experience to create a new normal with each of us as more ethical subjects to imagine new worlds?
Elisa Silva, CaracasIt is clear that the way we have been living and the patterns of governance we have chosen could be very different, they could change the second we decide to make them a priority and work collectively toward their fulfilment.
David Simon, LondonThe adaptational effort will be immense. While certain other activities are amenable to onlin-isation, others are not—some activities will simply be impossible. All bets are off.
Mary Hall Surface, WashingtonAt its best, theatre is a unique forum where communities can imagine together. We gather and literally align our beating hearts as a story unfolds told by actors who breathe our same air. My nightmare new normal is a Romeo and Juliet who never touch, watched by a masked audience too afraid to believe the story.
Erika Svendsen, New YorkI am grateful for all those who are working outside during this crisis and the sacrifices they have made all these days. Nature’s stage crew, so to speak. In the future, I’d like to explore ways to help strengthen our green workforce and support those within it that are most vulnerable during times of crisis.
Abdallah Tawfic, CairoPlanting is a representation of peace and hope and we should continue to encourage, support and spread it in such critical time, for the sake of our health and wellbeing. Let’s be hopeful and revive victory gardens again all over the world, let’s get back to our roots, and grow food and hope inside our cities.
Christine Thuring, VancouverI’m contemplating alternative and new ways by which to engage my energy, expertise, and love for the world. It is a bit of an existential place, which enlists the whole range of my creative and scientific faculties. If this is the new normal, where “business as usual” no longer applies, then how do I wish to contribute?
Naomi Tsur, JerusalemSince we are supposed to go no more than 500 meters from our homes, this is clearly a good time to see if we have all we need within that perimeter. A grocer’s? A small park? A school? A community garden?… Perhaps it is time to think just what is needed for a happy neighborhood and ask whether we have it.
Stéphane Verlet-Bottéro, ParisCan we, as artists, organize ourselves to inspire our institutions and societies to keep the engine on slow and never start again the machinery of neoliberal destruction? We talked long enough about politics in art. Time for action and art-as-politics.
Andreas Weber, BerlinI wonder what we will make of the insight that we are suddenly so vulnerable. I watch the glittering insects in the sun, much less numerous than some years ago behind this same window, and listen to the nightingale that plucks those insects from the twigs to feed their young. I sit in silence, until the first bat is out and shatters the pale sky with its ragged path.
Diana Wiesner, BogotáWe are the birds that make up their nest with everything they find: branches, bark, feathers, leaves, hair, and even strands of wool, any material to protect the essential: creatively reinventing what will emerge from this process of caring for the global nest. // Somos las aves que componen su nido con todo lo que encuentran: ramas, cortezas, plumas, hojas, pelos, y hasta hebras de lana, cualquier material para proteger lo esencial: reinventando creativamente lo que va a emerger de este proceso de cuidar el nido global.
Darlene Wolnik, New OrleansMy work supporting farmers’ markets across the U.S. remains very much the same. The markets are innovating contactless procedures at a furious pace: new “drive-thru” markets, ticketed entry walk-thru markets, curbside pickup, “click and collect” pre-ordering procedures. My days start early and go late, and at the end of each I wonder if I could have done more. Yet it is such hopeful work
Xin Yu, SchenzhenWill the pandemic flame urban residents’ passion to get in touch with Nature? I really hope so. Will people further respect and take care of Nature after the post-pandemic world becomes the new normal? We need to find out and do more.
Carly Ziter, MontrealI desperately miss interacting with family, friends, and colleagues in person—but I do plan to be more intentional about the choices I make, and to appreciate every family visit, conference, and chat in the hallway a little bit more as we make our way to a new normal.
David loves urban spaces and nature. He loves creativity and collaboration. He loves theatre and music. In his life and work he has practiced in all of these as, in various moments, a scientist, a climate change researcher, a land steward, an ecological practitioner, composer, a playwright, a musician, an actor, and a theatre director. David's dad told him once that he needed a back up plan, something to "fall back on". So he bought a tuba.
Introduction
We are all confined to our homes—if we are lucky (more on that later). Which is something, since most of us are “outdoor types”, “people types”.. Can we find meaning, motivation, and renewed spirit for action in this contemplative but deeply strange time? We find ourselves wondering, doubting, planning our next steps or perhaps second-guessing our last ones. We are trying to keep all the parts of lives still stuck together and not flying apart. Good luck with that. Bonne chance. Buena suerte. In bocca al lupo. सौभाग्य. בהצלחה. Boa sorte. Viel Glück. 頑張れ. Buti na lang. حظا طيبا وفقك الله (Please pardon any clumsy use of Google Translate.)
Now that we have seen how our cities around the world truly function at their most vulnerable, what possible excuse do we now have to not emerge solely committed to fixing it? Maybe in searching for a new post-Covid “normal”, we need to act on the idea that the old normal was a big part of the problem.
Perhaps we are somewhat like ascetics in caves, contemplating a potentially perfectible life outside, somewhere else and out of reach. For myself, I have been wondering how we will be changed by this experience: as people with dreams, families, and styles of behavior; and also as urban professionals.
So we, as we tend to do, gave a wide variety of people—artists to architects, scientists to planners—the following prompt: How do you imagine you might be changed by Covid, both professionally, but also personally as you negotiate a new post-virus “normal”?
In this prompt we intended to ask a professional question, but also a deeply personal one. All of us now know people personally who have been sick; many (even all?) of us know people who have died. All of us have had lives upended, lost opportunities, had careers and livelihoods set back or even wrecked.
How do we pick up the pieces? What pieces are even still available to us? Which pieces should we cast aside, and leave on the ash heap?
There are a few key threads in this collection of 58 people from 24 countries, and many hopeful responses:
We see (or can simply hear more clearly) more wildlife. Can we hold on to this and build on momentum for and the dream of greener cities for all?
New modes of communication and teaching have a lot of potential, but are also fraught. Meeting in person has real, intangible, and alchemical value. Not all of our students have the desire to learn online, and not all have the resources to do so.
Many of us are slowing down, “smelling the lilacs”, baking more bread, finding new ways to connect to others. Can contemplation and mindfulness be sustained?
Many are amazed at the clean air and reduced consumption. Can a new normal for the fight against climate change and for livability be embedded in our social actions?
Several note that after years of hearing “no you can’t change that”, or “these activities are not optional”, suddenly in a matter of days or weeks we changed fundamental ways of operating. Paraphrasing Diane Pataki below: let’s not take “no” for an answer next time. Or quoting Matt Jensen: “What else is optional” in our lives?
Let’s make sure not be too glib or tin-eared about the joy of greenery and songbirds, wonderful though they are. Most in this collection have jobs at big organizations that continue to pay salaries. Some in this collection work for small organizations or are free-lancers. Their lives are not simply changed by working at home until they go back to the office; life trajectories may be fundamentally altered. Some have lost opportunities that may not exist in the future.
We are lucky to be sheltering at home. Many beyond this collection have to go to work, brave public transportation. Or have no work at all. David Simon in this collection has two children who are emergency room physicians. (Our gratitude to them.) The New York Times and others reported recently that most new Covid cases are people who are working outside the home, such as in grocery stores. They probably don’t have a choice. Covid’s consequences seem to hit hard communities that already are challenged. For example, 70% of Covid deaths in Louisiana are African American. In Kibera, Dharavi, and other slums of the world, who knows?
We are The Nature of Cities—that is, the character of cities that we believe in: green, certainly, but also a thriving mix of communities, and immigrants, and restaurants, and performing arts, and cultural institutions, and civil society, and innovation, and diversity, and opportunities, and … people. I love cities. I fear for their immediate future and the people who live in them. Let’s remain focused on what we can now see are the fault lines and the possibilities for change in cities. As Mary Rowe says below: “now that we have seen how our cities around the world truly function at their most vulnerable, what possible excuse do we now have to not emerge solely committed to fixing it?”
Maybe in searching for a new post-Covid “normal”, we need to act on the idea that the old normal was a big part of the problem. Both personally and professionally, let’s take nothing for granted.
* * *
The banner image above is a nested necklace, jewelry by Ligia Ceballos de Wiesner, who happens to be the mother of one of our contributors here, Diana Wiesner Ceballos. (Photo by María José Velasco.) To me the piece symbolizes much of what we discuss in this roundtable: the act of nesting in our homes (our nests) during quarantine, the interconnectedness (the intricate tagle of nests) of communities, and the new life and ideas (eggs) nurtured within nests.
Pippin Anderson, a lecturer at the University of Cape Town, is an African urban ecologist who enjoys the untidiness of cities where society and nature must thrive together.
FULL BIO
Pippin Anderson
The differences in the lives of our students is stark. With everybody heading home for lock down, the somewhat levelling experience of a shared campus has gone like Cinderella’s carriage at midnight. Some get to leave the ball as they arrived, and others are left with pumpkins and rats.
The comma is used to package ideas and thoughts, to give meaning to phrases strung out across a sentence. Importantly, it also signals to the reader when and where to breathe. I recall as a child reading aloud and skipping over the commas, uncertain of their purpose, and being quite desperate for air by the end of the sentence. I like to think this pandemic is a comma in my life. It’s a pause. Don’t get me wrong, this is not a moment of idleness, of downed tools (this is no luxurious paragraph break). It is a pause that packages what came before into one entity, and similarly will give meaning to what comes after.
Professionally I have been moving all my teaching and supervision engagements to online platforms. This is a novel, and rather fun challenge in it is most basic form. I am not technologically savvy and have been on some steep learning curves. Less cheering is navigating paths with students who do not have access to internet services or devices or live in circumstances that preclude participating. The differences in the lives of our students is stark. With everybody heading home for lock down, the somewhat levelling experience of a shared campus has gone like Cinderella’s carriage at midnight. Some get to leave the ball as they arrived, and others are left with pumpkins and rats. The route ahead for these students through their degrees is at best difficult, but most likely devastating. This harsh reminder of the true South Africa, one of such gross inequity, is certainly reason to pause for thought. This is something to be tackled with greater conviction into the future. I hope the second half of this sentence has healing, and optimism.
To be at home in lock down with my family has been a pleasure. My husband is a delightful office companion, and my children drift into our office to chat, share an idea (did you know Genghis Khan has 16 million male offspring?), or to ask a question (can I tie-dye the bedsheets?) and then bumble off to get on with school work (we hope). Lunches have a holiday atmosphere of bread and cheese in the sun. I have had the time to notice the daily passage of light through my house at this time of year. Like other parts of the world with the muted city we hear birds as we never have before. I am aware this is not everyone’s experience of being home in lockdown and count myself lucky. It’s most certainly a pause, and one to be relished. We all know what lies ahead will be difficult to navigate. This brief time however will give us happy memories and familial resilience. We are certainly drawing breath for what is to come.
I hope the second half of my sentence will be slower, more thoughtful, and less cluttered than the first half. I hope it has resolution in it, healing, and optimism
Isabelle Anguelovski is a Senior Researcher at the Institute for Environmental Science and Technology at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. She is a social scientist trained in urban and environmental planning and coordinator of the research line Cities and Environmental Justice.
Isabelle Anguelovski and Panagiota Kotsila
The balance between keeping but delaying community engagement meetings, moving them online, or cancelling them all together, will be some of the many difficult decisions we will have to make in the near future.
One most recent and direct impact we have had in our practice is the need to rethink and cancel multi-stakeholder meetings we were preparing as researchers and academics from the Barcelona Lab for Urban Environmental Justice and Sustainability on the topic of creating more just and sustainable cities, and which were going to take place in Barcelona during spring-summer 2020.
One of them, focused on ongoing urban socio-environmental conflicts and struggles, was originally planned for March 19, 2020. The event was going to bring together activist platforms in the city who are working to address real estate speculation and large-scale redevelopment in their perspective neighborhoods while, at the same time, fighting for greener and sustainable neighborhoods for long-time residents – rather than for visitors, tourists, or high-income residents. Our idea as conveners was to reflect with participants on the common issues they are facing and to strategize on possible alliances and coalitions. Our meeting was going to be supported by short videos that filmmaker Alberto Bougleux was in the process of filming about each neighborhood struggle. Needless to say, both the event and the videos have been postponed for later this summer. Because of the topic of the event and the types of activists—vulnerable residents, local groups within one city—the idea of moving the meeting online is not in order. The challenge here lies in being able to grasp how the epidemic has changed activists’ priorities and abilities to participate amidst a process of recovering from a pandemic, while also in maintaining a thematic focus that is relevant, as the timeliness of activist oriented events is key to their meaningful outcomes.
The second event was a European wide Arena event in Barcelona, planned for June 4th and 5th 2020, which would bring together academics, urban planners, practitioners, and civic groups from across Europe and thus invite a transversal (cross-domain, transdisciplinary, intersectional) dialogue on the manifestations and drivers of urban injustice in the context of sustainability planning. Some of the questions on the table have been: How does racialized or ethnically exclusionary urbanization create inequalities in access to green amenities? How does tokenistic participation in urban planning reproduce exclusion in planning more sustainable and equitable food systems? How does urban regeneration create new inequalities in planning sustainable neighborhoods and eco-districts?
For this event, organized within the framework of the UrbanA EU project, the greater uncertainty surrounding international travel, even within Europe, for the next 3-6 months, has prompted us to transform it into a two-day series of small webinars (Agenda available here). The event will thus host already registered participants and hopefully welcome additional participants who might not have been able to participate before (due to time or travel restrictions) but now might find renewed opportunity to attend and—and can now apply online.
Apart from the different type of interaction that an online event can bring (and this restrictions in building connections between our participants and Community of Practice), an important caveat here is that people will probably be “Zoomed out” by June 2020 and thus might be discouraged by the prospect of online meetings. Our plan is to have highly interactive, short webinars, with concrete outputs, rather than long online sessions. We also intend to invest quite some time in engaging participants with the ideas and the people that will be “present” in each online conversation.
The balance between keeping but delaying community engagement meetings, moving them online, or cancelling them all together, will be some of the many difficult decisions we will have to make in the near future.
Panagiota Kotsila has a PhD in Development Studies and is a postdoctoral researcher at ICTA-UAB and the Barcelona Lab for Urban Environmental Justice and Sustainability (BCNUEJ). Her research examines the unequal distribution of health risks and how the very concepts of disease, health and well-being are constructed, mobilised and interpreted through and for power.
Janice Astbury is a Research Associate at the University of Sheffield where she is working on the Breathing Infrastructures project undertaking action research related to green infrastructure, air quality, wellbeing and connecting schools with urban nature in Buenos Aires.
Janice Astbury
I hope that many people around the world are enjoying the sounds of voices and birdsong, and the experience of cleaner air flowing into their homes, and will want this to continue.
I arrived in Buenos Aires on March 3rd. That was the day that the first case of Covid-19 was identified here. I came to collaborate with colleagues at the University of Buenos Aires working on green infrastructure in schoolyards, with a goal of reducing the concentration of air pollutants that reach children, and also generating other benefits associated with greening and enhancing nearby nature for children to interact with. I had barely got started when the national quarantine began. Today is day 40.
Street trees of Buenos Aires. Photo: Janice Astbury
I was lucky to find somewhere to live in the neighbourhood of Palermo. The first things I noticed were the tall beautiful street trees, the balconies from which people could interact with the street, and the array of small local shops and cafes. The next things I noticed were the high volume of traffic on my residential street, the noise it created, and the exhaust fumes that seemed to flow directly into my second floor apartment. Sitting on my balcony felt like sitting on the side of a motorway and I soon stopped doing it.
Now I sit on the balcony to work most mornings and enjoy the immersion in the street life, beginning with the custodians of the various apartment buildings chatting to one another and the swish of their wet brooms as they clean the pavement outside their buildings. I think how nice it would be if they were also watering gardens. The high-end buildings across the street feature only a few stalks of bamboo in pots—one arrangement is in a glass case.
Post-green planting. Photo: Janice Astury.
Later come the deliveries, I like the ones from the local shops where staff push shopping carts up the middle of the street. Less appealing is the daily visit from the massive truck delivering bottled water. I’m not sure about this “essential” service in an area with perfectly good tap water. I think one of the important things to come out of this experience is thinking about what’s essential, as governments all over the world deliberate on what should be included in necessities and what special permissions should be allowed. Allowing access to green space and nature is continuing to challenge many countries (including this one) and I am hoping that accessible nature will come to be seen as essential, not only during crises.
Having come here to work on a project with a focus on air quality and its impact on children’s health and development, I am thinking about the widely presumed essentialness of driving. Currently, if people want to drive somewhere, they have to fill in an online declaration stating which of the allowable exceptions justifies their movements during this health emergency.
By day 9 of the quarantine, air pollution in Buenos Aires was halved. If this can work to confront the Covid-19 health emergency, why shouldn’t it work to combat the greater illness and death caused by air pollution? Some people would still drive in the city but it would be considered exceptional, they would need to justify their travel by car. Rather than being the obvious choice, it would be the last resort. This will involve, among other things, maintaining online work practices, facilitating more active transport, and adapting public transport so that people feel it is safe to use.
I hope that some cities in the world will show the way by applying the sorts of systems they have put in place for the coronavirus pandemic to tackling the air quality and climate change crises. I hope that I myself will continue my work with greater confidence that big, rapid, creative interventions that change urban life for the better are possible. And I hope that many people around the world are enjoying the sounds of voices and birdsong, and the experience of cleaner air flowing into their homes, and will want this to continue.
Notes:
[1] Pollution in Buenos Aires went down to half due to the quarantine “La contaminación en Buenos Aires bajó a la mitad por la cuarentena” Clarin, 29 March 2020
[2] In 2016 (last WHO global assessment) 91% of the world population was living in places where the WHO air quality guidelines levels were not met and ambient air pollution was estimated to cause 4.2 million premature deaths worldwide. (WHO, Ambient air pollution: a global assessment of exposure and burden of disease, 2016)
Essential service? Photo: Janice Astury.
Carmen Bouyer is a French environmental artist and designer based in Paris.
Carmen Bouyer
I will keep dancing half an hour a day on Zoom with people from all over the world, and join the direct local actions that bring wonder, trust and care among people and among species, learning from the ways of trees and the songs of bees, together.
There is a place in the village where I live that beautifully embodies what I wish for the post Covid-19 era. It is a public orchard, imagined about two years ago by Nathalie, a woman living here in a small village by the Seine river, about one hour South of Paris. Last November, the first trees were planted in a great community gathering on a land belonging to the municipality. Pear, Peach, Plum, Apple, Cherry trees, blackcurrant, gooseberry bushes, borage, cosmos, rowan, etc. all bought and planted collectively by the town’s inhabitants. The orchard belongs to no one and to everybody. It is a collective good, a common that has been reclaimed. Open to all, everyone can grow food for everyone. Orchestrated as a food forest, this urban edible landscape is a space of freedom, conviviality and pedagogy. There, villagers can learn how to plant roots, how to grow food for strangers and for themselves, and how to respect the soil and biodiversity that enable us all to do so. This place embodies collectivity among humans and non humans. Indeed a third of the garden is wild and looks just like how it was when the orchard group came, and it will stay so. As my life both slows down with the quarantine and is shaken by the daily news of Covid-19 related sanitary and economical crisis, I feel the deep urge to participate in such communal initiatives. Not only to grow food as it is vital that we reclaim our knowledge in that sacred field, but also to grow profound intimacy with the earth and the local community. This time asks us to practice deep self care and in such deep care for the world, and this is political. We are experiencing how deeply we are all inter-related, intertwined in the fabric of a world that we all share. I feel the call to be more radical in this statement today, as work projects might become more scarce, time opens to nurture these relationships with the natural world, with neighbors of all kinds, with old time friends, dear ones and the unknown. I know that art will bring poetry, colors and balm to this humbling period of collective uncertainty. It will enable us to experience togetherness in ways so new and old, and accompany a much needed transition to more grounded ways of life. I will definitely try to participate in this movement, using the creative skills I developed since many years, but with more energy because of how pressing this need is now. I will keep dancing half an hour a day on Zoom with people from all over the world, and join the direct local actions that bring wonder, trust and care among people and among species, learning from the ways of trees and the songs of bees, together.
“Le verger citoyen”, a communal orchard supported by both the municipality and the locale association La Manufacture de Samois, in Samois-sur-Seine, France. Photo: Carmen Bouyer
Lindsay K. Campbell is a research social scientist with the USDA Forest Service. Her current research explores the dynamics of urban politics, stewardship, and sustainability policymaking.
Lindsay Campbell
For those of us privileged to be sheltering at home, the crisis has created a new sense of simplicity and attention to place. May we carry that forward wherever the future takes us.
I find myself hesitant to write this post, to say anything for public consumption just yet, in the midst of so much rapid change and crisis. When time has become so fluid—is it Monday or Thursday?—yet one week ago feels like an eternity. Speculating about the “post-virus” era feels like begging to offer something dated and irrelevant. Most of all, I feel so privileged to be salaried, housed, healthy, and home with my family. But at the same time my life is completely transformed, as are all of our lives. So I write this dispatch in the midst of the “during-virus, non-normal” moment, from a quiet corner in Red Hook, Brooklyn—proximate but worlds away from the epicenter here in New York City.
Over the years, my thinking and writing has focused on reciprocal relationships of care between people and their environments. Along with three of my colleagues (Erika Svensden, Michelle Johnson, and Laura Landau), we started a collective journaling effort of our observations of our changing experiences with nature, stewardship, civil society, and environmental governance in the time of COVID-19, all throughlines in our pre-existing research. The effort began with a series of text exchanges and then a shared google document we started on March 13. We have been writing near-daily since then from our homes across Brooklyn and Queens, sharing our reflections, photos, links: messages of hope and sadness that we encounter in our virtual and physical communities. The process has been deeply therapeutic for me and I think will feed our research for years to come. On a personal level, it led me to the story I’d like to share today.
Lilacs are one of my favorite plants and a wonderful signal of spring and warmer days ahead. Last week I saw some images online from the (closed) Brooklyn Botanic Garden of their beautiful lilac collection and it made me have a visceral yearning to see and smell the plant. I knew we had some in Red Hook, but I couldn’t recall their location. So I texted my plant-savvy friend and neighbor, Gillian, to ask if she knew some lilac whereabouts and she immediately responded, telling me she had smelled some yesterday just a few blocks from where I live. So my husband, daughter and I immediately walked over to visit them; and it was certainly the highlight of my day.
I think this vignette is revealing of how I—and perhaps many others—are experiencing nature in the time of COVID-19. I braid together virtual communities (the botanic garden post), personal social networks aided by technology (the text message exchange), and embodied experiences with my immediate family in my hyper-local environment. I tune into the simple beauty and sensuous experience of nature. I slow down and move at my toddler’s pace. I don’t mind if it takes me 20 minutes to walk one block to my neighborhood park, because I literally have nowhere else to go. My daughter has learned the words daffodil, tulip, and dandelion (or candylion, to her); she logrolls in the grass, because the playgrounds are closed. I walk and walk and walk, grateful to live just a block from the harbor, where I can smell the salt spray and watch the setting sun.
I appreciate this keener observation of our socio-natural world and I know that others around the globe are tuning in as well—to birdsong, to the wind on their face, to the sun shining through their window, to the sound of applause and cowbells from our neighbors—separate but together—cheering for the frontline workers. For those of us privileged to be sheltering at home, the crisis has created a new sense of simplicity and attention to place. May we carry that forward wherever the future takes us.
Sarah Charlop-Powers is the Executive Director of the Natural Areas Conservancy, with a background in land use planning, economics and environmental management.
Sarah Charlop-Powers
While we’re all navigating through this extremely stressful—and sometimes downright scary—moment, I can’t imagine what my life, and the lives of all New Yorkers, would be like without our local parks.
When I present about the work of the Natural Areas Conservancy, I frequently lead with two research findings: NYC’s forests are surprisingly healthy—85% of canopy trees are native species; and 50% of New Yorkers primarily rely on NYC’s parks for recreation and access to nature. New York City’s 7,300 acres of forested natural areas are a critical form of nearby nature. And, they require financial and community investments to ensure their longevity and to continue providing significant social and environmental benefits.
While I often speak about these important points, COVID-19 has made them even more significant and real for me personally. In March, as I shed my everyday routine—like my subway commute from Brooklyn to Manhattan; bus rides with my son to preschool; Saturday morning trips to the farmers market, followed by muffins on a park bench and a visit to the local playground—I started feeling as if life in our very dense urban neighborhood was unbearable.
As my wife and I began splitting our days into a relay of childcare and working from home, I started a new daily ritual: visiting natural areas with our three-year-old. I anxiously put on our masks, and as we ride the elevator from the fourteenth floor to the lobby I remind my son not to touch anything. When we arrive at a park and take that first step into the woods, we both exhale. During a recent hike in Pelham Bay Park in the Bronx, we spotted a skunk, a herd of deer, and an eagle catching a fish. In Forest Park in Queens, my son spent 30 minutes throwing sticks into a pond. And in Brooklyn’s Marine Park, we wandered through the park’s shrubby maritime forest and experienced the thrill of exiting the woods onto a smooth beach. Together, we are experiencing the simple pleasures that come from spending time in nature.
Right now, many families are relying on their local parks for respite, breathing room, and relaxation. With playgrounds and recreational facilities closed, we are seeing increased visitation in our natural areas, not only in New York City, but in cities around the world.
The lines between my personal and professional identities have now blurred. I am experiencing first hand the importance of local parks and natural areas—not simply in a “nice to have” context, but out of necessity. And while we’re all navigating through this extremely stressful—and sometimes downright scary—moment, I can’t imagine what my life, and the lives of all New Yorkers, would be like without our local parks.
Katrine Claassens' paintings reflect her interest in climate change, urban ecology, and internet memes. She also works as a science, policy and climate change communicator for universities, think tanks, and governments in South Africa and Canada.
Katrine Claassens
The pandemic teaches us this: rapid, coherent change is possible. It has also laid bare that there is much to be actively dismantled, and much to be actively built.
I write this on the day I was meant to be hanging my paintings in a Cape Town gallery, an event now indefinitely postponed, as so many things have been.
Here in Montreal, my home studio window looks out onto Parc Laurier. With this view, I have been drawn with a cord of tenderness into the intricate politics of neighbourhood cats, the love between a chickadee couple, the diligent industry of iridescent black birds nesting in a nearby tree, the aesthetically pleasing daily walk of the man in the red coat with the dalmatian, and the ceaseless antics of the squirrels.
This year has been one of partings without end: one billion animals dead in the Australian fires, swarms of locusts in Africa on a scale never seen in living memory, mass bleaching of the coral reefs, the warmest January on record. And now, with COVID-19, partings of a different kind, that rob us nonetheless of the same precious thing: of life and of a map for the future.
In this context of extreme ecological collapse and human despair, I have found some comfort in the stories of nature “rebounding” as documented by locked-down urban residents from their windows around the world. Shy but adventurous wild boars, coyotes, and deer wandering the empty streets; skies clearing to reveal faraway mountain ranges not seen from industrial cities in a lifetime; the canal waters of Venice almost crystalline (with rumours of dolphins!). It is breathtaking, the sudden clarity, the speed, the utter brilliance of the blue, and green, and the rough fur of the wild against our city surfaces.
And these visions of a different world are a powerful thing. While COVID-19 restrictions are unlikely to meaningfully move the needle on climate change and its attendant horrors, these stories offer a peephole to another kind of city. One that is wilder, one that is allowed to go to seed, one with cleaner water and skies. Once you have seen the mountains, you will know to miss them.
And through this eyelet of possibility comes a lesson, a warning, a flare. The pandemic teaches us this: rapid, coherent change is possible. It has also laid bare that there is much to be actively dismantled, and much to be actively built. For guidance on how to do this we can ask the questions that a gardener asks at the time when seasons change. What will we bury, and put to sleep? What seeds will we save? When will it be safe to sow? What wild seeds have travelled to our soil on the wind, and lie dormant waiting to be weeded or to delight?
Down in the park, I found the body of a young squirrel, small and sleek, under a tree. I marked its place with the most ancient of human writing, pushing sticks into the frozen ground, setting a circle of stones around it. An act to bear witness to life at a time when life seems so worth witnessing, and as a call for dog walkers and gentle children to observe the perfection of its paws and the almond shape of its closed eyes.
M'Lisa works to assemble connections and collaboration between diverse groups in cities. She is also Associate Director of The Nature of Cities.
M’Lisa Colbert
I am confronted with how much I need trees, grass, and fresh air to remain a sane human being. Being stuck between the four walls of my apartment all day feels foreign and unnatural.
I am changed by it. Everything in my small apartment looks more precious to me than it did a few months ago. I keep thinking about how to be careful with everything—the dishwasher, brushing my teeth, not wasting any food—because finding a technician, taking a trip to the dentist or risking it at the grocery store are all incredibly difficult and dangerous things to do right now. I feel constrained, uncomfortable, and anxious, and yet I am also ashamed of this because the majority of people around the world live like this on a daily basis.
My best friend sent me a GIF from Venezuela that asks of the rest of the world: “Oh, rationing, first time?”
It also makes me think about arguments I’ve made for increasing density in cities. Let’s build up. But how much do we build? And where? Is there a point where it because unsafe? I live in an area of Montreal that is food poor. They built condos, and leased main strip commercial space to expensive restaurants and boutique clothing stores to build out marketing campaigns for realtors that raised housing prices, but groceries stores and other practical services are scarce. This is ordinarily a heavily contested urban planning problem we argue about in our community, but the pandemic is highlighting just how critical it is, and will be for the future, to mix public services and access to diverse services in each borough in a city.
Mostly though, I am confronted with how much I need trees, grass, and fresh air to remain a sane human being. Being stuck between the four walls of my apartment all day feels foreign and unnatural. If this isn’t a stark reminder of just how much a part of nature humans are, I am not sure anything will push us to remember. I remain hopeful though, that this just might be the thing to do it.
Marcus is a sustainability scientist and his research covers a wide range of human-environment interconnectivity, environmental risk and resilience, transdisciplinary methodologies and novel ecosystems.
Marcus Collier
“The Chinese use two brush strokes to write the word “crisis”; one brush stroke stands for danger, the other for opportunity. In a crisis, be aware of the danger—but recognize the opportunity.” John F. Kennedy, April, 1959
I have a new resolve to overcome my despondency and try harder to find a means to engage urban communities with wild nature. In this case, the first step is literally on the doorstep!
While the first part of this quotation is now recognised as a mistranslation followed by a misinterpretation of Chinese characters, in my opinion the second part is more relevant as an aphorism for me during the COVID crisis. As an ecologist and sustainability scientist, I am well aware of how crisis or disturbance in an ecosystem can negatively impact some species, even to the point of extinction, but also provide opportunities for others. We live in a world of both natural disturbances and, as we all know, significant anthropogenic disturbances. Cities are, for me, the ultimate of anthropogenic disturbances. Their presence and operation does not permit “natural” processes to adapt and/or recover at the same rate as would historically have occurred, and therefore cities are a continual “danger” and “crisis”, to follow JFKs sentiments. This is the part of my work that fascinates me, and this is why I am a more than a little obsessed with urban novel ecosystems! While urban areas of all sizes and scales are increasingly dominating our global ecosystem, within them we observe many differing life forms coping, adapting, and in many cases, thriving. So while I am “trapped” indoors during the COVID crisis, I feel myself wanting to emulate these urban life forms and forcing myself to cope, adapt, and (I hope) thrive. You see, my mission to understand and quantify urban novel ecosystems has been faltering lately, and I have been growing increasingly despondent particularly with my inability to attract funding and interest for creating a citizen science approach to recording the effects of urban novel ecosystems on human behaviour.
Photo: Marcus Collier
However, during the COVID lockdown period I have noticed a significant increase on observations of nature in cities with a plethora of new websites, social medial feeds, and mainstream media observations of nature in cities. The absence of large numbers of people and vehicular traffic is permitting many animals to be brazen; unashamedly wandering through what were once busy streets. It should be said here that it is not the case that there are more animals or more bird song, however it is the case that we are better able to observe them now that the noisy, chaotic background of human activity has been removed and we are forced to “stop and smell the roses”. I love that people are posting their observations, some of them for the first time, and this will make my job a lot easier when I am trying to convey the diversity and resilience of species in urban environments. What is even more exciting is that urban ecologists are being provided, free of charge, with a growing data resource complete with images and geolocations. We are being given a snapshot of what cities could be like when nature is permitted to do its own thing, and thus we have more opportunities for generating theory and measuring urban ecological processes and characteristics. Indeed, this data resource could be an opportunity, in combination with data from transport, air and water quality, and so on, for convincing urban communities, planners and policy-makers of the values of adopting urban regreening strategies. Moreover, this is possibly our best opportunity to definitively prove to our fellow humans that by changing our behaviour we can have greener and healthier cities, and that these greener cities will make us healthier in mind and body; yes, we can cope, adapt and thrive!
Photo: Marcus Collier
Wait, I’m beginning to think that COVID might be doing me out of a job! Well no. With all sorts of tiny wildernesses appearing on walls, or in cracks in the pavement, or in the unmanaged corners of parking lots and parks, for me personally this crisis is providing an opportunity for some of the poorest members of our society, who perhaps cannot afford to visit a national park some distance from the city, to experience what wild nature really looks like. I have been speaking of the potential values of urban novel ecosystems for many years, and finally I am starting to see people voluntarily commenting on the emergent wildness of cities; emergent nature in cities! So, I am excited by the prospect of being able to demonstrate the values of urban novel ecosystems “in the flesh” as it were, and this has provided me with a new resolve to overcome my despondency and try harder to find a means to engage urban communities with wild nature. In this case, the first step is literally on the doorstep!
Paul Currie is a Director of the Urban Systems Unit at ICLEI Africa. He is a researcher of African urban resource and service systems, with interest in connecting quantitative analysis with storytelling and visual elicitation.
Paul Currie
Covid has surfaced a key reality for me: choice. I will be paying more attention to how cities increase the promise and attainment of choice for their citizens, who are so often restricted by cost, geography or demography, to one option.
I am caught in tension between two hopes: I hope everything can return to normal: that no one suffers further loss of life and loved ones. And I hope that nothing is ever the same again: that everyone’s calls to action for a transformed post-covid society will bear fruit.
Covid has shown how quickly we can dismantle our globally interdependent society. It has shown the disastrous consequences of negligent leaders, and offered the basis for solidarity and pride. It has shown the stark differences between what we consider to be necessities. It has shown how meaningless these words are when cash flow stops and we can’t feed ourselves and our dependents. And unfortunately, it has reminded us that true commitment and action is so often dependent on a crisis.
Have we not for decades been demanding radical transformative action to realize social justice, environmental restoration, and equity across multiple realities or expressions? How do we get the powers that be to acknowledge the slow crises? How do we get them to acknowledge the crises of climate change, structural inequality, racism, gender-based exclusion and violence, child stunting and environmental degradation? I am moved by our president in South Africa, who has issued the first call to a nation since 1994. I am moved by his acknowledgement of the failings to achieve an equal post-apartheid society. I hope now that when the declared national disaster for Covid is lifted, he immediately declares another national disaster that has been decades in the making, and coordinates action to address structural, rather than surface, ills.
In my work, I trace the hidden flows in cities that we tend to take for granted. These are the flows of resources that support our lives: where does our water flow? How does food grow and find us? How do we power our homes? And whither our waste be gone? A crisis shows these ignorances plain and none more so now than food and mobility. I have ever argued that some of the best infrastructure systems are based on people, and we see now the great losses as people are halted, as workplaces are closed, as informal workers are deemed non-essential, as cities grind to a halt. But we also see the new infrastructures of solidarity emerge as communities share supplies and food. In the imaginaries of future cities, I hope we don’t lose sight of the importance of people in shaping their homes, communities, and societies.
Covid has surfaced a key reality for me: choice. I will be paying more attention to how cities increase the promise and attainment of choice for their citizens, who are so often restricted by cost, geography or demography, to one option. In our efforts to improve food, water and energy security, how are we considering choice and agency? The city of the future lays options before all citizens, regardless of circumstance.
Samarth Das is an Urban Designer and Architect based in Mumbai. Having practiced professionally in Ahmedabad, Mumbai, and subsequently in New York City, his work focuses on engaging actively in both public as well as private sectors—to design articulate shared spaces within cities that promote participation and interaction amongst people.
Samarth Das
Being locked up in the comfort of our homes is certainly a privilege. Social distancing in a time like this is a luxury afforded by a few—over 55% of Mumbai city’s 13 million inhabitants live in slums where 6-7 people share a single room.
The Covid-19 pandemic has certainly brought normal life to a grinding halt. Following the spread of the virus worldwide, the Indian government under Prime Minister Modi took the bold step of enforcing a nationwide lockdown—initially for a period of 3 weeks which has since then been extended for another 18 days. India has done surprising well so far and the numbers speak for themselves.
This duration of the lockdown has offered a lot of time to reflect and critically think about work and other daily engagements. We all certainly have found ways to ensure that the work flow of our offices are not too hampered. As an architectural practice such as ours, it was difficult to cope and manage design work. But this was overcome through adapting several modes of communication and a certain up-skilling that individuals have undertaken. This testing time has certainly thrown light on finding efficient ways of communication, collaboration and co-producing work. Human desire to succeed in tough situations prevails, and with it brings copious amounts of positivity and hope.
But being locked up in the comfort of our homes is certainly a privilege. Social distancing in a time like this is a luxury afforded by a few. Over 55% of Mumbai city’s 13 million inhabitants live in slums where 6-7 people share a single room in most cases. The fate of daily wage workers who live hand to mouth is truly deplorable. With industries and businesses coming to a standstill, these workers are completely cut off from their daily source of income. Despite the state’s efforts in providing food and water to this vast and mobile people, are isolated, stranded in cities with no way home to the comfort of their loved ones. It does hit one hard.
We are all hyper aware of the pandemic at this moment in time, but the fact is that a majority of the urban poor in our country live in and encounter pandemic like scenarios on a daily basis with no access to formal housing, affordable healthcare, stable employment or any other sense of social security. It has certainly made me think about how we utilise our resources be it water, energy, produce, products, etc.
The Covid-19 pandemic has paralysed the world economy and taken countless lives. It has been close to 100 years since the devastating Spanish flu of 1918, but the frequency of such epidemics is bound to increase as we move forward. As an architect, it certainly fuels my drive to pursue large scale affordable housing as well as promote the development of accessible amenities and open public spaces for the urban masses. The general quality of everyday living must improve for the vast majorities who are often neglected in our development agenda. The change must happen now. A structural change in the way we approach policies and strategies that promote equitable distribution of resources, housing, healthcare, education and livelihoods must be taken up immediately.
The silver lining amidst this crisis has been the respite that our natural environment is receiving. With no human activity, our beaches and waterfronts are cleaner than even before, coastal marine life has come to the fore, the air is the cleanest it has been in decades and the continuous noise of cars has been replaced by the swelling sounds of bird calls. Nature is getting its much deserved break, albeit temporary. What will be the new ‘normal’ we aspire to achieve once this is behind us?
Gillian is the Manager of Spatial Planning – Research & Development team within the Development Plan Group at Glasgow City Council.
Gillian Dick
We definitely need to take the opportunity to build back better, but we also need to pause and not rush when we hit the reset button. We need the right rebuilding, in the right place, at the right time, for the right communities.
Looking Back to discover the new normal
It crept up slowly, the tension building. Work on Friday 13th March was relatively normal. Work on Monday 16th March was not. The train was crowded and uncomfortable. People looked worried. We were still in “herd immunity” policy. Social distancing had started and we were playing a waiting game. By the time I went home we were heading towards lock down. A week later we were there. We offered a collective sigh of relief. Then into how to we make this work. Our IT systems were not ready and some of our team members found themselves in full on hack mode. It took us a week to get our planning service up and running again. Unlike our colleagues dealing with Parks, Roads and Environmental Health, we quickly discovered that there was lots of work that we could do from home. Planning applications still need to be processed; government consultations still need to be responded to and, as Planners, we started to think about how to get our communities back on their feet once we come out of lockdown. The sheer tenacity and resilience of my team astounds me every day
Firth of Clyde—Home. Photo: Gillian Dick
I revisited a set of essays that were published after the Christchurch earthquake in 2011. They were grouped under a set of headings that to my mind builds a framework for the future and makes me think differently about what the new normal of urban planning will be and where modern British Town Planning came from:
Making Plans: We’ve always made spatial plans. The idea goes right the way back to the UK response to the Cholera epidemic in 1848. The first planned places came from the first Public health act that recognised that in order to be healthy people need space.
Selling the plan: The Boar War exposed the poor health of recruits and led directly to the first UK planning legislation in 1909.
Rewriting the rules: The idea to plan for places grew following the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918, which led to a greater emphasis on the need to have open space within housing areas and on to the garden city movement.
Considering the common good: The devastation of WW2 led to the 1947 Planning Act that viewed unregulated market forces as a threat to public health.
Thinking Big: Post war urban planning sought to rethink and reimagine communities that were fit for modern living
Acting Small: Gradually planning and health disconnected. But communities started to think that there was a better way. Community empowerment and activism started to grow.
Meeting in the middle: Covid-19 is changing everything. Are our resilient communities still going to be there? Is a new community spirit emerging?
Building back better: In lockdown people need space both within and around buildings that they can call their own. Balconies, roof gardens and more generous building space requirements are needed.
Reimaging recovery: There is a new normal coming for our communities. A new way of being and a new way of living. Will we embrace a more locally connected world? Will we return to the old normal?
Covid-19 has upended all my normal routines. I’m optimistic that the new normal creates a more resilient; equitable place where more people work flexibly and in different ways. I don’t think any of the folk that I work with think that we will go back to where we were four weeks ago. It’s an opportunity to reset, reinvent, and reimagine. We definitely need to take the opportunity to build back better, but we also need to pause and not rush when we hit the reset button. We need the right rebuilding, in the right place, at the right time, for the right communities.
Writer, architect, urban evolutionary, founding convener of Urban Ecology Australia and a recognised ‘ecocity pioneer’. Paul has championed ecological cities for years but has become disenchanted with how such a beautiful concept can be perverted and misinterpreted – ‘Neom' anyone? Paul is nevertheless working on an artistic/publishing project with the working title ‘The Wild Cities’ coming soon to a crowd-funding site near you!
Paul Downton
COVID-19 has forced changes that have given nature a breathing space, but I’m betting when the capitalist engine of destruction returns to “normal” it will raid the stores of nature like a selfish bully in a candy shop. It won’t be pretty.
“Let us talk, I will isolate myself.”
The title and all other quotations are from “The Machine Stops” by E.M. Forster, first published in 1909.
The usual routines of my wife and I are minimally affected by the pandemic as I work from home and have long relied on electronic communications. The dog gets a walk on the beach every day but I no longer plan to do anything else. In a world turned on its head my frustrations are trivial. But I’m angry.
Australia has dealt quite well with COVID-19 but we hold a fraction of the world population. Trump wants to sacrifice lives to rescue the US economy whilst making “democracy” and “freedom” meaningless globally. America is fighting a bizarre civil war and I’m wondering when “the Hunger Games” will start in earnest…
Imagine, if you can, a small room…
In Forster’s prescient 111 year old story “The Machine Stops”, Vashti lives a static life in a single room, nevertheless, like an avid Facebook user:
She knew several thousand people…
Dealing with the pandemic would be unthinkable without the internet.
…in certain directions human intercourse had advanced enormously…
COVID-19 has accelerated changes already underway. Our doctor offers phone consultations and our grandchildren are attending school virtually; families are zooming in to teleconferencing…
“I see something like you in this plate, but I do not see you.”
We accept being isolated in order to talk to others, we accept a simulacrum of someone’s image on a screen and mechanical reconstitution of their voice as if they were the real thing.
The clumsy system of public gatherings had been long since abandoned; neither Vashti nor her audience stirred from their rooms.
Public space has been central to urban civilisation but life in personal bubbles mediated by machines is part of modern urbanism and pre-COVID-19 we were already abandoning meetings in the flesh.
She made the room dark and slept; she awoke and made the room light; she ate and exchanged ideas with her friends, and listened to music and attended lectures; she made the room dark and slept… Those funny old days, when men went for a change of air instead of changing the air in their rooms!
Air-conditioning and artificial light have separated urban generations from reliance on diurnal cycles and a sense of how the earth moves through space has been eroded to a point of irrelevance for much of our industrial civilisation. COVID-19 seems likely to exacerbate this condition. As we connect on-line, we disconnect from the planet. It becomes harder to understand the poison gas we can’t see and that other great invisible force pressing on our civlisation. Global heating will take many more lives than this pandemic, and there’s no quick fix.
“Have you been on the surface of the earth since we spoke last?”
Few people experience anything wild in a world of industrialised civilisation. Children ape their elders thinking that farmland is “nature”. Many will never stand on the pre-industrial surface of the earth.
And if Kuno himself, flesh of her flesh, stood close beside her at last, what profit was there in that? She was too well-bred to shake him by the hand.
Tactility is part of being human but now it’s anti-social and dangerous. Social distancing, facilitated by reliance on the virtual, presages a disaster in terms of healthy human evolution. How is it not possible to feel angry and worried about this? Is it just too “abstract”?
“You know that we have lost the sense of space. We say ‘space is annihilated’, but we have annihilated not space, but the sense thereof. We have lost a part of ourselves.”
Like many of us, I’m reviewing assumptions about the way physical social space functions in our cities. I don’t have any answers yet. Then there’s our relationship to the rest of nature. COVID-19 has forced changes that have given nature a breathing space, but I’m betting when the capitalist engine of destruction returns to “normal” it will raid the stores of nature like a selfish bully in a candy shop. It won’t be pretty. But it’s hard to be an optimist as the Trumps and Bolsanaros make things unnecessarily worse and the world outside our “western” universe isn’t looking too good, with estimates of 3 million or more likely to die in the next 12 months in Africa alone.
Forster’s story doesn’t end well but allows a glimmer of hope, with others “…hiding in the mist and the ferns until our civilisation stops…”.
Emilio Fantin is an artist working in Italy on multidisciplinary research.
He teaches at the Politecnico, Architecture, University of Milan, and acts as coordinator of the “Osservatorio Public Art”.
Emilio Fantin
Talking about coronavirus, egoism needs to be switched into solidarity and sharing, but this cannot be done as a reaction to contagion fear or daily body count. It has to be the result of a long path towards the achievement of a new existential consciousness.
Many people define this pandemia as a war. If you look at what has been happening since second world war, I would say that nothing is going to change in a short time. In Italy, after the first moment of depression, we had the economic boom. That meant the improvement of health, poverty, and social conditions due to the circulation of a huge amount of money, as a consequence of reconstruction of houses, streets, bridges. A new man arose, apparently happier, but more cynical and more individualistic than before. So, if you look at the long term situation, you can understand that war didn’t bring a real change in ethics and moral. What happened, was exactly the contrary.
Talking about coronavirus, egoism needs to be switched into solidarity and sharing, but this cannot be done as a reaction to contagion fear or daily body count. It has to be the result of a long path towards the achievement of a new existential consciousness.
Many reflections and essays deal about the relationship between chemical and electromagnetic pollution and coronavirus. Some others speculate on how to reinforce our immunity system, but all conclusions bring to the same result: respect humans and not humans, love nature, take care of the environment, be sympathetic.
That’s why the new urbanism has to be thought as a care for the environment. The design of the city has to switch from a logistic and pragmatic vision to the consideration of those aspects which balance broken down rhythms and neurotic habits of city life. Time and space cannot be seen only in term of mobility and economic value, but we need to consider both in term of preserving human health end preventing possible diseases (I am not talking only about virus, but also about neurotic behavior and poisoning). We have to start such a process from below, reducing the number of our cars, limiting the use of our smart technologies, asking for new cycle lines, walking in our cities. The immunity system of the city will improve its force which depends on its inhabitants’ behavior. To fund healthcare doesn’t only mean to build more hospitals and provide new technologies. This approach comes from considering the view point of the “effects”. What should be done is taking into account also the “causes” (which mean low life quality). Rather than using the term urbanism we might find a more appropriate word in order of re-thinking the city as a living organism. If we don’t want this organism to get sick, we should ask politics to limit private interests in the building industry, to avoid the abuse of power into water business and not to break the balance between natural and artificial elements inside the city.
It looks simple, but it is extremely complex. Why? Because of profit, private interests, economic strategies, political conveniences? Yes of course, but it is also a matter of our action, in term of considering ourselves as a part of a “city organism”, by feeling its skin, heart and brain.
Todd Forrest is Arthur Ross Vice President for Horticulture and Living Collections at The New York Botanical Garden. He oversees the team of managers, horticulturists, and curators who steward the Garden’s plant collections, natural areas, gardens, and glasshouses and has been a leader in the development of the Garden’s celebrated program of interdisciplinary exhibitions.
Todd Forrest
A garden feels empty and pointless without people to enjoy it. So does nature. While I have always felt strongly about the importance of nature to a person’s well-being, I have never been so keenly aware of the essential partnership people have with the natural world.
All is (too) Quiet in the Garden
Not long ago an accountant friend gleefully told me about an article he had read claiming that accountant and horticulturist are professions attractive to misanthropes. Knowing us both, it made sense to me. Each of us tends toward the gloomily irascible and neither of us would be the first person you would invite to a dinner party if you wanted to cultivate a fun, chatty vibe.
I didn’t consciously choose a career in horticulture because of its apparent appeal to grumpy people—I was fortunate to follow my lifelong passion for nature into the world of plants. Ironically, perhaps, given what my chosen profession says about me, I have spent nearly my entire career at The New York Botanical Garden (NYBG), an institution founded in 1891 to educate, delight, and serve people.
But when my friend shared this observation, I thought a bit and realized that most public horticulturists I know do spend maybe a little too much time grousing about the sins an oblivious public delivers upon their beloved plants. Footprints in flower beds, bouquets of pilfered peonies, branches broken by would-be Tarzans. The tragedy of the commons! The only negative aspect about public gardens, a colleague once cracked, is the public.
But what is a garden if not a distillation of nature’s miracles organized just so for the enjoyment of people? People are not an imposition on a garden, they are its raison d’être. If I suspected this all along, the past six weeks at NYBG have proved it true. As a beautiful spring has unfolded in the eerie emptiness of pandemic New York, this magnificent place, which generations of gardeners have cultivated in partnership with nature for the benefit of the public, feels only half alive. Yes, there aren’t any footprints in the flower beds, but neither are there exclamations of amazement and wonder. This garden needs people just as much as people need this garden.
A garden feels empty and pointless without people to enjoy it. So does nature. While I have always felt strongly about the importance of nature to a person’s well-being, I have never been so keenly aware of the essential partnership people have with the natural world. We struggle to preserve nature; we thrill in revealing nature’s complexities; we delight in sharing nature’s beauty with others. We do this not for sake of nature, but for the benefit of humanity.
A now-questioning misanthrope, I look forward to seeing visitors here at NYBG soon so that the NYBG I love will feel whole again. I hope that those whose lives have been turned upside down by the pandemic will find some joy and solace here when they are allowed to return. I hope that once we have had a chance to put our lives and the lives of our loved ones in order, we will rededicate ourselves to nurturing our partnership with nature for the good of all.
Andrew formed Grant Associates in 1997 to explore the emerging frontiers of landscape architecture within sustainable development. He has a fascination with creative ecology and the promotion of quality and innovation in landscape design. Each of his projects responds to the place, its inherent ecology and its people.
Andrew Grant
I have learned to take time to notice, and perhaps I have learned that however devastating Covid-19 is being, it has taught me to reflect on my Life, my Art, and my Nature.
I have just read Station Eleven by Emily St.John Mandel. Published in 2014 and based around a global flu pandemic that wipes out 98% of the population, it is very hard not to use this book to imagine the potential consequences of an even more virulent Covid-19 outbreak leading to a total breakdown of life as we know it. No vehicles, ships, planes. No electricity, gas, clean water, gadgets. No government structures, schools, hospitals, prisons. Yet there are things that endure in the book. Art, music, reading, play, albeit on a basic analogue level. Then nature recovering and reclaiming the abandoned landscapes and cityscapes. People reverting to hunting, foraging, and farming for food. Life, Art, and Nature as enduring themes.
Meanwhile, Covid-19 has brutally illustrated how our values have been corrupted and I think it is time for Life, Art, and Nature to reassert themselves as fundamental components of our culture and approach to urban development. The images of streets and squares empty of vehicles all across the world just makes you wonder why we ever need to fill them up again with such a polluting, undemocratic model of people movement. At the same time, the spotlight on parks and green spaces and walks highlights how they are universally beneficial to our health and enjoyment. I hope we can move towards landscape based cities rather than road based cities from here on.
I also hope Covid-19 proves to be the “Tree Shaker” for my professional world. We were already seeing a distinct move towards nature-based systems, greening cities and inviting nature into our lives. The climate and biodiversity emergencies were, and still will be, key drivers for change in the way we all work. Can Covid-19 be the accelerant to that? Shifting urban planning and design from vehicle and economics dominated systems to people and nature motivated place making? To social, creative, and ecological models rather than financial?
At the heart of both our professional and private lives will be the need to adapt to the new post Covid-19 world. It might be one or two years before we are able to even think about this but in that time we are all going to change how we live and work. It will strip out waste and inefficiencies. It will make us understand the value of our life support systems of clean air, water, fresh and healthy food. It will see the end of unsustainable industries and perhaps even the rapid demise of anything fossil fuel and petrochemical related. It will inevitably mean all designers have to focus on cost effective sustainable solutions informed by resilience, circular economy concepts and availability of materials. Landscapes in cities will move away from hardscapes to softscapes. Rural landscapes will move towards rewilding in those areas of poor agricultural performance and to more productive farming in the better soils. Forest and woodlands will spread across the planet. Landscape as art will also become more relevant as we try to make marks on the land that make sense about our place in the world.
This Easter I sat outdoors each day watching the world turn green. Slow at first but then rapid unfurling of leaves of multiple hues of green fill my valley view. Birdsong almost saturates the soundscape. Sunshine warms the soil ready for planting out seedlings. For the first time we have had a hedgehog in the garden, newts and frogs bring new life to our natural pool. We have had a pink moon illuminating the nightscape. I have learned to take time to notice, and perhaps I have learned that however devastating Covid-19 is being, it has taught me to reflect on my Life, my Art, and my Nature.
Eduardo Guerrero is a biologist with over 20 years of experience in projects and initiatives involving environmental and sustainable development issues in Colombia and other South American countries.
Eduardo Guerrero
The dilemma for a healthy planet is not: nature or people? The right approach must be people in nature, planning, and building resilient cities following ecological principles. Quoting Garcia Márquez: “I believe it’s not too late to build a utopia that allows us to share an Earth on which solidarity could become a reality”.
Pandemic prevention and management needs healthy nature in cities
Global crises as COVID-19 remind us that our cities are intrinsically part of nature, not only social and economically interconnected, but also part of ecologic corridors. So, in addition to social, health, and economic measures, solutions should be also nature-based.
From politics and economic perspectives, we human beings pretend to be apart from nature but, we ourselves, our economic models and our cities are functionally part of nature. If you prefer let’s call urban areas “transformed nature”.
A satellite image of the Earth at night (left image) resembles fungal mycelia (right image) which is like a natural internet connecting the forest through soils
Condominiums are like honeycombs or coral reefs; highways seem like a school of fish and our social networks resemble the fungal mycelia which are like a natural internet.
We are nature for good, not for bad. The problem is not to be a social animal that evolves by building an interconnected global society. The problem is acting as if nature is something alien to us instead being part of us. The problem is the air contamination and particulate material that causes cardiopulmonary diseases and facilitates virus dissemination. The problem is the illegal traffic of wild fauna and their habitat fragmentation which disrupt ecological balance and allows the zoonotic transmission of a virus from a wild animal to people.
The new coronavirus emergency has moved humanity to feel united in diversity and, at the same time, has obliged leaders and governments to make synergic decisions relating economy and human health.
Under this crisis, links between human health and environment have emerged more clearly than ever before. Biodiversity loss, climate change, and COVID-19 challenge humanity in similar manners. They are not just themes under a single-sector responsibility, not unidimensional problems assigned in a simplistic way to Environment or Health Secretaries. They are multidimensional and complex matters which require comprehensive approaches.
I hope government and corporate leaders will no longer act according to false dichotomies like economy vs social well-being or economy vs environment.
As many under this crisis, I feel anxious, expectant and concerned and, at the same time, I feel motivated and optimistic about the opportunities and challenges we face.
I imagine a post-COVID world in which human relationships are less physical in terms of contacts but emotionally closer with more real solidarity. I imagine a post-COVID stage in which nature is organically integrated into urban planning, not just as a “must be”, but as a “all of us appreciate it and want to”.
The dilemma for a healthy planet is not: nature or people? The right approach must be people in nature, planning, and building resilient cities following ecological principles.
The global crisis of COVID-19 poses a challenge to the dense and compact city model. However, the solution cannot be a radical change in urban development models, but the development of tools, redesigns and environmental adaptations that contribute to preventing, controlling and mitigating public health threats.
Many actions for a healthy urban environment are at the same time good practices for a healthy population to prevent and/or mitigate epidemics and other public health threats. Landscape architects and ecologists must talk and work together, as must economists, biologists and health professionals.
So, an effective management of post-COVID emergency will require integrative nature-based solutions.
We can develop approaches such as the following:
Sanitary safe access to green public space. Adaptation and / or redesign of public space, in order to generate functional, spatial and / or temporal isolation in the access of citizens.
Redesign and adjustment of green infrastructure, to reduce the risks of contagion.
Trees cleaning air contamination. Green areas and trees that capture particulate matter and generate wind tunnels to dissipate it.
Urban mobility solutions, strengthened of bike networks and rationalization of public transport.
Sustainable and sanitary consumption of green and local products. Involves the development of biosecurity measures for productive and commercial activities associated with the circular economy, green businesses (bio-commerce, urban ecotourism, etc.) and urban agriculture.
Urban forest restoration.
Today more than ever the challenge is to achieve economic, social, and ecological transitions towards sustainability, equity, and health.
Quoting Garcia Márquez: “I believe it’s not too late to build a utopia that allows us to share an Earth on which solidarity could become a reality”.
Bram Gunther, former Chief of Forestry, Horticulture, and Natural Resources for NYC Parks, is Co-founder of the Natural Areas Conservancy and sits on their board. A Fellow at The Nature of Cities, and a business partner at Plan it Wild, he just finished a novel about life in the age of climate change in NYC 2050.
Bram Gunther
Instead of opening the streets up to cars again, muscling each other and spewing their nasty exhaust, we should keep the cars where they are now, inert. The city would transform itself, streets into nature trails lined with aster, sweet pepperbush, and oak trees. Our world-class electric-powered mass transportation system would connect all our neighborhoods as one equal family.
Let me indulge myself, as I need some utopian escape during this dreadful moment.
In these images from my brother I can imagine the future, in part because I’ve walked these blocks thousands of times as a lifelong New Yorker. Its emptiness is its blank slate. The pandemic forced (most of) us inside, leaving our cars parked and silent, and the air is cleaner and so are our waterways. This then is the time to re-imagine the famous thoroughfare—Broadway and Times Square.
Four hundred or so years ago, Times Square area was composed of an oak-tulip forest, Appalachian oak-hickory and oak-pine forests, a red maple swamp, and marshy and rocky headwater streams.
The wildlife then—otters and whales in the harbor, wolves and bears on the land, the bees asteroids of yellow and black—was so abundant it was more biodiverse than that of Yellowstone National Park in the western United States.
Photo: Matt GuntherPhoto: Matt GuntherPhoto: Matt Gunther
We’re a forward-looking city but at the moment we’ve been forced into a more old-fashioned way of life. Things are quieter (for most of us), work is more fluid, and I can take longer breaks in between meetings and assignments to cook a hot lunch and talk with my son. I take stock of my relationships and make sure to express my feelings to those I love. I’m less focused on myself than the health of my community, my region. When I go out, cautiously, I go into nature as there is no Covid-19 hanging menacingly from a tree’s bark or on the flower of a daffodil.
Looking forward, instead of opening the streets up to cars again, muscling each other and spewing their nasty exhaust, we should keep the cars where they are now, inert, and let’s develop a program to buy automobiles back from owners and recycle their materials. I’m in! Then dig up the streets and sidewalks of Broadway and Times Square, where I’ve had numerous concrete jungle experiences, and restore it with some of the ecosystems, in miniature and in-between the towers, that used to thrive in this place.
Slowly, the whole city would transform itself in this way, streets turned into nature trails lined with aster, sweet pepperbush, and oak trees. (Our world-class electric-powered mass transportation system would connect all our neighborhoods as one equal family.) This would allow us to keep our emissions down and our rivers and harbor clean. Starting with Broadway as it intersects with 7th Avenue and forms Times Square, the city will brim with forest (but no bears and wolves), wetland, and garden, and it will change how we live: where cars used to be there is now nature, clean air and water, and because of this more time spent outside with neighbors and loved ones, especially the kids, surrounded by and healthy within the renewing biodiversity all around us.
Matt Gunther
Can you imagine a New York City like this? I can.
Photos: Matt Gunther is a New York City-based documentary and advertising photographer and director. He’s worked on photography campaigns for MSNBC, Harvard Business School, and NIKE, among other businesses and institutions. He has won numerous awards. He first monograph, Probable Cause, was published in fall 2017. He’s in the process of editing a film homage to summertime in NYC.
Dagmar Haase is a professor in urban ecology and urban land use modelling. Her main interests are in the integration of land-use change modelling and the assessment of ecosystem services, disservices and socio-environmental justice issues in cities, including urban land teleconnections.
Dagmar Haase and Annegret Haase
COVID-19 is not just a natural, virus, or health crisis, it is a societal crisis. The response has to be given by the whole humankind. Urban nature, its maintenance, care and fair use, forms an important part of this global response.
Reflections about Corona pandemic and the nature of cities
An urban ecologist and an urban sociologist sharing under current social isolating measures in Germany one home office and—due to the nature of this matter—are constantly exchanging thoughts, experiences, and perceptions, wish to share the following reflections with a wider community interested in TNOC: Dagmar is convinced that, firstly, we need to rethink what we as urban ecologists mean be “co-evolution” in urban systems. Evolution in wilderness systems—regardless being situated in a city or beyond—has been continuously endangered by humans in a way that it—finally—endangered humans, in cities or beyond, with zoonosis. For cities, this means, sharing a larger habitat together, humans and wildlife need real niches in urban systems where wildlife can develop without disturbance surrounded by buffer zones access of humans and livestock is limited. Refraining from current increasing living space per urban capita, we have to understand that it is the size of the niches for wildlife in and around cities that has to increase first!
We have considerable knowledge about ranges of wildlife and diversities of healthy ecosystems in urban ecology discipline(s): we have to make use of them! Having understood that co-evolution does not always mean co-habitation, we will be able to create healthy cities embedded into a larger landscape that respect wildlife. Another core principle of urban ecology needs revival in relation the aforementioned:
Secondly, we should strictly follow the idea of a real network of open spaces in cities and its peripheries that allow for both human outdoor stays—also in such bad times of a pandemic—as well as safe outdoor life for wild animals. Providing space for a healthy stay outside without crowding effects and respective—when and whatever distancing, also in a non-pandemic sense—is possible in a “fair way” seems mandatory. Thus, we need clear limits for infill and densification in cities. We need space. When spatial resources are understood—at least in parts—as a commons, values like affordable flats and house prizes along with open green and blue spaces for humans and wildlife should be as rewarding as any economic return rate. Full accessibility of green and blue spaces for all would be prerequisites. And—what is important and relates back to the argument above—the human-used open space network does not interfere with the wildlife space. This way, we allow wildlife in and around cities to find space to form stable biocoenosis, including all vectors that belong to, and thus prevent the formation of zoonosis as best as we can. How can we achieve such conditions?
Thirdly, we need a novel thinking about values that guide our “do” and “don’t” imperatives in urban system where wildlife and humans interact and where humans exploit natural resources. Cities always were and will be social-ecological-technological systems (SETs) with a lot of—as we learned during the pandemic—critical infrastructure. Also critical resources like fresh air, green, blue and soil resources for the above mentioned co-habitation of humans and wildlife. To safe both, human life and wild animals life, we will need to shift our values for these resources from a very utilitarian to a more holistic one. From a pure economic and revenue-oriented to a common resource and habitat one. This does not mean that we should totally neglect market and market capitalism. However, we should let a commons thinking accompany the market-orientation and develop a multi-value system adopting the Dépense-system-idea, which involves a rethinking of the organization of society signalled by terms such as limits, care and sustainability.
What does this mean for cities, for urban society, for the interaction of people and nature in cities?
The crisis also sheds light on existing inequalities and injustices of our urban societies—in terms of how people can adapt to and cope with restrictions: It is much easier to stand restrictions in a large flat with balcony, garden or rooftop access and close to green spaces than in a small flat packed with people.
Annegret as an urban sociologist sees, after just very initial thinking and increased reading since about four weeks (which makes clear how much we are still at the beginning of a discourse), the following major points we have to consider:
Cities are hotspots of the crisis—since cities are densely populated and form hubs of mobility and interaction, they are especially likely to become also hubs of pandemic crises—as we experience now e.g. in Paris, Madrid, the urban Lombardy, NYC etc. Subsequently, pandemic crises of today and tomorrow will always be primarily urban crises and—at the time—hubs to deal with them. Therefore, it will be crucial to debate how we can make cities more resilient to pandemic crisis. Here, urban nature plays an important role. Under the circumstances of physical distancing and restrictions to meet as we experience them currently worldwide, the contact to urban green and nature, the stay in nature becomes even more important for human physical and mental health than normally. The stay in nature can counteract stress, depression and fears related to “curfew” condition and personal concerns about future, family, job etc.
Being in urban nature also admits contact to other people, even while keeping a physical distance. Insofar, urban nature represents an environment which may actively counteract social distancing, alienation and isolation. Next to parks and open spaces, also allotment gardens or community gardens play an important role as safe places for people allowing for distance and contact, especially also for current high risk groups as elderly people. To use this potential, easy access to urban nature, parks, gardens and other forms of open space for all urban inhabitants is indispensable, as the maintenance of the existing spaces. Here, we are in front of a multiple challenge.
The crisis also sheds light on existing inequalities and injustices of our urban societies—in terms of how people can adapt to and cope with restrictions: It is much easier to stand restrictions in a large flat with balcony, garden or rooftop access and close to green spaces than in a small flat packed with people. No easy access to high quality green space is a clear disadvantage under the conditions of restrictions. Not to speak of social support structures that are closed now and poor people are depending on. As we experience now, the crisis is aggravating existing injustices and runs the risk to lead to even larger injustices in the future; the longer restrictions endure, the larger injustices may become. First evidence in many affected countries shows this already now. To make our urban societies more resilient to pandemic crises, among others, an easy access to high-quality nature represents one crucial precondition, and urban planning and policy-making should consider this.
Putting justice and social responsibility into the centre of urban resilience thinking is thus not just a romantic dream but also a clear demand in the name of sustainability and liveability of our cities. Maybe, the recognition of such requisites belongs to what others call the “progressive or even productive moment” of the crisis or a chance for learning and making other decisions for the long-term future. Since it is not at all whether we experience just a temporary disturbance or a fundamental change of our ways of living, producing, working, travelling and interaction. Even more: The crisis also challenges our conceptual thinking about people-environment relations in cities: resilience, sustainability, health, justice etc. More than ever, there is a need of truly interdisciplinary thinking, and of a thinking that considers a fair co-existence of society and nature, not only, but particularly in cities where they come so close and intensely together. We have to look for cross-fertilizations of the mentioned concepts with terms like fairness, solidarity, weighting and, if needed, renouncement.
We as researchers on TNOC have many new questions to answer: What do urban green spaces mean in times of restrictions? What do restrictions do with visits to and use of urban green spaces? Will people appreciate urban nature differently under the current conditions? Will the crisis allow for a more responsible, wise and even more humble debate on nature and its values and our dependence on it? Will urban green become a considerable part of our resilience towards times with restrictions? And what about our co-habitation with wildlife: How do we ensure mutual respect; live and let live. We need truly interdisciplinary answers to this hyper-complex challenge.
COVID-19 is not just a natural, virus, or health crisis, it is a societal crisis. The response has to be given by the whole humankind. Urban nature, its maintenance, care and fair use, forms an important part of this global response.
Dr. Annegret Haase is a senior researcher at Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ in Leipzig, Germany, at the Dept. of Urban and Environmental Sociology. Her research is focused on sustainable urban development, urban transformations and social-environmental processes in cities.
Fadi has more than 25 years of international experience in analysing the interaction between development, urbanism, disaster risk, climate change, conflict, and state fragility. Fadi cooperates with various companies, cities, and countries to protect people, assets, and the environment
Fadi Hamdan
What we need is a value change in order to effect a paradigm shift in the way we produce, consume and live as societies.
When it comes to risk, it has become clear that change is all around us. The past is no longer a reliable indicator of the future. Climate change is changing the severity and frequency of hydro-meteorological hazards, where now in many parts of the world we are witnessing successive yearly flash floods and storms of a severity that used to happen once in a decade or even less. Furthermore, the world population is at an unprecedented level, with ever increasing demands for land, food, energy and housing, leading to a continuous encroachment on natural habitat. At the same time, increasing numbers of people are living in cities, and megacities for that matter, for a variety of reasons- leading to a concentration of people, assets and infrastructures. In addition, climate change is leading to rural to urban migration; in particular rural to urban informal settlement migration, leaving people living there more vulnerable to other hazards such as earthquakes and tsunamis. Climate change and rural urban migration is also, in many parts of the world exacerbating poverty, unemployment, youth unemployment and inequality, thereby entrenching socio-economic exclusion where the latter is a main driver of violent extremism.
Concurrently, economically and politically, globalisation is also a game changer. Politically, it has undermined the democratic process in several democratic countries as people voting for certain welfare policies are told that big capital will leave if such policies are funded through additional taxation. It has also removed the bargaining power of organised labour in these countries by shifting production to other hemispheres of the earth. On the other hand, in third world countries it has helped people connect together, to lobby and mobilise for effecting change. Economically, it has led to just-in-time supply chain economics, thereby eliminating redundancy for the case of efficiency—and often at the expense of the environment.
The result is a world which is more connected than ever before, more populated than ever before, and where risks are more difficult to understand and more uncertain to predict. We now see systemic risks across connected social, environmental, and economic systems, interlinked at the global spatial level, with implications for the immediate, decadal and longer timelines. We can now talk about systemic failures which will take place if these systemic risks are not addressed.
What Covid-19 did was to move the above scenario from the realm of risk specialist to make it a reality for every citizen on our planet. While this forces us all to recognise and try to deal with uncertainty, it also provides an opportunity for us to mobilise in order to effect change. The old adage that humans prefer short term interests to long term risks is no longer applicable, as the risks of our economic, social, urban and environmental practices have finally caught up with us. This reinforces my belief that the political is the professional which is now the personal, more than ever. In all aspects of our lives, we must strive to effect positive change towards more inclusive and democratic societies that respects the environment and all creatures in it. This should be the post virus “normal”.
Cecilia Polacow Herzog is an urban landscape planner, retired professor at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro. She is an activist, being one of the pioneers to advocate to apply science into real urban planning, projects, and interventions to increase biodiversity and ecosystem services in Brazilian cities.
Cecilia Herzog
I am investing my time in isolation to improve my capacity to contribute to a wide discussion about urban nature, how it is important to sustain healthy lives and adapt to the ever-growing threat of extreme weather events.
Let nature be the solution to heal us all
I am being transformed by this sudden tragic pandemic that is affecting the whole of humanity. I am lucky to have a beautiful place in the countryside to be during this period of retreat. I have more questions than statements up to now. How will I go back to a new “normal” life? How long will take until I will be able to hug my granddaughters? My kids… Will I be able to be with my mother again? Those questions are on my mind every day, all day long.
I believe this is a life-changing event. When we lose the abstract confidence that life will go on forever in the same way, deep changes occur. Now I praise living more than ever. I miss my loved ones and fear for their lives. I miss my work, my colleagues, my presential classes, and so many other ‘normal’ activities I used to have.
I am eager to meet people, especially my family and friends, peers, students… I want to travel to be with my kids and grandkids. I also want to attend conferences and other events when my friends from other places get together. I value and long for presence: look in the eyes, be able to hug and laugh, sense the pleasure of having made friends from different cultures and meet them.
Life and human relations are the most important things for me.
Transformation. I have written a lot about urban transformation, and now in social distancing I have been wondering how this crisis will change cities and people’s minds.
Will our societies wake up for the immense challenges we face: growing social inequalities, climate change, loss of biodiversity and other threatening life disruptions?
I am interested in knowing how people will come out after a long period of isolation, mainly who live in apartments without contact with nature. Parks and squares will be there, and I believe people will praise common green spaces more than ever before. As I work with urban landscapes, my thoughts are about what will happen to them. Will they become more important and valued by people and decision makers? Once economic losses are affecting most of urban dwellers, what kind of low-cost experiences they will demand? How people will interact in urban spaces? What kind of open spaces will bloom to help societies recover from this traumatic period?
I am investing my time in isolation to improve my capacity to contribute to a wide discussion about urban nature, how it is important to sustain healthy lives and adapt to the ever-growing threat of extreme weather events. I believe nature-based solutions are the response to enhance our adaptive capacity and social justice. I am prepared to stay away for a long period of time before I will be able to restart a new “normal” life and face new challenges in the city. Let nature be the solution to heal us all.
In 2000, Alex opened a restaurant at Rio Design Barra shopping mall, where he then established the IN HOUSE Café-Bistrô. He developed his passion for food and cooking with his grandmother, who was a great Belgian cook. When he was a kid, used to he spend hours and hours in the kitchen helping and learning with her.
Alex Herzog
I believe there will be a strong enhancement of circular economy, increasing the value of local, its people and its businesses. Consequently, waste will decrease, and much of what before was seen as such, will begin to be reused. In other words, a syntropy in restauration.
Restaurants in syntropy
As Chef at a bistro in Rio de Janeiro, I try to imagine how the new “normal” will be, when restaurants finally get “discharged” from quarantine. How many will survive Covid, and reopen their doors? I believe that the ones that resist, will need resilience and high adaptation skills, in order to see a new way of making business emerge. I compare this crisis, to a drastic prune done to protect the whole tree. You cut branches, leaves, everything that seems like too much, and then, when the foliage sprouts, it’s an explosion of nature. I presume the same will happen with restaurants. Why? Well, people will have been confined for weeks, if not months, no going out, no visiting family, friends or coworkers.
At some point, everyone had to begin cooking for themselves. People will have, more than ever, the desire to go out, have fun, see friends, see the ones they like. One simple hug, will gain a never before seen proportion. For centuries, restaurants have been one of the best places to connect with one another. Parisian establishments such as Le Procope, founded in 1686, or “Bouillons”, that served soup for workers, so they could be “restored” (originating the name “restaurant”), are proof of all of that. These establishments have in their DNA: time for leisure, social gatherings, happiness, reunions, and of course many hugs.
Many will have to adapt to people’s fear and also to the new paradigm expected to rise following the crisis. Worries about hygiene and agglomerations, will reveal that people are going to prefer eating in open spaces. Cities and neighborhoods will have to adapt. Clients will be more educated and will stop taking for granted all the hard work that goes on behind the scenes in a restaurant. Local products will gain value. Inputs, with high ecological footprints, will become expensive.
Costs in the kitchens will have to be cut, preventing food waste. At the top of the list of many establishments, will be actions, such as donating “doggie bags”, to people in vulnerable situations. Following the same community-oriented actions, people will start to think more in a collective sense, engaging more with their community. People will end up living closer to their workplaces, decreasing the need to commute. We will have “smaller” cities, and in that sense, parks, gardens, public spaces will have to be re-conceived. Nature will be more appreciated. Restaurant outings will tend to stay within the same neighborhood, strengthening local businesses. And as they rise, chefs will have to review and rethink the ingredients used in their menu, begin to buy from local producers, and ultimately turn up their creativity in making dishes. There will be a change in the way people consume. They will stop buying just for sake of buying. Exotic inputs won’t be as interesting as before, as they will be hard to get and prices will high. Comfort meals will be more appreciated, bringing lost wellness during quarantine period.
Many businesses will increase their revenues through delivery. There will be a considerable investment in this area, once people will remain worried about a new pandemic wave. Delivery and frozen foods will have an important role in restaurant sales, as they will be the solution to keep them up well and running, even as new viruses appear.
Recapping, I believe there will be a strong enhancement of circular economy, increasing the value of local, its people and its businesses. Consequently, waste will decrease, and much of what before was seen as such, will begin to be reused. In other words, a syntropy in restauration.
{Syntropy: Is an integrated system within itself and in balance, where all the energy produced is consumed within its own system, without losses.}
Mike Houck is a founding member of The Nature of Cities and is currently a TNOC board member. He is The Urban Naturalist for the Urban Greenspaces Institute (www.urbangreenspaces.org), on the board of The Intertwine Alliance and is a member of the City of Portland’s Planning and Sustainability Commission.
Mike Houck
I will spend more time, personally and professionally, focusing on the green interstices of our city, the small, often scrappy, bits of nature nearby for my own psychological and physical health, and that of my city.
Nature Nearby, A Path To Resilience
Coming out of Covid-19 more robust psychologically and physically, individually and societally, I believe, will depend in large measure on access to nearby nature.
I have seen myriad online accounts of people’s interactions with nature from their apartments and nearby parks and natural areas and trails. I have had many of my own intimate experiences with nature nearby since being in lock-down. Recently, I happened to glance out of my living room window and noticed the cherry blossoms had just burst out, a profusion of pink filling the entire scene.Then a rapid, zig-zagging movement caught my eye as a female Anna’s hummingbird lit on a nearby branch. I managed to snap her image, her pollen-specked bill titled skyward. Was she looking for a predator or her territory obsessed mate? The pink blossoms and emerald-green avian buzz-bomb, calmed me, energized me, and I have no doubt left me healthier and happier for the rest of the day.
Not long ago while standing next to our newly installed rain garden I encountered a song sparrow perched next to our “backyard habitat” sign. That song sparrow has become my daily Covid-19 buddy. Each morning I stand next to him, much too close for proper “social distancing,” as he tilts back his head, puffs out his chest and belts out a beautiful, full-throated melody. I imitate him; he sings back, looking me in the eye I sing again; he flutters both wings, much as young birds do when begging their parents for food. We’ve connected; we continue our “dialogue” for several minutes after which I walk off, convinced we are both the better for the encounter. I often glance down from my second story flat to see a mother with her kids pointing at the song sparrow who’s perfectly happy to sing for anyone willing to take notice of him at the rain garden’s edge.
Scenes like this are repeated all over the city where small patches of greenspaces have been saved or woven into the urban fabric.Both personally and professionally I will spend more time focusing on the green interstices of our city, the small, often scrappy, bits of nature nearby for my own psychological and physical health, and that of my city.
Matthew Jensen is an interdisciplinary artist whose rigorous explorations of landscape combine walking, collecting, photography, mapping and extensive research. His projects investigate the relationships between people and local landscapes.
But who hasn’t dreamt about snapping their fingers and making air pollution go away? And all of a sudden we realize it is optional. Those scroll bar images are fun. Before. After. Before. After. What else is optional
Our apartment is on one of the highest hills in the Bronx and we can see out to Queens. Every plane out of LaGuardia flies up and over our building, directly over, before banking one way or another. I once took a picture of our rooftop from an airplane window, before banking one way or another.
Morning comes with deep silence; 10:00am is the new 3:00am. The sparrows tussle on the windowsill. This is nothing new. There is a male sparrow that has been advertising a hole in the eve for a few years. But now his morning chirps seem to shake the building.
My students are Zooming from across the globe. Or not at all. I am a tab now. Just another tab. Maybe even minimized. Whatever I just said was not that funny. What are they laughing at?
Spring is here. On time and ahead of schedule.
Everywhere, all at once, an entire species is changed while the rest go about their business. Except for those tigers at the Bronx Zoo.
We are on the sixth floor and the elevator is down for a few more weeks. Our neighbor across the hall, Alma, an 86-year-old wonder woman is stuck. No more senior center. Her granddaughter might die of Covid. But her daughters are worried about how she’ll can handle the news. Perhaps a virtual goodbye?
But who hasn’t dreamt about snapping their fingers and making air pollution go away? And all of a sudden we realize it is optional. Those scroll bar images are fun. Before. After. Before. After. What else is optional?
Callery Pear in bloom in empty New York City. Photo: Matthew Jensen.
Right. I am an artist. It is not like I can turn that off.
My life post-virus? But some recovered patients are testing positive again. Or is that clickbait? It is me who needs to stay positive. Chin-up-can-do-bootstraps-yes-we-can-dawn-horizon. I used to spend so much time in the future but now I’m afraid to go there.
Summer classes? Doubtful. Fall? Well, we have to wait for enrollment numbers. Wait, are we still charging money for school? What am I not getting here?
It is time for the 7:00pm clap session and sing-along out the windows of the building. Finally, something other than bird song! But now that “this is New York” song makes me want to cry. Is it a requiem? Our building has essential workers and our neighborhood is suddenly very essential.
Negotiate? Well, I guess the stimulus payment might be considered a settlement. Is there someone else I can talk to? Someone in charge?
I do remember that article about the 130,000 saiga antelope that dropped dead in Kazakhstan. But that was five years ago. Why am I thinking about it now? Were bats somehow involved?
How many wonderful parts of our civilization were symptoms or extensions of the worst parts? I am afraid of the answer.
I photographed all the flowers blooming around our building so our neighbors that cannot leave can enjoy a digital spring, a very silent spring.
Expert en écologie urbaine, en communication publique et en politiques publiques, Gilles Lecuir travaille pour l’Agence régionale de la Biodiversité en Île-de-France et anime le concours national Capitale française de la Biodiversité. // Expert in urban ecology, public communication and policies, Gilles Lecuir works for the Paris Region Agency for Biodiversity and animate the French Capital of Biodiversity Award.
Giles Lecuir
The confinement makes me feel intimately what I have known and said for many years now: the presence of nature in the city is not a decoration, it is a vital need for the city dweller.
Paris, (too) mineral city
Sunday, March 15, 2020, I land at Roissy-Charles-de-Gaulle airport, back from a week of work in Montreal to discuss with local partners the idea of a French-language The Nature of Cities (but that’s another story, which we’ll tell you more about here soon). The next day, the President of the French Republics announce a strict confinement of the entire population except for those people essential to essential services. But already since Thursday in Quebec, the pre-confinement was already being felt, and I spent the last two days of my trip in my hotel.
Returning to my Parisian apartment, a stone’s throw from the Moulin Rouge, I kissed my wife and children and we were committed to a confinement of at least a month. As the days go by, I realize that in this nascent spring, I can’t observe a single floricultural insect (my main hobby, via the Suivi Photography of Insect Pollinaors, the SPIPOLL, a French participatory science program). I miss it.
From my window on the 1st floor, I can only see the sky through the reflections in the windows of the upper floors. I miss that too.Thanks to the ornithologist Maxime Zucca, who every day on Twitter describes a Parisian bird that can be observed and listened to from home, I watch the songs, I search. Only the Crow visits me. It nests in the tall trees of the nearby Montmartre cemetery, which is closed to the public, as is the small square of Deux-Nèthes; these are the only “green spaces” in my neighbourhood. Twice a week, I go out to buy vegetables and bread, and get some fresh air: not a single flower on the sidewalk, the feet of the large plane trees on Avenue de Clichy are dry and compact, and in any case, we took great care to put a geotextile sheet on them during the last renovation of the sidewalks, to make sure that no undesirable grass can grow there.
On my typical Haussmann-style street, which has two parking lanes and a one-way traffic lane, not a tree line. 100 metres away, a few flower boxes decorated with horticultural plants have been installed by the City of Paris, at the request of the inhabitants, to avoid the annoying parking of motorized two-wheelers on the pavement.
The confinement makes me feel intimately what I have known and said for many years now: the presence of nature in the city is not a decoration, it is a vital need for the city dweller.
What to do in the future? Remove at least one of the two rows of car parking, an unnecessary and polluting occupation of public space, and replace it with a grassy area planted with a few bushes and small trees. The City of Paris has started to create these “green streets” in an experimental way, such as Rue Blanche. It’s still very horticultural and not really low-tech, but it’s a start. We now need to massively generalize this principle of de-waterproofing and renaturalize car parking areas. This will limit the urban heat island effect caused both by the paving materials (bitumen and stone) and by the canyon-like shape of our streets which reverberate and store solar energy during the day, making the night stifling and dangerous for the most fragile among us during heat wave episodes. It is also an opportunity to devote part of the roadway to bicycles alone…
* * *
Le confinement me donne à ressentir intimement ce que je sais et dis depuis de nombreuses années maintenant : la présence de la nature en ville n’est pas un décor, c’est un besoin vital pour le citadin.
Paris, ville (trop) minérale
Dimanche 15 mars 2020, j’atterris à l’aéroport Roissy-Charles-de-Gaulle, de retour d’une semaine de travail à Montréal pour notamment évoquer avec les partenaires locaux de l’idée d’un The Nature of Cities francophone (mais c’est une autre histoire, dont on vous reparlera ici bientôt). Le Président de la République française annoncera le lendemain un confinement strict de toute la population sauf les personnes indispensables aux services essentiels. Mais déjà depuis le jeudi au Québec, le pré-confinement se faisait sentir, et je passais les deux derniers jours de mon voyage dans mon hôtel.
Regagnant mon appartement parisien, à deux pas du Moulin rouge, j’embrasse ma femme et mes enfants et nous voilà engagés dans un confinement d’un mois au moins. Au fur et à mesure que les jours passent, je me rends compte qu’en ce printemps naissant, je ne peux pas observer un seul insecte floricole (mon loisir principal, via le Suivi photographique des Insectes polinisateurs, le SPIPOLL, un programme de sciences participatives français). Cela me manque.
Depuis ma fenêtre du 1er étage, je n’aperçois le ciel qu’à travers les reflets dans les vitres des étages supérieurs. Cela me manque aussi.Grâce à l’ornithologue Maxime Zucca, qui décrit chaque jour sur Twitter un oiseau parisien qu’on peut observer et écouter depuis chez soi, je guette les chants, je cherche : seule la Corneille me rend visite. Elle niche dans les grands arbres du cimetière de Montmartre voisin, fermé au public, tout comme le petit square des Deux-Nèthes ; ce sont les seuls « espaces verts » de mon quartier. Deux fois par semaine, je sors acheter des légumes et du pain, m’aérer un peu : pas une fleur de trottoir, les pieds des grands platanes de l’avenue de Clichy sont secs et tassés, et de toute façon on a bien pris soin d’y mettre une bâche géotextile lors de la dernière rénovation des trottoirs, pour être bien certain de ne pas voir s’exprimer une herbe indésirable.
Dans ma rue haussmannienne typique, qui comprend deux voies de stationnement automobile et une voie de circulation à sens unique, pas un arbre d’alignement. A 100 mètres, quelques jardinières ornées de plantes horticoles ont été installé par la ville de Paris, à la demande des habitants, pour éviter le stationnement gênant des deux-roues motorisés sur le trottoir.
Le confinement me donne à ressentir intimement ce que je sais et dis depuis de nombreuses années maintenant : la présence de la nature en ville n’est pas un décor, c’est un besoin vital pour le citadin.
Que faire demain ? Supprimer au moins l’une des deux rangées de stationnement automobile, occupation inutile et polluante de l’espace public, et la remplacer par une zone enherbée et plantée de quelques buissons et petits arbres. La Ville de Paris a commencé à créer ces « rues végétales » de manière expérimentale, comme par exemple rue Blanche. C’est encore très horticole et pas vraiment low-tech, mais c’est un début. Il faut maintenant généraliser massivement ce principe de désimperméabilisation et renaturer les zones de stationnement automobile. Cela limitera l’effet d’îlot de chaleur urbain provoqué à la fois par les matériaux de revêtement (bitume et pierre) et par la forme en canyon de nos rues qui réverbèrent et emmagasinent l’énergie solaire en journée, rendant la nuit étouffante et dangereuse pour les plus fragiles d’entre nous lors d’épisodes de canicule. L’occasion aussi de consacrer une partie de la chaussée aux seuls vélos…
Nina-Marie Lister is Graduate Program Director and Associate Professor in the School of Urban + Regional Planning at Ryerson University in Toronto.
Nina-Marie Lister
For now, I take solace in the routine of daily bread. The measured pace of the knead, the proof, and the rise offers structure to my blurry days. Ultimately, it is the realization that this simple, measured act and its alchemy are both literally and figuratively what sustains us in its slow and patient way.
Pandemic Pause
I am frustrated as I turn the loaf in the old cast iron oven. I can’t tell if the heat is even or the crust is charred. Wood-fired sourdough is a learning curve. I’ve always been a baker, and I’m (not so secretly) proud of my sourdough, made with my lively 6-year-old home-grown ferment. But here, on the farm in isolation things are more basic. No thermometer, electronic scale, artisan flour, or exotic sea salt. I have just the raw elements: flour, salt, water—plus the basic biology of fermentation, the alchemy of microbes at work. The irony does not escape me that the coronavirus pandemic seems to have catalysed the (re)discovery of yeast… and baking. The store shelves are devoid of flour. Instagram photos of home baking have surged. I wonder, have the microbes have conspired to distract us?
In these hazy locked-down days that blend from one to the other, along with (but apart from) many others, I am doing a lot of baking. I am also exhausted and yet I can’t remember what time it is. I am always on the computer or the phone, contingency planning or organising food deliveries. I admit there are too many wine bottles in the recycling bin. I swing between euphoria and depression, caught in the pandemic pendulum. Everything has changed in a relative blink: we’ve pivoted from working in close physical and social proximity to virtualizing our offices (albeit clumsily and tenuously), blending our home and work lives into a slurry that slips between chaos and creativity.
Of course, our homelives are just that, homes, often shared with children, elders, pets, and plants that creep and crash into our Zoom screens as an abrupt reminder of these now-blurred boundaries of live, work, and play. Many are struggling with the more immediate social and economic fallout of the pandemic pivot: risk, hunger, poverty, bankruptcy, abuse, despair, fear, loneliness, and of course, sickness and death. No one wants to be here, everyone wants to go back/forward/anywhere but this. Being “at home” is now loaded; it means so much more suddenly. More pressures to combat doing nothing at the office by doing everything in the home: Learn a new language, homeschool the kids, take up dance, play an instrument, write a book, organise those pictures, master knitting, sewing, singing, baking. Anything to keep busy, pass time, distract and deflect our attention from what is really happening. We don’t want to see or feel, let alone be in this moment. I think we want to bake our way into oblivion.
But crisis is where we will learn who we are. Really, we need to just STOP. Breathe. Slowly. Sit, as Donna Haraway reminded us, with the trouble. I don’t know when this will end. I can’t tell my students or my kids with any certainty at all. But I do know it has changed us, and what matters is what we will do with this change. For this we need to stop, breathe and think a while. Steep in the pandemic pause. Look up and around, notice, listen, SEE. The air is cleaner, the waters are clearer. Wildlife are roaming our streets, returning to the places we’ve abandoned. We say the cities are “eerily quiet”, but this really means less traffic, construction noise and airplanes. When I listen, I hear the songs of people, birds, frogs… and the earth breathing.
What are we learning in this in-between, in the months where time seems suspended? What will we take from this turn? The invisible force of a virus catalyzed a change in human behavior that only months ago was unimaginable: we shut down the global economy, and we paused. For a brief moment, humanity acted together, for our own collective good. And the planet breathed. So in the headlong rush to return to “normal”, will we lose the gift of this foresight, a glimpse of the possible in the pandemic pause? I don’t know, but I hope.
And for now, I take solace in the routine of daily bread. The measured pace of the knead, the proof, and the rise offers structure to my blurry days. Ultimately, it is the realization that this simple, measured act and its alchemy are both literally and figuratively what sustains us in its slow and patient way.
Kevin Lunzalu is a young conservation leader from Nairobi, Kenya. Through his work, Lunzalu strives to strike a balance between environmental conservation and humanity. He strongly believes in the power of innovative youth-led solutions to drive the global sustainability agenda. Kevin is the country coordinator the Kenyan Youth Biodiversity Network.
Kevin Lunzalu
The COVID-19 curfew has given me the space to reflect on viable alternatives to my common practices: I am rethinking my food, modes of travel, entertainment, and forms of meeting people. Working from home for certain days may prove to be one of the best environmental practices. These ideas will greatly shape my post-crisis personality.
To say the crisis has disrupted professional and personal endeavors is an understatement. The pandemic will evidently leave behind a permanent scar, likely to reshape our professional and personal practices. New practices will come to life while some existing ones may be forgotten. With new developments come new adaptations-skills, techniques, rituals, and modules. This resilient and adoptive nature of humanity has enabled it to survive centuries of occasional unprecedented calamities, each time coming out stronger, unified, and wiser than before. COVID-19 is not an exemption.
As a coordinator of a national youth network, I anticipate that the pandemic will catalyze several important alterations to our work. We have to reassess, restructure, and re-plan how our grass-root projects, youth workshops, training, and related impact will play out both in the short and long run. In the very least, digitization and automation will be at the core of things. Minimizing human interactions while scaling up our work will mean exploring technological tools that are at our disposal.
Youth capacity-building workshops, campaigns, policy meetings, and related document reviews, and training modules will be largely be conducted online. However, while all these options seem feasible, we cannot be blind to the fact that access to technology and internet solutions is still a challenge in many developing countries, including Kenya, especially at the local level where most conservation work happens.
This crisis lays a tangible test on the ability of many organizations in Africa to adapt to the super-changing technological provisions and also embrace circularity. Exploring partnerships beyond our niches to include cloud computing service providers and digital companies is one of the strategies we have to embrace. This is also the time for me to evaluate my professional landscape in terms of what I need to adjust and learn, to grow and attain my personal career goals in the post-crisis era.
As a pan-African, I strongly believe in the power of coming together as a community and largely as a society. African Traditional cultural provision are largely based on human interaction. The current crisis provides a challenge to rethink a new “norm” concerning cultural engagements.
In my personal space, I enjoy diverse cuisines, making new friends, meeting people, being entertained, and traveling. The COVID-19 curfew and stay-at-home directives paralyzed transportation, and the closure of entertainment places (including a halt to football matches) have given me the space to reflect on viable alternatives to these practices. For instance, I am rethinking my food consumption patterns, the modes in which I travel, what entertainment options I have, and different forms of meeting people. With reports of pollution levels going down during the pandemic, I am being convinced that working from home for certain days of the week may prove to be one of the best environmental practices as it reduces traffic pollution, office space needed, and use of facilities that may be directly harming our natural world. I have also started appreciating nature found around my home, doing balcony gardens, and generally converting the home space to be greener. Some of these practices will greatly shape my post-crisis personality.
Patrick M. Lydon is an American ecological writer and artist based in Korea whose seeks to re-connect cities and their inhabitants with nature. He is an Arts Editor here at The Nature of Cities.
Patrick Lydon
What will be the new normal? Perhaps now is our chance to slow down, take care of ourselves and our fellow living beings a bit better, look to nature, and figure it out.
Remembering: What We’ve Been Needing
A haphazard series of slight changes, sometimes seemingly disconnected, have occurred here in Osaka. Shops close early, big gatherings are prohibited, people are going to their offices less, nearly everyone wears a mask. The tourists are gone too, which in Osaka means about 10 million would-be consumers will have vanished from streets and balance sheets by year end if this continues.
On the other hand, suddenly more people visit parks and green spaces in the middle of the week, cars are fewer, and many of the trains and public buildings that once relied on climate control, now have their windows open to encourage fresh air instead.
Physical distancing at Nakanoshima Park in central Osaka, Japan / CC BY-SA, Patrick M. Lydon
Privately here in our home, coronavirus has meant more time spent cooking—and growing—new foods, sewing and fixing clothes instead of buying them, and working to enjoy the process of finding where we can slow down and be more attentive, to ourselves, to our neighbors, to our environments.
Much of my work as a writer and artist—and my wife as an herbalist—is becoming more virtual. After six months of preparation, an exhibition in Kyoto was canceled just days before we were set to open due to COVID-19. We went ahead virtually instead, substituting an in-person audience for an “online” audience thanks to The Nature of Cities’ new Urban Ecological Arts Forum.
We’re now trying to expand this opportunity, to help more urban artists who are in similarly difficult positions.
The closed exhibition ‘Typhoon Queens, Exhibition #1’ at Art Spot Korin in Kyoto, Japan / CC BY-SA, Typhoon Queens
It seems this is a theme across other disciplines too. Helping those in need suddenly becomes the obvious thing to do, when we realize so clearly that all humans, and the entire living world around us, are in need.
It seems many other urban needs are finally being realized at this time, too.
In most industrialized nations, we have been in need of a slowdown, of more time listening to nature, of more urban gardens, of clean air, clean water, and of bringing and end to jobs that degrade the environment and human health. We’ve also been in need of ways to feed and house our fellow mortals—as ecologist Larry Korn liked to say—in ways that support the wellness of all beings.
We’ve needed these things in our cities for a long time.
Now, suddenly, miraculously, seemingly accidentally, so many of these needs are being revealed to us in very potent ways. Outdoor air pollution —which kills over 4 million people every year—is giving way to blue skies that have not been seen for lifetimes, and the same is true for the reduction of urban noise pollution. There are Coronavirus Victory Gardens popping up all around Los Angeles. Tiny homes for homeless are being built in San Jose at rapid pace, and Americans are suddenly listening to birds, and going out into nature in such numbers that authorities don’t know how to handle the new influx of nature lovers.
With these revelations, come some inevitable questions. How do we keep the skies blue, the herons cackling, and the gardens growing, after this is all over?
What will be the new normal?
Perhaps now is our chance to slow down, take care of ourselves and our fellow living beings a bit better, look to nature, and figure it out.
Yvonne is an Urban Greening & Climate Resilience Strategist who works with Royal Commission for Riyadh City.
Yvonne Lynch
I remain positive regarding a post-virus era because, notwithstanding the gravity of this situation, crisis always presents opportunity for positive transformation. Professionals in my field have always struggled to convince decision makers of the benefits of urban greening and climate adaptation. Not so much now.
Living and working in Riyadh, I have been predominantly insulated from the tragic chaos that has gripped major cities around the world. Measures here were put in place swiftly, healthcare was made freely available to all and stockpiling did not occur. Work is now conducted remotely and has very much continued at the same pace, so it’s quite possible that proactive resilience planning measures here will result in a quick bounce back to business in the post-virus era.
Riyadh city is in the midst of delivering several megaprojects that will transform the urban fabric with the introduction of a world class metro rail and bus network, more than 3,300 new parks and gardens, one of the world’s largest urban parks, 7.5 million new trees and the development of a water recycling network. These projects are part of implementing the Vision 2030 for Saudi Arabia which is an incredibly well articulated strategy to drive economic diversification and greatly improve liveability. This work is unlikely to falter.
In general, I remain positive regarding a post-virus era because, notwithstanding the gravity of this situation, crisis always presents opportunity for positive transformation. Professionals in my field have always struggled to convince decision makers of the benefits of urban greening and climate adaptation. Increasingly now, I am hearing people everywhere extoll the virtues of urban nature and express gratitude for their trees, parks and gardens during their lockdowns. This growing vocalisation and awareness of the benefits of urban nature presents an unprecedented opportunity to create a persuasive and powerful narrative linking social and urban resilience to nature. Strong communities are healthy communities, and healthy communities have easy access to nature.
We will undoubtedly experience a global economic downturn for at least two years, and I think we will see the cities that have resilience plans move forward to execute ambitious projects. Already, proactive leaders are driving change that was previously opposed or planned for gradual implementation. Europe is speeding a transition to a low car future with the Mayors of Paris and Milan leading the way with plans for extensive bike paths.
Unfortunately, the cities that are not prepared will start to slash budgets with greening amongst the top items on the list. Some of our peers will lose their jobs, others will have their budgets dramatically reduced. Those of us who are not affected, must take the time to consider how we can help our peers, so that we can maintain and grow the momentum that has been created in recent years.
As things return to normal, and they will, we need to continually and collectively drive home the message that dramatic changes are possible and to articulate the business case for creating a new and improved normal.
Antonia Machado is the Strategic Partnerships Project Manager for the Natural Systems Enhancement and Stewardship Department at Clean Water Services in Hillsboro, Oregon.
Antonia Machado
The coronavirus has exposed deep structural weaknesses, reinforcing the notion that working across silos and centering equity is imperative to building resilience and moving towards transformative change.
Most schoolchildren in Puerto Rico experience at least one field trip to El Yunque National Rainforest, the only tropical rainforest in the United States’ national forest system. Careening through the humid rainforest in noisy buses while learning about one of the Caribbean’s most precious natural resources is a unifying national experience. A particularly memorable lesson learned on these excursions is that hurricanes are mechanisms for forest renewal, ultimately increasing the resilience of the ecosystem. This lesson shaped my understanding of these occurrences, providing a sense of assurance when hurricanes pummeled the island and left us without power or running water. In the face of the coronavirus pandemic, I cling to the same hope that we are in the midst of a transformative event from which we will emerge more resilient.
A pandemic is undoubtedly different from a hurricane, but these disasters share key similarities. When I returned to Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria, I flew in over a sea of blue tarps that covered all of the structures where the roofs had been torn off, a patchwork of blue squares against the denuded landscape. While the pandemic has left our houses intact, it has managed to pull the roof off the top of our systems, like prying the lid from a fuse box, allowing us to peer inside. Two definitions are useful here: The word “crisis” derives from the Greek word krisis, which means “decisive moment”. The word “emergency” is derived from the Latin emergere, “to bring to light”. Indeed, this crisis provides an opportunity to recognize the interdependence between our social-ecological systems, and to consider how we can act upon that recognition to increase our collective resilience.
My work centers itself around developing strategies for catalyzing transformative partnerships through Tree for All, a collaborative landscape-scale restoration program in the Tualatin River Watershed, just west of Portland, Oregon. Tree for All counts more than 35 organizations as partners, enabling the program to be one of the nation’s most successful large-scale conservation programs. In the midst of this pandemic, I am peering into the metaphorical fuse box and contemplating the role of transformational partnerships and collective impact to rebuild from this crisis.
It is well established that the impacts of large-scale conservation extend far beyond the ecological arena, providing significant benefits to the local community and economy. How do we expand upon this model, leveraging our collective capacities to pursue interdisciplinary and multi-sector approaches to wicked problems such as houselessness and climate change? This work is beyond the capacity or resources of any single organization or institution. The coronavirus has exposed deep structural weaknesses, reinforcing the notion that working across silos and centering equity is imperative to building resilience and moving towards transformative change. Our collective health is only as strong as the most vulnerable among us, and as such, this issue is not beyond the mission of any sector. A characteristic endemic to all crises is their ability to uncover the weaknesses in our structures, but it is ultimately our responsibility to use that information to inform our rebuilding efforts. My unbridled hope is that we may use these lessons to provoke an era of innovation in the form of interdisciplinary partnerships that spur transformational change.
François Mancebo, PhD, Director of the IRCS and IATEUR, is professor of urban planning and sustainability at Reims University. He lives in Paris.
François Mancebo
Well hidden behind any disaster, there always is a cost-benefits analysis that went wrong. Yet, more than often those who decide on the acceptability of a risk are not those who will be most exposed once the disaster happens. For the future, it is crucial to decide now who and what actions should be priority in the aftermath of Covid-19, and by whom these choices should be made.
Staying at home all day long is not something new for me: a good part of my job consists in writing articles, books, project reports, reviewing papers, etc. And usually, I like all of it. But not now, because now I don’t stay at home. I am contained at home, which rhymes nicely with detained. I didn’t decide it. It was imposed upon me to counteract a plausible risk: a virus. But wait a moment, is this virus looks the only bad guy in the story. I don’t think so.
Covid-19 is not the reason why all activity stopped in the world. The ultimate reason is fear: anticipation of a disaster amplified by social networks. The situation reminds me of two quotes from Montaigne, a French Renaissance philosopher too little-known in English speaking countries and a very good reading during containment: “There is no passion so contagious as that of fear” and “A man is not hurt so much by what happens, as by his opinion of what happens”. Well, putting aside collective fear what is actually happening with this virus.
Covid-19 did not go viral by itself. Hyper-mobile human beings did the job. Covid-19 is not a serial killer. Human failures in most countries concerning warning and early response procedures turned it into a serial killer. There is nothing natural about pandemics. They depend on how humans deal with their living environment and what risks they are willing to take by adopting such-or-such urbanization pattern or ways of living. For example, choosing to promote hyperconnected global cities —Wuhan, New York, Paris, etc.— that generate massive flows of people and goods is a pretty risky option as far as pandemics and other disasters are concerned. Well hidden behind any disaster, there always is a cost-benefits analysis that went wrong.
Yet, more than often those who decide on the acceptability of a risk are not those who will be most exposed once the disaster happens. To prevent a similar situation in the aftermath of the pandemic, it is crucial to decide now who and what actions should be priority in the aftermath of Covid-19, and by whom these choices should be made. And it won’t be easy to decide upon these priorities, since we are dealing here with what can typically be considered wicked problems, namely problems which involve dealing simultaneously with a sizeable number of factors which are interrelated into an organic whole, neither rational, nor completely chaotic. A wicked problem never entails a single answer. There always are many, which differ according to how the person or the group who proposes an answer perceive his environment and his best interests. All are equally valid, but usually result in conflicting solutions. There is no magic bullet here. Always keep in mind that after the crisis, everything could very well start over it was before, but even worse!
When the containment period began and millions of French urbanites discretely fled with their friends to the countryside, what does this tell us about the domination exerted by urban centers on rural areas? When—at the same moment—millions of others flew to distant sunny countries to escape the pandemic and get some extra vacation, and when the virus finally arrived in the “paradise” where they were staying—an easily predictable situation—rushed to the airports and embassies asking to be repatriated for free, what does this tell us about the human nature and the colonial type consumer relation people in developed countries have with the rest of the world and with their own country? Right now, it is the evening in Paris. I am looking out the window: very few lights in the apartments, most people walked off.
Dr. Robert McDonald is Lead Scientist for the Global Cities program at The Nature Conservancy. He researches the impact and dependences of cities on the natural world, and help direct the science behind much of the Conservancy’s urban conservation work.
Rob McDonald
I have often been someone who threw himself at work, who saw work as not just a job but as a calling, who perhaps spent too much time working and not enough time at home. So, it is humbling to realize that, at this moment in time, perhaps the most important thing I can do in the universe is be with my family.
Both personally and professionally in this time of Covid19, what I thought was important is changing.
A pandemic like this has a way of clarifying what is important, and what is not truly important, in one’s personal life. I am on day 39 of self-quarantining with my family in our little apartment in Washington, DC. It has been an intense event, for all the usual cliched reasons but also for more spiritual ones. I could make jokes about the challenges of home schooling two kids while two spouses do Zoom calls to people in all time zones around the world, etc. But those jokes seem already fully played out in popular culture, and don’t capture what I find novel about the experience.
Rather unexpectedly, I have found all this time at home with my family to be a spiritually clarifying moment. It has given me an increased appreciation of the power of family in a time such as this. I have often been someone who threw himself at work, who saw work as not just a job but as a calling, who perhaps spent too much time working and not enough time at home. So, it is humbling to realize that, at this moment in time, perhaps the most important thing I can do in the universe is be with my family. We are lucky to all be healthy, and for both my spouse and I to have jobs that allow us to work at home, so I don’t mean to imply that it was a particularly hard lot for me. Rather, just that I have realized the work of teaching my kids and psychologically connecting with my family, of helping us survive and thrive mentally as a family, was more important than any of my official work as an urban ecologist.
Professionally, this pandemic has brought some big changes for me. The Nature Conservancy, like many non-profits around the world, will have its budget significantly impacted by the economic crisis we are in. This will lead to significant changes in how our urban work is structured, which we are still working through as an organization. Moreover, it seems clear to me that the “traditional” agenda of urban conservationists, of pushing for nature-based solutions in cities for the ecosystem services they provide, for resilience and human well-being, may not be enough. There are hard questions being asked within the conservation movement right now. What is the value of nature during a pandemic? Does nature matter in cities post-coronavirus? Is there even a future for cities post-coronavirus, and if so, what is it? How can we talk about the links between nature and health, which are real and significant, without seeming trite compared with the enormity of the health impact of this pandemic? While we are beginning to find some answers to these questions, they will take months or years for the conservation movement to fully ponder. I truly don’t know yet how much our movement will change, or how.
Brian McGrath is Professor of Urban Design at Parsons School of Design at The New School and Associate Director of the Tishman Center for Environment and Design where he leads the Infrastructure, Design and Justice Lab. The focus of his work is the architecture of urban adaptation and change from social justice and ecological resilience perspectives.
Brian McGrath
I with others have recently postulated a metacity framework—a more flexible and adaptable form of architectural space—for the future adaptation of cities as we face a global climate crisis—such as the current pandemic. My hope for a positive outcome of this tragic virus is the development of new infrastructures in solidarity towards a just transition based on the feminist/ecologist metacity matrix.
New York, the current epicenter of the coronavirus, has transformed into H.G. Wells’ fictional Time Machine with a tragic twist: instead of armies of laborers working underground while the elite frolic in the open air, public life is now occupied by essential workers in service of the millions trapped indoors. Life goes on for those lucky enough to stay in our homes and still able to work. Days pass into night, Spring erratically arrives. We sleep, fitfully dream, wake up, eat, zoom, exercise, rest and sleep again. My Parsons architectural design studio class, after dispersing across the globe, has reassembled online to complete the semester. A few international students and locals remain unable to escape from New York. For many here, a contemplative life has replaced a New Yorker’s frantic pace. As someone who recently moved out of the city, the end of commuting is a relief, with a few hours gained a day. Horribly, thousands of our fellow citizens have been exposed to a cataclysmic respiratory assault, but Earth is finding an easier time breathing. Humans have substantially reduced their carbon footprints overnight; a behavior shift that five decades of scientific warnings about climate change barely budged. The Himalayas are in view again from India’s northern cities, and dolphins are swimming in Venice’s calm canals. Reading the architecture of cities provides a way to understand the past and the future of human responses to disease and climate. Societies have long designed cities as protective spaces for biological and cultural reproduction. Architectural inerventions such as walls, moats, spaces for worship, and blocks of houses with open spaces between, were not built not just for protection from armies, but also as strategies to avoid the spread of disease. Interestingly, Michel Foucault begins his “Panopticism” chapter in Discipilne and Punish not with the history of the architecture of criminal incarceration, but with the strategies developed in Europe for the spatial separation of lepers, and later the architecture of segmentation to contain infection during the plague. Of course, social inequity was the object of his study just as it was for Wells. With the advancement of medical science, cities have been designed to make us individually more separated, society more segmented and wilderness more remote. Le Corbusier’s City of Tomorrow was born in the antiseptic afterglow following the 1918 Spanish Flu. Urban “reformers” cleared away the crowded segmented space of Foucault’s Victorian City, creating the towers in the park and open free plans of modernity. Ecologists Steward Pickett, urban design theorist David Grahame Shane, and I have recently postulated a metacity framework for the future adaptation of cities as we face a global climate crisis. This current pandemic is just one of the multiple climate disturbances we face in the coming years. Through the metacity we search for more resilient city forms in the face of such an unstable future. In the 1981 essay for Heresies Magazine, Susana Torre developed a feminist concept of “space as matrix”, which advocated for a more flexible and adaptable form of architectural space that was neither the room, closet, corridor arrangement of Foucault’s Victorian age, nor the complete erasure of privacy and security promoted by the modernist free plan. This matrix spatial logic is nature’s own, and in the matrix strategy of the metacity, neighborhood units are understood as social patches within larger natural systems of nitrogen and carbon fluxes. This social-natural strategy aided by medical science may provide a way to have an open urban society where we can maintain Earth and public health without reverting to further personal isolation and social segmentation. My hope for a positive outcome of this tragic virus is the development of new infrastructures in solidarity towards a just transition based on the feminist/ecologist metacity matrix.
Siobhan is the Associate Director of Innovation at the Centre for Social Innovation in Trinity College Dublin where she heads up research and innovation activities under the themes of sustainability and resilience.
Siobhán McQuaid
We are facing now into a pivotal moment in time where it is possible to contemplate an alternative recovery plan. Governments and decision-makers need to take time out to reflect on the importance of small business, local business and nature-based business for community resilience.
Post-COVID – an opportunity for a new type of business?
Over the last five years I’ve had the privilege of working with some innovative companies who are passionate about bringing more nature into cities —sometimes they’re community enterprises designing and developing “growing” projects to meet the needs of vulnerable groups. Other times they’re commercial entities who have leveraged their horticultural knowledge to create new innovations like green living rooms. Such interventions can instantly transform concrete squares into urban oases, enticing children with little exposure to nature to engage, happily picking strawberries from green walls. More recently, I’ve met start-ups harnessing satellite technology to come up with so-called “green-prints” to help cities plan, monitor and benchmark greener, healthier and happier urban environments.
In February this year, Connecting Nature, an EU-funded initiative, launched a survey to explore more widely the concept of nature and business. What type of business can nature support? How can business support nature and society? Just as Europe began to shut down country by country, we reached our first goal of 100 survey responses. A preliminary analysis shows that nature-based enterprises offer considerable potential in a post-COVID environment—not just to create much-needed jobs but equally importantly at a social and environmental level. Nature-based enterprises offer sustainable solutions to transform grey spaces into green lungs for cities, lifelines for apartment-dwellers, for homeless gym-bunnies, for communities as a whole, for nature.
This month we launch a mini-follow up survey to find out how these businesses have been affected by COVID-19. Anecdotally we have seen a wide divergence in impact. Any kind of food-growing business has seen interest skyrocket; the more local and natural the produce, the more insanely busy they have become. On the other hand, nature-based businesses depending on the construction or public sector have virtually closed down overnight, with tons of plants wilting on pallets waiting for on-site construction which has effectively been put on hold.
With plans afoot for the gradual re-opening of society, what will a post-COVID world look like for these nature-based businesses? Faced with mounting pressure, will the public sector, business and construction sector put nature on the long finger again? Will governments roll out short term economic stimulus packages focusing on a return to “business as usual” as quickly as possible? Will workers return in their hoards to city-centre offices on packed commutes? Or will government and businesses seize this opportunity to reflect and consider the situation we were in before this crisis—where “business as usual” led to unsustainable economic cycles contributing to climate change and biodiversity devastation in another type of emergency.
We are facing now into a pivotal moment in time where it is possible to contemplate an alternative recovery plan. Governments and decision-makers need to take time out to reflect on the importance of small business, local business and nature-based business for community resilience. Business leaders need to consider the proven benefits of bringing nature into work environments or even better the possibility of creating new working environments in commune with nature. We have the opportunity to incubate a new business sector, to stimulate the start-up of new nature-based enterprises and support the re-emergence and growth of existing nature-based businesses. Can each of us make the case in our own community for investment in a different type of business, nature-based businesses that contribute to resilience, community connectivity and that most crucial element we have all come to appreciate—quality of life?
(Note: The Connecting Nature survey of nature-based enterprises is open to enterprises globally. We welcome your insights on the impacts of COVID 19 and future opportunities for this sector. Click here for more information.)
Source: Borzykowski, B. “The outdoor office spaces where workers commune with nature” BBC (2017) https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20170517-the-outdoor-office-spaces-where-workers-commune-with-nature (accessed 22/4/2020)The ouidoor office. BBC (2017) https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20170517-the-outdoor-office-spaces-where-workers-commune-with-nature(accessed 22/4/2020). Photo: Siobhán McQuaid.Exploring nature on a mobile green living room. Photo credit: Jonathon Muller, Helix PflantzenGetting in touch with nature on the mobile green living room. Photo credit: Jonathon Muller, Helix Pflantzen
Ragene Palma is a Filipino urbanist currently studying International Planning at the University of Westminster, London, as a Chevening scholar. Follow her work at littlemissurbanite.com.
I call for urban practitioners and legislators to immerse in the daily lives of those who have been sidetracked for the longest time, and work from there to begin championing spatial equality—visit slums, converse with the homeless, and know what it’s like to live on the verge of the city. Our previous “normal”should not be recreated.
I write this piece about COVID-19 with a consciousness on my privilege of being able to do so—I am comfortable in the confines of my tiny flat in central London, and continuing my postgraduate education and scholarship online. I have the option to turn off the ghastly coronavirus death toll whenever I need a mental health “break”; I ensure daily, transborder communication with my family in the Philippines; and I get to have my supplies delivered to my doorstep.
I cannot help but contrast this privilege with the plight of so many others, who are vulnerable to the coronavirus.
Years before this pandemic, urbanists have emphasised the reality of the world’s historical urban crisis, from sporadic economic challenges in the last century to today’s spatial inequality—a powerful few dominate the “rest” and the “others”, and we live segregated lives, because we simply cannot afford to live in the city anymore. Urban literature points to gentrification, “accumulation by dispossession”, and the urban-suburb dynamic, caused by intertwined factors: globalisation, neoliberalism, and urbanisation all grew hand in hand. Migrants, slum-dwellers, and the working class experience spatial discrimination in their daily life, an unfortunate reality that has become the norm.
Now, this health crisis literally exposes the reality of an urban crisis. Around the world, those without homes, or those who have been deprived of work opportunities, show us where our plans, and our cities have failed. World leaders are faced with massive challenges—in the US, a staggering 17 million people have filed for unemployment; in the UK, authorities address the rough sleepers, and look into eviction protection; in Japan, the government moves to house “internet cafe refugees” (the homeless are associated with internet cafes to access sleeping areas and showers). In the Global South, South Africa’s struggles are haunted by the apartheid; in the Philippines, regional lockdowns threaten at least 11 million informal workers, including farmers; and in India, migrant workers have been forced to walk thousands of miles due to lack of transport provisions.
In the planning profession, we deal with the elements and components of cities that have the potential to improve how we deal with pandemics: housing, mobility, urban design, ecological integrity. These are also crucial in “redoing” a new “normal”. In revisiting how we model our plans and shape our cities, we can begin with addressing inclusion and equality.
As a start, I call for urban practitioners and legislators to immerse in the daily lives of those who have been sidetracked for the longest time, and work from there to begin championing spatial equality—visit slums, converse with the homeless, and know what it’s like to live on the verge of the city. Spatially, our previous “normal” saw our urban areas create a new breed of “colonisers”, enclaves and borders, and a push-out of the “rest” of society. This was never supposed to be a “normal” in the first place; we should not revert to what went wrong, but move towards spatial solutions that provide for all, and not just the powerful few.
* * *
Hinihikayat ko ang mga nasa larangan ng pagpaplano at mambabatas na pananaliksik ng pamumuhay ng nakararami—bisitahin natin ang mga iskwater, kausapin natin ang mga walang tirahan, at alamin natin kung ano ang kalagayan ng mga namumuhay sa loob at labas ng mga lungsod.
Sinusulat ko itong sanaysay tungkol sa COVID-19 nang may kamalayan ukol sa aking pribelehiyo—kumportable akong nasa loob ng isang maliit na kuwarto sa London, at pinagpapatuloy ang aking pag-aaral ng master’s sa online na pamamaraan. Maaari kong hindi pakinggan ang balita kapag ninais kong huminga nang panandalian sa nakaririmarim na bilang ng mga namatay na; araw-araw, sinisiguro kong makausap ang aking pamilya sa Pilipinas; at habang nandirito, madali naman sa aking magpa-deliver na lang ng mga pangangailangan.
Napakasuwerte ko sa ganitong kalagayan; marami sa atin ang halos walang laban sa sakit na dulot ng coronavirus.
Bago ang sakuna na dulot ng pandemic, nagsulat ang mga urbanista tungkol sa krisis na pinagdaraanan ng napakaraming lungsod, mula sa problema ng mga ekonomiya sa mundo, hanggang sa kakulangan ng patas na espasyo para sa nakararami. Ang ilan lamang na nakaaangat ang nagpapatakbo ng karamihan ng negosyo, habang ang iba naman ay nabubukod sa oportunidad, at nawawalan ng kakayahang mamuhay sa loob ng siyudad. Sa pag-aaral ng urbanismo, malalaman natin ang tungkol sa hentripikasyon (o ang pagpapaganda ng isang lugar para sa mga may kakayahan), ang pagkakamal ng lupa at pag-aari habang ang iba ay nawawalan ng titirhan, at ang kagunayan ng lungsod at ng mga nakapaligid sa lungsod. Ito ay bunga ng globalisasyon (ang koneksyon ng mga ekonomiya sa iba’t ibang bansa), neoliberalismo (ang kalagayan kung saan may kawalan ng regulasyon sa ekonomiya), at urbanisasyon (ang paglago ng tao at kanilang pangangailangan). Tinatamaan ng mga ito ang mga migrante, mahihirap, mga nasa iskwater, at ang mga nagtatrabaho; nagiging karaniwan ang hindi pantay-pantay na pamumuhay.
Inuugnay natin ang krisis ng coronavirus sa kalusugan at medikal na larangan, ngunit pinapakita rin into ang isang krisis tungkol sa ating espasyo at mga lungsod. Maraming siyudad sa mundo ang naglalantad ng mga pagkukulang sa pabahay at trabaho. Sa Estados Unidos, 17 milyon ang humihingi ng benepisyo dahil sa kawalan ng hanapbuhay; sa Inglatera, binibigyang pansin ngayon ang pagpapaalis ng mga umuupa; sa Japan, binibigyan ng pabahay ang mga walang tirahan. Ang mga umuunlad na bansa ay may mga dagdag na suliranin sa pagtugon sa krisis, tulad ng kasaysayan ng apartheid ng South Africa, ang pagtigil ng kabuhayan ng 11 milyon sa impormal na sektor ng Pilipinas, at ang puwersadong paglalakad pauwi ng mga naghahanapbuhay sa India, dulot ng kawalang ng pampublikong serbisyo at transportasyon.
Sa pagpaplano, binibigyang halaga at probiso ang mga bagay na kailangan upang kalabanin ang pandemic: pabahay, paggalaw at transportasyon, disenyo ng pampublikong espasyo, at pangangalaga sa kalikasan. Kailangang kilatisin ang mga ito upang maisaayos ang laganap na kahirapan at problema sa ating mga espasyo.
Hinihikayat ko ang mga nasa larangan ng pagpaplano at mambabatas na pananaliksik ng pamumuhay ng nakararami—bisitahin natin ang mga iskwater, kausapin natin ang mga walang tirahan, at alamin natin kung ano ang kalagayan ng mga namumuhay sa loob at labas ng mga lungsod. Ang nakasanayan natin ay dakilain ang may kaya at may kapangyarihan, habang naiiwan ang ‘iba’ at nakararami. Kung tutuusin, hindi ito ‘normal’, at kailangan nating talakayin kung paano tayo magkakaroon ng patas na pamumuhay pagkatapos nitong krisis.
Si Ragene Palma ay isang urbanista o tagapagplano, at kasalukuyang nag-aaral ng International Planning sa University of Westminster, sa London, bilang isang iskolar ng programang Chevening.
Diane Pataki is a Professor of Biological Sciences, an Adjunct Professor of City & Metropolitan Planning, and Associate Vice President for Research at the University of Utah. She studies the role of urban landscaping and forestry in the socioecology of cities.]
Diane Pataki
What about poverty, inequality, food insecurity, lack of access to clean water, climate change, and pollution? Now that I know we can act in response to COVID-19, there’s no turning back. Our society can change – completely and rapidly. The next time we have a daring solution, let’s not take “no” for an answer.
I now have a completely different perspective about the speed at which our society can change. For as long as I can remember, I’ve been told that rapid transformations to society, to cities, and to our relationship with the environment are impossible. Many of us spend countless hours brainstorming, discussing, and envisioning daring and far-reaching solutions to urban problems, only to be told “no”—that such solutions can never be implemented. How many times have we heard that there are too many barriers to change, especially in the face of uncertainties about future risks such as climate change?
I no longer find this argument valid. In the past few weeks, we’ve seen massive changes to almost every element of our society, implemented at unprecedented speed. We shut down businesses, sent workers and school children online, closed streets to cars, and changed social norms about what to wear. For my entire career as an academic, I was told that universities were slow to change and would take years to fully embrace online education. Yet, virtually every campus in the United States transitioned to online teaching in a matter of weeks, sometimes days. Professionally, most of us kept up air travel to meetings that could have easily been held online, even though we knew we shouldn’t. We didn’t want to change—until suddenly we did.
All of this happened under massive uncertainty: we still don’t know how many COVID cases there really are, whether the virus will persist through the summer, whether anyone really has immunity even after they’ve recovered, and how long it will take to develop a vaccine—if ever. And yet still, we acted. We acted because lives were at risk, or because it was the right thing to do, or because we were afraid, or because we were compelled, or because the risk of not acting seemed greater than the risk of change.
This is not to say that the societal changes we’ve seen so far have been positive. Many have been devastating. In New York City, where I grew up and where my family still lives, the changes are heartbreaking. In the New York borough of Queens, a global epicenter of COVID-19, my elderly family members no longer step outside. Every two weeks my brother dons protective gear and visits several grocery stores to find enough food for all of them, quietly delivering their groceries without saying a word or going inside. Family friends became infected, and one died when the hospitals refused admission for three days in a row because the ICUs were full.
The human toll has been horrific, and many governments were, in fact, too slow to respond given the circumstances. Yet still, I’ve seen more wide-reaching government and societal action in the last two months than in my entire life. When lives are threatened, we can change the way we do things to a phenomenal extent.
So what about the other ways that lives and wellbeing are threatened in cities? What about poverty, inequality, food insecurity, lack of access to clean water, climate change, and pollution? Now that I know we can act in response to COVID-19, there’s no turning back. Our society can change – completely and rapidly. We transformed when it was necessary and we can do it again. Radical changes are possible, and urgent. The next time we have a daring solution, let’s not take “no” for an answer.
Dr. Mitchell Pavao-Zuckerman is an Associate Professor at the University of Maryland. He is an ecologist studying the interactions of decision making, design, and environmental change on ecosystem processes in urban landscapes.
Mitch Pavao-Zuckerman
Not all of our students have the desire to learn online, and not all have the resources to do so. There is talk about how the new normal will impact university budgets and student enrollments. This experience is teaching many about the real lives and experiences of our students, and we need to be sure that any transformations in the new normal reflect on inequities in access to time, technology, and privacy.
I held my last non-virtual class of the semester over 6 weeks ago in a course on urban ecosystem services. We were focused mainly on my nascent plans for moving to online instruction. To my surprise the students pivoted this discussion to talking about the potential for cities to be transformed by the impacts of COVID. These are the inspired and creative moments in the classroom that we live for! Having taught online before (and not during a crisis), I knew having discussions like that would be more difficult. Still, as my students were quick to realize, COVID will provide an opportunity for transformation. How will COVID will change teaching—and how will it change teaching for the better?
Six weeks later, we’ve all experienced the challenges of teaching online—how much more time it takes, the drain of using Zoom, and the disconnection we have if we aren’t able to use technology to connect directly with students. The relative stability of campus life has dissolved for many students as they cope with the need to find jobs to help parents who are newly unemployed, care for sick family members, and the lack of internet and computers to connect with online courses. It is clear though; our students are hungry for the opportunity to engage and to help make a difference within our local communities. How can this transformative moment support this hunger?
At my university we talk a lot about the “land grant mission”—that research and education should be linked to improve communities and the environment—but that mission is not integrated well into the classroom. As we plan for the new normal, we are anticipating remaining online to some degree for the near future. We are looking for ways to modify internships and capstone experiences to fit a distance education format. We seek to transform these experiences so that students can problem solve and gain service-learning experiences in addition to professional development and research skills. If we succeed in bringing this land-grant model into online courses, this is a transformation that we need to maintain once we are back in the classroom.
Not all of our students have the desire to learn online, and not all have the resources to do so. There is talk about how the new normal will impact university budgets and student enrollments. This experience is teaching many about the real lives and experiences of our students, and we need to be sure that any transformations in the new normal reflect on inequities in access to time, technology, and privacy.
Personally, I’m still figuring out the new normal, but one thing COVID is teaching me is about the illusion of time. In some ways, we seem to have more of it: spending time with old friends across the country playing virtual games and listening to music, baking, taking long daily walks, and watching our kids explore along the streams in our neighborhood. This time to connect has been a welcome source of joy and normalcy. Post-virus, I hope these transformations stick for the better too.
Steward Pickett is a Distinguished Senior Scientist at the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, New York. His research focuses on the ecological structure of urban areas and the temporal dynamics of vegetation.
Steward Pickett
This changes everything … again; Will those of us who survive learn this time? All of us are on some verge.
This Changes Everything
In this Time of Pandemic: You can’t see your friends; You hunger for a simple hug, even a fist bump; You must stay home for months; You must manage time better and keep from an emotional abyss; You must remember this is real and serious. You understand this is part of a system of ignorance, forgetfulness, and greed; Face has been saved with lives lost; This has happened before.
In Uncertain Times: Euphemisms emerge; They will sell you a car along with a dose of sincerity.
In the Time of Climate Change: Spring comes in all wrong; Floods happen too soon, or find welcome places far from floodplains; The ocean steals into coastal water supplies; People move as if from tectonic disaster.
In an Era of Unprecedented Fire: Entire towns are consumed, just as in the days of wooden cities and timber camps; We have to learn new ways to fight fire, or how to give up, or how to prepare.
In the Era of Globalization: Jobs are snatched away, Philanthropy grows huge, but distant and blind; You have interesting new neighbors, and your cousin moves to a place where your language won’t work.
In a Time of Civil Unrest: People let go their anger; People stomp their frustration in the street; The pawn shops and big box stores are empty of guns. Fear is the order of the day. Power is still in the same hands as usual.
In the Time of the Slave Trade: The mythology of race matures and finds a home in “the natural order of things;” Some people are capital; Those who are capital are forbidden to acquire the other tools of capitalism, and so unto the generations.
Under Jim Crow: White supremacy emerges again in the public sphere, and is legally and habitually reinforced for the next ninety years; The monster cannot be subdued by individual action, and it kills, corrals, humiliates, and excludes at will.
In an Age of Mass Incarceration: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within…” (Amendment XIII); Private prisons are profitable business; The burden falls inequitably; Jim Crow is dead/long live Jim Crow.
In the Time of the Scapegoat: Fear becomes personified; Political and commercial accountability is subverted; Chinese Americans have been insulted and assaulted in the name of COVID19; in some places mask wearers are honored, while in others vilified.
In the Time of Cholera: A time that has never ended; A time that rises from time to time in different places, from squalor and untreated water; A proper name for pandemics past.
In a Time of Increasing Automation: A threat to workers in city and country; The missing tellers, clerks, help desks; The lost wages and gained profits; The idle, hungry hands that cannot leave.
In this Crazy Time: The label that comes up when my friends and I text or video chat.
In this time…You can’t see your friends; You hunger for a simple hug, even a fist bump; You must stay home for months; You must manage time better and keep from an emotional abyss. Some friends have moved away looking for jobs; They’ve lost their pride and hope as work they might have aspired to dries up; Others have died long ago from drugs and the endless litany of the pandemics in whose times we continue to live; This changes everything – again; Will those of us who survive learn this time? All of us are on some verge.
Mary W. Rowe is an urbanist and civic entrepreneur. She currently lives in Toronto, Canada, the traditional territories of the Anishinabewaki, Huron-Wendat and Haudenosauneega Confederacy, and works with government, business and civil society organizations to strengthen the economic, social, cultural and environmental resilience of the city and its neighborhoods.
Mary Rowe
I think the most profound challenge for any of us working in urbanism through and after COVID, is now that we have seen how our cities truly function at their most vulnerable, what possible excuse do we now have to not emerge solely committed to fixing it?
Better Normal
A few months before COVID I accepted a position to lead a national charity focused on the quality of life in Canadian cities. Canada’s Urban Institute was founded 30 years ago, before cities were as widely acknowledged as the dominant unit of human settlement of the 21stcentury. But in 2020 they are. Canada is one of the most urbanized countries in the world with close to 90% of the population living in communities of 5000 people or more. Two-thirds of this nation’s GDP comes out of six urban centres. But the dominant narrative in Canada does not reflect this reality. We still perpetuate a settler story: rural communities, smaller towns, two or three “global” but more likely niche cities, and an agrarian and resource extraction-based economy.
The dilemma that aged story presents Canada is an absence of coordinated urban policies and inconsistent public investment commitments to address real challenges.
To create a more realistic and compelling narrative to lead to systemic change, my focus taking this gig was to focus on creating new forms of connective tissue: to foster an ecosystem of urbanism—horizontal, peer-to-peer learning in a vast country whose governance has historically run vertical: from municipalities to provinces to the federal government. What if we were able to catalyze connections between city builders—in every sector, people engaged in making their urban places more livable and resilient?
We were headed on to doing that, planning urban “residencies” in a dozen cities where we would set up a week of deep listening and connecting. The first were to be in April in two cities hardest hit by the global collapse of the oil industry: Edmonton and Calgary.
The COVID hit and travel plans were dashed.
COVID seems to have acted like a particle accelerator—a term I borrow from NYU sociologist Eric Klinenberg, who first used the analogy to describe the how the 1995 heatwave in Chicago exposed all the neighborhood dysfunction that existed before that July, leaving poorly designed and resourced neighborhoods much more vulnerable than others. We see the same in our urban neighborhoods in Canada here in 2020. Where density was imposed without adequate public amenities, creating isolated, often over-crowded buildings, the impacts of COVID—and stay at home orders—have been devastating. Similarly, our city shelter systems, safe consumption sites, food banks—none of these have proven adequate to provide these essential services in safe, socially-distanced ways. Victoria has moved their support operations to town parks; Toronto shelters to sports arenas; public library parking lots are now foodbank depots (with librarians now stocking pantry shelves).
Our efforts during COVID have been to create three live platforms to grow our connective tissue and create a dynamic narrative: www.citywatchcanada.ca, www.citysharecanada.ca, and www.citytalkcanada.ca. These are being populated daily by hundreds of partners and volunteers. That’s the connective tissue value proposition: it tells the good (how responsive local governments and resourceful communities have been), the bad (areas where resources are badly lacking and planning and design has utterly failed) and the ugly (the starkness of underlying inadequacies in so many areas). I think the most profound challenge for any of us working in urbanism through and after COVID, is now that we have seen how our cities truly function at their most vulnerable, what possible excuse do we now have to not emerge solely committed to fixing it?
Andrew Rudd is the Urban Environment Officer for UN-Habitat’s Urban Planning & Design Branch in New York, where he leads substantive advocacy for the urban dimension of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (including the SDGs).
Rudd
I am frequently in mourning that after this crisis the world will never be the same. I am also hopeful that after this crisis the world will never be the same.
I wake up without an alarm—bad dreams are just as effective—and take 100 ujjayi breaths, then brew coffee while we air out our 60m2 apartment. This is our morning ritual. Much bird song pours in during these 20 bracing minutes and I realize that my only previous memory of hearing springtime birds through an open window is from the 1980s at my great-grandmother’s house in the Appalachian foothills. Either I never took the time to notice the springs of intervening years or the reduced noise of background traffic during the last 42 days (apart from ambulance sirens) has brought them to the fore. All the same, the indifference of nature is comforting. Sparrows gather in the honey locust in front of our building while, inside, neighbours text-quarrel over common space protocols. Some have started leading yoga from the courtyard balconies. Two weeks ago, when I first went outside, clustering teenagers brandished their normalcy and callery pear trees blossomed in oblivion to their invasive stigma. New York is as quirkily convenient as ever, and food and supplies can be delivered right to our doors. However, this ability to conduct life (almost) as normal exposes the ugly class divide between those who can afford to self-quarantine and those who cannot. Here COVID-19 prevalence is highest not in the dense core, but in peripheral neighbourhoods where those with the highest occupational hazard can afford to live. The national health director of the US claims that the role of federal government is merely to ‘facilitate’ the pandemic response in cities, but this left New York with distressingly fewer ventilators from our own national government (400) than others around the world (1,000 from China). Now is also a sobering time for urbanists. A number of columnists are arguing unfoundedly against compact living and attempting to resurrect segregated, car-centric living patterns. Samuel Kling writes that the scapegoating of urban space for disease is nothing new. But we again have the task of revealing the socioeconomic causes of our social ills so that cities’ positive potential can be maximized. People are social animals, and they require co-existence in shared physical places. So does climate action. One of my tasks at the UN will be to help frame a more convincing argument that, rather than sharing space, the more likely transmission factors are destruction of natural habitat, excessive air travel and disintegrating (or nonexistent) public health systems. Another will be to research urban form and human behaviour, including surface touch and close-contact networks. Cities are going to need this evidence if they are going to build for survival. And my colleagues and I will have to design solutions that accommodate the impact of our actions at multiple scales—the immediate, near and far. Mariana Mazzucato writes that we now have the opportunity to rethink capitalism and rebuild the public sector into more than a fixer of crises. I am frequently in mourning that after this crisis the world will never be the same. I am also hopeful that after this crisis the world will never be the same.
Eric Sanderson is a Senior Conservation Ecologist at the Wildlife Conservation Society, and the author of Mannahatta: A Natural History of New York City.
Eric Sanderson
What is life, if not hope? What are our cities, if not an investment in our future? Great things will come again. Take care, my friends; hold on; and invest what you can into the long now.
A few great things
I was in the middle of a really great thing when the COVID-19 pandemic came to town.
Last spring, I was offered one of fifteen coveted fellowships at the Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Center at the New York Public Library. For nine months, I was going to commit entirely (well, almost entirely) to one project: to complete research on a book I longed to write, summarizing everything I had learned from two decades of study about the historical ecology of all of New York City, as a kind of sequel and complement to my earlier book, on Manhattan (sensu Mannahatta). The forests of Bushwick, the wetlands of Jamaica Bay, the schisty basements of the Bronx, and the towering hills of Staten Island, and their ancient forefathers and Earth mothers, were my topic. Generations on generations of relationships, human and mostly not, developed through the planet’s long and dramatic history, had been expressed in extraordinary, beautiful, biological splendor right here, in the place where the five boroughs came to be. If the streams, meadows, and indigenous inhabitants had been forgotten under the relentless onslaught of concrete and asphalt of the 21st century city, then some old maps, dusty books, and our remaining natural areas, plus a bit of historical and ecological puzzle-solving, could help me remember them for all of us.
Outside the library, on “Library Way,” also known as East 41st street, this quote from John Ruskin’s Sesame and Lilies is embedded in the sidewalk. I used to walk by it every day on my way to the New York Public Library’s Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Center for Scholars and Writers.
The very best part, though, was that I had lucked into spending nine months of my working life with people unlike my usual science-oriented cohort at the WCS. My fellow fellows were novelists, journalists, poets, translators, philosophers, and historians, all scholars and writers committed to plumbing the human heart and exploring the reaches of the human mind, not a scientist amongst them save me. They could carry on in ancient tongues or witty English. They ruminated on the pros and cons of back story. They knew engrossing details about people I had never heard of. Lunch time conversations ran from Nabokov to the National Book Award to techniques for baking the best sourdough bread. Yes, we were baking and breaking bread long before the library was shuttered, and we were all forced to skedaddle.
I totally understand that the breakup of our fellowship is among the lightest of burdens to carry during the pandemic. Although a few of us have been sick, none have died; and we all have some version of a home to which we can return. The library is closed, but not insolvent. Our work is largely imaginative and portable. Like so many, we now zoom and text and email; we connect as best we can; we share rumors and speculations; and we try to claw out of the vacuum vortex of talking only about COVID-19. We live and work cognizant of better days to come, if only because every other disaster we have ever seen or read about has had better days that followed worse ones, as dawn follows night.
What does any of this have to do with the Nature of Cities? Everything really. Cities are successful because of the kind of interactions the Cullman Center exemplifies: new people, new ideas, new expressions, new feelings, new friends. Scientists in conversation with artists, artists laughing with librarians, librarians effusing to philosophers. Cities, such as New York, which have been in the urban business a long time, have invested in institutional structures to foment such connections.In much the same vein, The Nature of Cities connects our global community of urban-obsessed, nature-loving, polyglots.
Of course, this same trick of determined confrontation with difference is the genius of nature too, though in manifestly more diverse ways and means. Nature is all about felicitous combination, shaped by the conditions and circumstances of place and time, informed by the past, but not bound to it, channeling an effervescent hope for the future.
What is life, if not hope? What are our cities, if not an investment in our future? Great things will come again. Take care, my friends; hold on; and invest what you can into the long now.
Some books by this year’s fellows at the Cullman Center. How are books like these made? Through the magic of the nature of cities.
Olivier Scheffer is a consultant in responsible strategy and innovation, the former Managing Director at NOBATEK/INEF4 (the French national Institute for Energetic Transition of the AEC sector), former R&D Director of XTU Architects, a board member of the French Committee of Biomimicry Europa, and a strategic adviser to the CEEBIOS.
Olivier Scheffer
We are standing at the edge of the cliff, and the coronavirus is right behind us…So how do we urgently change the urban metabolism to something highly resilient?
The post-Covid Cities
The Coronavirus pandemic has had the effect of a giant X-ray on our liberal globalized economies, of which megacities are the utmost expression.
We’ve discovered (or directly experienced) that our food autonomy is only of a few days. The city of Paris, France, for example, would only have a 3-days food stock if food supply stopped (be it because of trucking strikes, energy supply shortfalls or … a pandemic).
Moreover, food travels hundreds of miles (“food miles”) before reaching citizens (an average of 660 km in Paris[i], and up to 3500 km for a yogurt[ii]). The Paris Region (“Ile-de-France”) produces only 10% of the food its inhabitants eat, so most of the food is imported from “outside” the Paris area. On a national scale, 30,000 semi-trailers cross France every day to supply factories, warehouses and retail chains just-in-time[iii]… which in the context of freight traffic disruption, might simply cut the supply of a large array of food products.
Last but not least, the whole food production value chain, from agriculture to food processing and distribution, relies heavily on energy. Researchers have calculated that for the U.S. food system, it takes 7.3 calories (one unit of energy) as fossil fuel to recover 1 calorie as food[iv], and the same is true for most industrialized countries with intensive agricultures, like France. Energy has always been used to produce food, but the major shift that happened from the 1960s on, with the “Green Revolution”, is that it started depending heavily on fossil energy, with peak oil behind us and shale oil EROEI plunging[v].
Harchaoui S, Chatzimpiros P. 2018. [vi]On top of that, biodiversity and climate emergencies are still looming behind the Sars-Cov-2, putting our agriculture and food system at very high risks, as was stated as early as 2015 by the Lloyd’s[vii] and later by the IPCC[viii].
Regionalized projections of the soil relative humidity index (spring average), compared to 1970. (IPCC RCP 6.0 scenario: 3 ° C in 2100). Source: Drias-climat (www.drias-climat.fr)
We are standing at the edge of the cliff, and the coronavirus is right behind us…
So how do we urgently change the urban metabolism to something higly resilient?
A study of the food autonomy of Paris[ix] by Sabine Barles, Professor of town planning and development at the University of Paris 1, concluded that it would take the whole Seine watershed area to produce organic food for parisians, who would have adopted a demitarian regime (50% cut in animal proteins). Commenting the study, she stated “Of course, it requires a strong political will. And above all, that public authorities and the State control land in cities as well as in peri-urban areas. We can therefore hope for development policies where the security of agricultural land is effective and where we develop a housing policy that consumes less space.”[x]
As for the low-tech technical solutions to agriculture, they already exist with permaculture, agro-forestry or ecological agriculture.
[v] We know that peak oil is now behind us and that it has become a critical raw material as “Today approximately 90% of the supply chain of all industrially manufactured products depend on the availability of oil derived products, or oil derived services. […] Approximately 70% of our daily oil supply comes from oil fields discovered prior to 1970. […] Since 2008, the Shale revolution (North-american tight oil or fracked oil) has increased global oil supply which stabilized increased demand.“[v] But as we move from conventional oil to shale oil, the EROEI is falling from 10-15 to 4-5 at best, and down to 1,4 for tight oil – and with the current fall in demand and prices, exploration investments will be postponed.
Michaux Simon, « Oil from a Critical Raw Material Perspective », Geological Survey of Finland (GTK), December 2019 (http://tupa.gtk.fi/raportti/arkisto/70_2019.pdf)
[vi] Harchaoui S, Chatzimpiros P. 2018. Energy, Nitrogen, and Farm Surplus Transitions in Agriculture from Historical Data Modeling. France, 1882–2013. Journal of Industrial Ecology. doi:10.1111/jiec.12760
Huda's experience and training combine urban planning, sustainable development and public health. She is a chartered town planner (MRTPI) and a chartered environmentalist (CEnv) with over 15 years' experience focused on visionary master plans and city plans across the Arabian Gulf. She is passionate about influencing Arab cities towards sustainable development.
Huda Shaka
I have been reminded of the privileges I have which others do not: having the option to work remotely, having access to quality public space and amenities at my door step, having a choice about how I travel and where I spend my leisure time—and having leisure time. I will work harder personally and professionally to bring those privileges to others, I hope.
As an urban planner, I am hopeful that COVID-19 will bring a renewed understanding and appreciation for urban resilience and what it means for communities, infrastructure, facilities, and governance. I am not simply referring to measures to facilitate life with physical distancing. In fact, I hope that we do not get stuck on the concept of physical distancing. It is a necessary extreme measure which is needed while we live through the pandemic. However, the next shock to face our cities will likely not be a pandemic and it will likely require a different set of responses. We need to be more strategic and plan for more holistic inclusivity, flexibility and robustness in our urban systems.
I am hopeful that my work will look at the planning and design of housing and public spaces differently. I am hopeful that developers and local authorities will be more interested in minimum standards that provide acceptable and accessible outdoor and indoor spaces for all. I am hoping that there will be more interest in promoting “complete communities” where basic amenities are provided within walking distance. I am hoping that there will be renewed interest in facilitating active travel, and in ensuring that our streets and policies are flexible enough to accommodate people’s needs and lifestyles.
As for how I do my work, COVID-19 has highlighted to me the importance of face-to-face office interactions. No amount of video calls can replace unplanned, informal chats with colleagues and clients or over-hearing project discussions happening in the background. At the same time, I realized how many of our planned, formal meetings can occur virtually, and maybe even more successfully. For one thing, its easier for me to keep quiet and focus on listening when there is a mute button!
On a personal level, the pandemic has helped me realise my fragility and dependency on others, particularly for my mental wellbeing. I hope that my post-COVID “normal” will include being more accepting of my limitations and weaknesses, and more open to reaching out to others. I expect that I will be more aware of my level of anxiety and better able to manage it. I will no longer expect certainty.
I have been reminded what it means to have three meals a day with family, and I hope to have more of those days even after I go back to working from the office. I have also been reminded of the privileges I have which others do not: having the option to work remotely, having access to quality public space and amenities at my door step, having a choice about how I travel and where I spend my leisure time, and having leisure time. I will work harder personally and professionally to bring those privileges to others, I hope.
Laura Shillington is faculty in the Department of Geoscience and the Social Science Methods Programme at John Abbott College (Montréal). She is also a Research Associate at the Loyola Sustainability Research Centre, Concordia University (Montréal).
Laura Shillington
“It’s the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine” — REM, 1987, Document
While we may be sharing a global experience of living in a pandemic, how we experience it is very specific to place, age, class, race, and gender. Can we use this experience to create a new normal with each of us as more ethical subjects to imagine new worlds?
Like many who read and write on The Nature of Cities, my hope is that the world at all scales (from personal to global) is radically changed as we slowly emerge from the global COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, I hope that we have not forgotten that we were in a crisis before this—the climate crisis—and that perhaps living through this pandemic and seeing how the world has changed (for example, the clear waters and skies in cities normally clouded in smog) will persuade more individuals to take the climate crisis as seriously as the coronavirus pandemic. Reflecting on how I have been professionally and personally changed by the pandemic is an interesting task. As a geography professor, I have continued to teach my classes online, so my schedule and life has altered little. Just as my college closed, I was about to start economic (development) and population geography in my “Introduction to Human Geography” class. As I prepared to pivot online, I altered the course content to incorporate the pandemic. In doing so, I revisited my books and articles on feminist political economy and political ecology. I wanted to give students new ways of thinking about economies, populations, health and, most importantly, the role of individuals within a collective. Two books, specifically, have become essential to me during this troubled time: The End of Capitalism (as we knew it) (1996) and A Post-Capitalist Politics (2006), both by JK Gibson-Graham.
As I re-read, I was reminded how insightful, instructive and inspiring the books were and still are. There are two broad ideas that can help us transition into thinking in radically new ways as we negotiate a new post-virus normal. The first is that we already live in a world of diverse economies. Despite the taken-for-granted assumption that we are a globalized, capitalist economy, and that this economy was the pinnacle of so-called development. Yet there have always existed other economies, but such economies tend to be viewed as not important, stuck in the past, and a threat to profits. Without diverse economies, what we know as capitalism would not have emerged and functioned. In the current pandemic, we are seeing the importance of these other economies, especially the care economy. Other economics, especially economies of care, have greater potential to bring about not just social justice, but also ecological. Recognising the important of other economies will (hopefully) lead us to “ethical practices of thinking economy and becoming different kinds of economic beings” (2006, p. xxviii).
Gibson-Graham’s second main idea is the importance of collective action and the politics of the subject (2006, p. 127). They ask and attempt to answer: “How we might become post-capitalist subjects?” We can add to this how we are different post-pandemic subjects. The politics of the subject for Gibson-Graham is a complex, not-so-neat process of “resubjectivation” – “the mobilization and transformation of desires, the cultivation of capacities, and the making of new identifications with something as vague and unspecified as a ‘community economy’ ” (2006, p. xxxvi). The process is reciprocal: as we change ourselves as subjects, we also change our worlds.
Indeed, there is a reciprocity in the current global pandemic. It is changing us as subjects (individual and collective) as well as changing our worlds. While we may be sharing a global experience of living in a pandemic, how we experience it is very specific to place, age, class, race, and gender. Can we use this experience to create a new normal with each of us as more ethical subjects to imagine new worlds?
“It takes a world to create a locality, and an imagined world to transform ourselves in place” (2006, p. 196)
Elisa Silva is director and founder of Enlace Arquitectura 2007 and Enlace Foundation 2017, established in Caracas, Venezuela. Projects focus on raising awareness of spatial inequality and the urban environment through public space, the integration of informal settlements and community engagement in rural landscapes.
Elisa Silva
It is clear that the way we have been living and the patterns of governance we have chosen could be very different, they could change the second we decide to make them a priority and work collectively toward their fulfilment.
An Optimistic Legacy for Covid-19
The misnamed Spanish flu of 1918 infected over 500 million people and was responsible for 100 million deaths. Since it coincided with WWI and economic depression it is difficult to separate the effects the epidemic might have had on the way people live from the equally devastating effects of war and famine. As we collectively devour articles, scouring over the past in order to find clues of what may lie ahead in our near future, I find myself most curious about the long-term effects Covid-19 will have on our lives. Re-dimensioning circulation corridors for social distancing, inserting sneeze guards at checkout counters and increasing the number of divisions within homes seems to me akin to other spatial investments in the past such as underground bunkers in German homes, or bullet proof glass separations in convenient stores in Brooklyn. In other words, they may have been absolutely critical for a finite period of time, but not structural in the way we live or the choices we make.
As a direct consequence of the Spanish flu, so far, I have been able to identify two clear long-term outcomes. The first one involves changes in interior design and furniture motivated by sanitary reasons. It was believed that increased light, air and openness would help kill germs, (the flu’s exact cause was still unknown) and the elimination of bacteria-lodging-crevices in ornament, and dust-collecting draperies typical of 19h century homes came to be seen as a deterrent for maintaining homes free of disease.[i] In other words, the white, spacious interiors flooded with light associated with modern architecture and the continuous surfaces of bent wood and tubular steel, used by Alvar Aalto, Marcel Brewer, Le Corbusier, and Mies van der Rohe in their furniture design, was as much a consequence of increased concern for hygiene as it was about practicality and the industrial aesthetic.
The other even more amazing change to which I have become aware, is the story behind Sweden’s modern welfare state. The flu affected the town of Östersund particularly hard, due to the fact that it hosted several army regiments, which in response to the war had increased in number to the point of swelling the town’s population by 50%. They were stationed in close quarters which facilitated the spread of the diseases. Another factor that aggravated the situation was the severe inequality that had resulted from the industrialization process of previous decades. Many families lived in cramped quarters, wooden shacks and tents. Apparently, this all changed when the city’s bank director Carl Lignell, decided to take matters into his own hands by using federal funds to turn a school into a hospital, since the city did not have one.[ii] He had people quarantined in their homes, he convened a medical team to scour the city for victims and moved the sick into the transformed school. These efforts were strengthened with city-wide cooperation to organize relief, raise funds, feed and clothe the most vulnerable. After the epidemic, what had been a week state, adopted the cooperative approach to social reform and one hundred years later, Sweden boasts one of the world’s most exemplary welfare systems.
So, what might be the long-term effects of COVID-19 in 2020? I would like to believe they will also be closely tied to both eliminating what is superfluous and the empowerment of institutions focused on mitigating inequality. We have all been shocked to see how quickly pollution levels have diminished in the atmosphere and nearly extinct animals have reclaimed their habitats. What is superfluous and unnecessary in this case is the way we contaminate and destroy the environment, the way we overgraze our share of a planet that is shared with other beings. Considering the second point, not surprisingly, we have witnessed the complete impotence of people living in informal settlements and the homeless to defend themselves from the virus’ eminent spread. Might we, like the Swedes, collectively grow indignant of what has thus far remained a tacitly tolerated humanitarian injustice, or will we continue to embrace our indifference as a society to these manifestations of inequality. In either case, it is clear that the way we have been living and the patterns of governance we have chosen could be very different, they could change the second we decide to make them a priority and work collectively toward their fulfilment.
Maps by NASA’s Earth Observatory. Levels of nitrous dioxide NO2
Notes:
[i] Paul Overy, Light Air and Openness: Modern Architecture Between the Wars, London: Thames & Hudson, 2008.
[ii] Brian Melican, “How Spanish flu helped create Sweden’s modern welfare state”. The Guardian August 29, 2018.
David Simon is Professor of Development Geography at Royal Holloway, University of London and until December 2019 was also Director of Mistra Urban Futures, an international research centre on sustainable cities based at Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
David Simon
The adaptational effort will be immense. While certain other activities are amenable to onlin-isation, others are not—some activities will simply be impossible. All bets are off.
Inevitably, the personal and professional aspects of my life are closely intertwined. At one level, coping with the disruption and uncertainties at all levels has been greatly facilitated by no longer having dependent children at home who need home schooling and boundless time and energy in so many ways. We also no longer have elderly parents or in-laws and their siblings to worry about and care for.
On the other hand, our elder son and his fiancée are both intensive care doctors who have been under relentless pressure on the frontline in two London hospitals. Given the risk to unprotected healthcare workers, exacerbated by the ongoing shortages of personal protective equipment and ongoing inadequacy of the testing regime for staff, this has been a nagging worry on them and us.
I am also immensely privileged in living in a detached house with good-sized garden on the very edge of the green belt, and with the forested expanses and beauty of Virginia Water lake in Windsor Great Park just around the corner. Unlike so many, I have therefore been able to swap my regular squash and tennis for training cycles “in nature” as the daily exercise for which, along with essential shopping and medical appointments, we are allowed to leave the house under the UK version of lockdown. Moreover, the 90% reduction of daily flights into and out of nearby Heathrow Airport has greatly reduced ambient background noise, making the birdlife far more audible.
Professionally, the progressive shutdown of travel and the universities caused anxiety and indefinite postponements of long-distance travel for research work, related workshops in Kenya, a PhD defence in Germany, and a guest university lecture in Luxemburg. Where practicable, rather like the teaching and assessment work of my university, we have rapidly reorganized to do the work online, so the guest lecture will go ahead on schedule.
While I have already done one UK PhD defence via Skype, the German system involves a whole ritual including a public lecture by the candidate and then a debate with the examiners. Hence the host university refused to countenance a slimmed down online version and we have set a provisional alternative date in mid-July. All bets are off.
Conversely, while certain other activities are amenable to onlin-isation, others are not. The bulk of planned fieldwork, multi-stakeholder discussions and academic writing training workshop for PhD students and early career researchers in Kenya require travel and face to face engagement. To date it has been impossible to reschedule this because the team comprises colleagues from Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, South Africa, India, Argentina, the UK and Sweden and each country has different restrictions and lockdowns, timelines and so forth. Who knows when all will be clear, flights will resume, visas be obtainable, the respective universities have rejigged their activities to cope with lost time, and thus leave of absence be granted?
Kenya’s universities will struggle since they have been unable to go online because many students lack wifi at home, let alone stable electricity, personal computers, and enough domestic space to be able to study quietly. As I started writing this, my own university has announced radical plans to reconfigure next academic year’s curriculum and modes of delivery, on the assumption that something resembling normality for our global student catchment will be unachievable before next January. The adaptational effort will be immense, and thus, apart from contractually agreed circumstances, sabbatical leave (which I have due for Sept to December this year) has summarily been postponed a year. What this means for the grant-funded research projects I hope to win and start in September/October, not to mention other activities incompatible with intensive curriculum redevelopment and teaching…
Mary Hall Surface is a playwright, director, and teaching artist. She is devoted to intergenerational audiences, multidisciplinary collaborations, and to transforming communities, museums and schools through the arts.
Mary Hall Surface
At its best, theatre is a unique forum where communities can imagine together. We gather and literally align our beating hearts as a story unfolds told by actors who breathe our same air. My nightmare new normal is a Romeo and Juliet who never touch, watched by a masked audience too afraid to believe the story.
February 1, 2020. Almost 10am. Actors gather for rehearsal. Effusive, affectionate comrades greet, hug, laugh in each other’s faces. They do a quick warm up, their bodies interacting, giving and taking weight, close, dance-like. They circle in and breathe together as their voices send sound across the shared space. Three actors then stand tightly together and move in sync to hoist another high above their heads. She’s flying! Theatre magic.
February 1, 2021. Almost 10am. Actors arrive for rehearsal. Cautious, efficient troopers leave their shoes at the door, wash their hands, wave across the large room. They stretch, run in place, alone in six-foot intervals of space. They circle wide, backs to one another as they warm up their voices, muffled behind facemasks. Three actors then stand in separate spots and raise their arms on cue as a fourth, lifted only by her own toes, grounded, spreads her arms like wings. She’s flying. Maybe.
When trying to imagine theatre in the new post-virus “normal,” my colleagues tend to focus on audiences. How far apart can we seat people? Do we hand out masks at the door? Take temperatures before taking tickets? These are shattering images. But what keeps me awake at night is picturing a socially distanced rehearsal process that leads to a performance by face-masked actors who never physically connect. My nightmare new normal is a Romeo and Juliet who never touch, watched by an audience too afraid to believe the story.
At its best, theatre is a unique forum where communities can imagine together. We gather and literally align our beating hearts as a story unfolds told by actors who breathe our same air. Theatre can challenge, lead, comfort, and heal. My grief for my shuttered profession is tempered by my knowledge that theatre has always risen from the ashes of past plagues and disasters. But a return to live performances, the kind we treasured only two months ago, is now far in the future.
So what happens between now and then? And what will “then” look like once we live through the journey forward? Will we create vibrant virtual spaces that can fill the role that theatre has played in our cities and communities? What essential aspects of the art form can exist now when what defines it—its in person shared live-ness—is impossible? Theatre companies worldwide are rushing to create on-line content. But can we truly convene on line as we do on stage? Can we collectively think and feel about our humanity, our interconnectedness, our systems and shortfalls on Zoom? If we can, then live theatre will change. When we reach “then,” what kind of rehearsal room will I return to?
April 22, 2020. Almost 10pm. A director/playwright wrestles with her core beliefs about what theatre requires and what it provides. COVID-19 simultaneously erodes and strengthens what she knows to be true. Her next play is in process, under development, with no set opening date. But she has the beginnings of a story line.
Dr. Erika Svendsen is a social scientist with the U.S. Forest Service, Northern Research Station and is based in New York City. Erika studies environmental stewardship and issues related to hybrid governance, collective resilience and human well-being.
Erika Svendsen
I am grateful for all those who are working outside during this crisis and the sacrifices they have made all these days. Nature’s stage crew, so to speak. In the future, I’d like to explore ways to help strengthen our green workforce and support those within it that are most vulnerable during times of crisis.
Nature’s Stage Crew
It’s true that my normal weekly routine has changed, but I have returned to an activity that I have always enjoyed: walking and watching.
At the beginning of this crisis, I was walking with friends. Then, with just one friend. Then, only with my husband. And then, alone. And in doing so, I remembered how much of my early research had been inspired by everyday urban nature-human observations. These days, before my household is awake, I rush outside to walk and look for signs. Signs that remind me of the reciprocity between humans and the non-human world. Signs that spark my curiosity. And signs that give me hope. I see sign on fences thanking hospital staff, teachers, and restaurant workers. I see purple ribbons tied around trees. I notice new vegetable plots carved out of front lawns and side yards. I see people setting out window boxes and planters.
I started to think about how my friends and family have been telling me how grateful they are for nature. Grateful for the trees and the trails, the forested parks and gardens, the playgrounds and lawns, the bikeways and waterfront parks. All providing bit of solace during these tragic times. I have to admit that I started to get a little defensive in my mind as I thought, “That’s cool. But do people realize that there is a stage crew that helps to put on this amazing public nature show?” I took my own walk in nearby Prospect Park in order to regain some calm repose and an inner voice reminded me, “Hey, remember that all this natural beauty doesn’t come easy.”
Each day, I look out the window to see the park across the street from my apartment. It has been locked for weeks. When the emergency orders began, people flocked to the parks for some fresh air. People gathered in a way that was too close for comfort, so many of the parks have closed. I watch as an elderly woman pushes a cart and stops at the gate. She looks defeated as she ponders the lock and chain. I think to myself, “Does she have another place to go? Where can she rest around here? She can’t possibly get on the subway or a bus to find another park!”
I recognize a park regular as he sits down on the edge of a street tree guard. He sets out a small cup for change. I see a worker walk toward the park with a morning coffee and bagel. He quickly pivots to sit on a stoop across the street. I hope no one comes out to usher him along before he finishes breakfast. I see a woman simply standing at the corner of the park. I see she is closing her eyes and tilting her face up, toward the sun.
As time goes on during the stay-at-home order, I see fewer people around the park. I still look out that window, waiting for my favorite redbud trees (Cercis canadensis) to bloom. I notice there are two people who return to the park each day. They arrive at different times. The morning person is a park worker, wearing a bright NYC Parks t-shirt. She is sweeping the park, picking up the occasional food scrap (sorry, squirrels) and straightening up. I now realize she has always been there, since the beginning of this crisis and long before.
In the afternoon, a man appears in the park and gets to work quickly, tending to the flowers and my redbud trees. Weeding and a bit of pruning today. I know him to be a park volunteer. I think about that. Where does he find the time? Like the park worker, he is wearing a mask and working alone, not speaking to anyone.
My thoughts go back to all the park workers out there, the volunteers and the greening NGOs in my city. In our parks, they are bravely showing up despite their own challenges. I know that many of these park workers are seasonal or temporary. I know that the greening NGOs are trying to find ways to adapt their field work, funding and programs as a result of this crisis so they can continue to support the nature just outside my window and well beyond.
I am grateful for all those who are working outside during this crisis and the sacrifices they have made all these days. Nature’s stage crew, so to speak. I am also proud of the network of people that I work with in my field of forestry and natural resource stewardship. In the future, I’d like to explore ways to help strengthen our green workforce and support those within it that are most vulnerable during times of crisis.
Abdallah is an architect, environmentalist and urban farmer. He works at the German International Cooperation (GIZ) and he is also the cofounder of Urban Greens Egypt, a startup aiming to promote the concept of Urban Agriculture in Cairo.
Abdallah Tawfic
Planting is a representation of peace and hope and we should continue to encourage, support and spread it in such critical time, for the sake of our health and wellbeing. Let’s be hopeful and revive victory gardens again all over the world, let’s get back to our roots, and grow food and hope inside our cities.
Growing Hope in the time of a Pandemic
Do you think its the first-time humanity faced a dark cloud? Skimming through history books, mankind has been through serious and tough plights. But I always wondered what keeps us going in the face of any adversity. We as Human Beings are remarkably resilient as a species. We don’t fully understand the science, but we know that the “support of one another” is crucial and is what keeping us strong during such difficult times. The experiences that we are going through nowadays will probably stay in our hearts before our minds for the rest of our lives. Covid-19 should be a lesson to all of us on how to go beyond the norms and routines of our daily “for granted” lives and be more dynamic and resilient inside our cities and within our communities. It should also allow us to have a glimpse through our past, learn and reflect from previous times of distress, and highlight and get inspired by solutions, innovations and successes that we always refer to in our history books with pride and admiration.
Urban Agriculture’s loyalty through stormy seas of our history. Through history Urban Agriculture has been an effective tool and a supportive friend for lots of cities worldwide, especially during critical times of humanity. Urban Agriculture is nothing new. In fact, it’s been around for as long as humans have lived in cities! Through time, the significance of urban Agriculture has taken on different levels of meaning; from serving as tools for social reform, to promoting environmental justice, and as subsistence in times of food insecurity during wars or pandemics, and even as a simple pastime and leisure in times of prosperity.
During World War I and World War II, most supplies and food were prioritized for the war effort, leaving many at home to deal with scarcity. In order to boost food supplies, many countries promoted “Victory Gardens” or “War gardens”, or gardens cultivated by citizens on private and public land. Besides alleviating the strain on the public food supply, it also was a way to boost morale and patriotism. In the US, President Woodrow Wilson asked Americans to plant Victory Gardens to prevent food shortages. Victory gardens were responsible for about 41% of all consumed vegetable produce in the US in the year 1943 according to some resources 1.
Nowadays Urban agriculture can be crucial to feeding more than half of the world’s population, whom are residing in cities, potentially producing as much as 180 million tons of food a year—or about 10% of the global output of pulses and vegetables, according to a 2018 study published in the journal Earth’s Future 2.
World War II poster created by the United States Office of Emergency Management, circa 1941-1945. Image courtesy of Pinterest
Do we have a potential to grow food during this critical times ? Balconies, gardens, empty lots and roofs are potential spaces that we can make good use of and start growing different types of productive crops, and decrease stresses happening nowadays on our global food supplies. Panic buying in some countries during this crisis has led to empty supermarket shelves and an uptick in the purchase of seeds, according to media reports. Many urban farms across the world are switching to this kind of community-supported-agriculture model (CSA), which guarantees a weekly supply of produce and may save their recipients trips to crowded supermarkets. The idea can also have a direct impact on our usual visits to busy local markets and thus decrease possible health compromises from social interactions we unfortunately aren’t encouraged to do nowadays.
Planting is a representation of peace and hope and we should continue to encourage, support and spread it in such critical time, for the sake of our health and wellbeing. Let’s be hopeful and revive victory gardens again all over the world, let’s get back to our roots, and grow food and hope inside our cities.
Christine Thuring is a plant ecologist who integrates her love of life into creative collaborations and educational dialogues. While her expertise is expressed particularly in the built environment (green roofs, living walls, habitat gardens), she is passionately practical and enjoys restoring peatlands, mentoring students, leading interpretive walks, and advocating sustainable and healthy lifestyles.
Christine Thuring
I’m contemplating alternative and new ways by which to engage my energy, expertise,, and love for the world. It is a bit of an existential place, which enlists the whole range of my creative and scientific faculties. If this is the new normal, where “business as usual” no longer applies, then how do I wish to contribute?
How surreal, to be alive during this global pandemic. Surreal in the sense of living through a prophesy I recall from the beginning of my career. My memory may be hazy, but I’m certain that my cohort (Environmental Science and Biology, Trent University, 1995) discussed, even debated, which organism, if any, would put a dent into the irrepressible population of Homo sapiens? Would Kingdom Fungi, or Bacteria, reign supreme? The Viruses? Or would we bring it upon ourselves by permitting our leaders to ignore the precautionary principle?
Personally and professionally, COVID-19 has changed my life in various ways. I’m growing food and traveling less. I’m teaching online, which has actually been a big deal. I’ve always enjoyed teaching, but now I’m not so sure anymore. Maybe the “virtual classroom” will grow on me, I don’t know. The 2-dimensional quality gives a limited sense of connection with my students, and I’ve been quite stressed by the massive prep time required and the steep learning curve.
Meantime, I’m contemplating alternative and new ways by which to engage my energy, expertise, and love for the world. It is a bit of an existential place, which enlists the whole range of my creative and scientific faculties. If this is the new normal, where “business as usual” no longer applies, then how do I wish to contribute?
Do I stay with what I’ve been doing, teaching and advocating for ecological green infrastructure? Do I start up a new enterprise, to help re-build up the economy and the ecology? The latter idea is inspired by that aspect of the Great Depression in which governments created employment schemes to get some of the population working on public projects, like building infrastructure. In this moment in time, much work needs to be done on creating climate jobs, building resilience, transitioning to post carbon society, getting off pesticides, restoring degraded habitats, etc. Another contemplation is whether I should get into politics, and serve as a vocal force for good. I want to see an end to perverse subsidies (e.g., industries of war, fossil fuels) and for those funds to be transferred towards life affirming industries (e.g., renewable energy, organic agriculture, small business). I imagine that the latter are like small trees in a forest, waiting for the big trees to fall. Perhaps this pandemic is the equivalent of some big trees falling, creating a gap in the canopy, and now those alternative industries can get their share of the sunlight and move into the mainstream.
The tragedies of the pandemic are inconsolable, and much gratitude is owed to the small and large acts of kindness everyday. Whether this virus’ effect becomes that of a Plague remains to be seen. At the very least, it has created a space for us to slow down. Recalling the debate, Kingdoms Fungi and Bacteria will always reign supreme. The big question is whether Homo sapiens can organise itself in line with the precautionary principle.
Naomi Tsur is Founder and Chair of the Israel Urban Forum, Chair of the Jerusalem Green Fund, Founder and Head of Green Pilgrim Jerusalem, and served a term as Deputy Mayor of Jerusalem, responsible for planning and the environment.
Naomi Tsur
Since we are supposed to go no more than 500 meters from our homes, this is clearly a good time to see if we have all we need within that perimeter. A grocer’s? A small park? A school? A community garden?… Perhaps it is time to think just what is needed for a happy neighborhood and ask whether we have it.
Time to Rethink and Reset Our Urban Systems?
Many of us are spending time in contemplation and reflection during these difficult days. We have a gut feeling that beyond the immediate and severe impact of the global Corona pandemic, there will need to be game-changing restructuring of our systems in the period following it. However, post-Corona is as yet an indistinct concept, too hazy to consider, especially as we are barely managing to cope with the storm of the pandemic as it rages.
There is an inherent contradiction in our current circumstances—we need and want to pull together, but must do so while observing strict social distancing. Virtual work meetings and social interaction are all well and good, but not as productive nor as enjoyable as real-time human interactions. Moreover, the current shut-down throws the whole world into severely challenging economic territory.
I am among those who believe that in the post-Corona age the main shift will have to be in our economic thinking and planning. When Adam Smith wrote his famous treatise, “The Wealth of Nations”, published in 1776 (the same year that the U.S.A. gained independence….) he laid the foundations of modern economic thinking. He could not have been expected to, nor did he take into account that 250 years later the world’s population would have reached its current size, and that there would be a serious danger that global resources would no longer be sufficient to provide food, water, energy and other needs for the ever spiraling numbers. In 1776 the global population was 800,000,000, compared to 7,795,000,000 today. He could certainly not have anticipated a world in which 90 percent of the total population live in cities, nor one in which more than half of us are over the age of sixty. Add to that the current on-going climate crisis, with the steady rise of sea-levels, the increasing incidence of natural disasters and the life-threatening rise in temperatures, and you might agree that there is a sufficient basis to re-think our way of looking at things, even before the recent outbreak of Covid-19.
In spite of the rise of democracy in the western world, and the attempt made in some countries to establish a welfare state (my own country, Israel, among them), the free market economy is globally predominant. Adam Smith’s “hidden hand” still moves and shakes global economic trends.
Economics students are taught that the economy is healthy when there is growth. However, as early as the mid twentieth century, some economic thinkers were already pointing out that growth cannot go on forever, especially if we take into account the dwindling resources of a finite planet. So we currently live in a world where we have to over-consume in order to maintain a healthy economy, yet we must live modestly and consume mindfully, if we are to enable our planet to continue to support human life. I am sure that many will join me in finding an inherent contradiction here.
Adam Smith claimed that the job of government is to protect national borders, to enforce civil law and to engage in public works (education, infrastructure etc.). In our over-populated world of dwindling and finite resources, it makes sense for governments to invest in the kind of infrastructure that will conserve and protect natural resources—renewable energy, sewage treatment, desalination, innovative methods of food-growing, sustainable transportation, public health, social welfare and so on. I would humbly point out that most world governments are failing in this. Moreover, in the face of the current global Corona pandemic, world leaders are talking about a “temporary” breakdown of their economies, with the goal of picking up on production and consumption levels when this nasty patch is over.
How does Covid-19 fit into these dilemmas? The pandemic is first and foremost an equalizer, since it does not make any distinction between rich and poor, or people of different faiths, and has proved that it is truly borderless. Countries round the world are maintaining only essential services, and a tremendous drop in pollution levels has been marked worldwide as a result. On the other hand, we are paying a heavy economic price. There is a genuine spirit of community support, but a real danger that elderly people, living in physical isolation, may develop depression and anxiety.
In my own urban world, in a locked-down neighborhood of Jerusalem, I find it a fascinating game to try and reconcile the restrictions imposed on us with the concept of “local is good”, that reflects the spirit of modern sustainable urbanism. Since we are supposed to go no more than 500 meters from our homes, this is clearly a good time to see if we have all we need within that perimeter. A grocer’s? A small park? A shaded path to walk on without noise and air pollution? Kindergartens? A school? A family clinic? A community garden? A day center for the elderly? A post office? A glimpse of nature? Perhaps it is time to think just what is needed for a happy neighborhood. We might be surprised to learn the positive health impact of one that offers clean air, a taste of nature, plenty shade and locally grown fruit and vegetables…..
Looking ahead to the post-Corona era, dare we hope and strive for a better world, in which economic security does not go hand in hand with over-taxing of our natural and finite resources? Can we “repair our world”, by basing our economic planning on an equitable and sustainable system? If we do, we may look back on Corona as the chance we were given to rethink and reset our urban world, something we would have been much less likely to do if we had continued with business as usual.
Stéphane Verlet Bottéro (b. 1987) is an artist working at the intersection of social practice, installation, education, writing, gardening, and cooking. He is interested in the entanglements of community, materiality, body, and place. Based on site-specific research and durational interventions, his practice seeks to open spaces to unlearn and unsettle ways of inhabiting the world.
Stéphane Verlet-Bottéro
Can we, as artists, organize ourselves to inspire our institutions and societies to keep the engine on slow and never start again the machinery of neoliberal destruction? We talked long enough about politics in art. Time for action and art-as-politics.
On Valentine’s day this year, I was in Karlsruhe, Germany, to take care of the winter pruning of a fruit orchard with the ZKM museum staff. A few months before, I had made a proposal to the museum to reclaim and restore the abandoned meadow, legacy of a traditional fruit farming system that is among the most species-rich landscapes in Europe. The point was not only to regenerate a biodiversity hotspot and urban food forest, but also to sketch a terrestrial future in which museum would expand their maintenance practices, from human artifacts to non-human compositions.
This embodied experience came with a collective understanding of the institution’s necessary transformation towards radical sustainability, from carbon footprinting its upcoming exhibitions to an ongoing environmental policy working group. Landing on a world of pluriversal becomings implies to rethink all means of production, including cultural networks: travel slower, exhibit differently, etc.
Two months later, the world tipped. Bees thrive and trees blossom in the orchard field, giving a glimpse of those speculative projections. But darker futures may also be observed. Frontline struggles, unequal vulnerability, racist, sexist, and classist body politics. Artists are not spared: while symbolic work on trauma recovery will be essential, restrictions on travels and public gatherings will deeply inhibit this therapeutic function.
National culture agencies are setting up emergency funding. Museums and festivals are moving their programs online. I would also like to see in the current crisis, where and when it is possible, an encouragement to pause the race for audience figures, mega-exhibitions, hypermobility.
Like requests for conditional bailouts and calls to “not go back to normal” by other productive sectors, can we, as artists, organize ourselves to inspire our institutions and societies to keep the engine on slow and never start again the machinery of neoliberal destruction?
Ask museums, festivals and institutions to take binding environmental measures immediately (zero carbon venues, no flying policies, etc.)
Decolonize cultural networks and improve mobility for Global South artists
Shift focus to local/regional audiences and communities
Work towards stronger ethics, economic resilience and equality for staff and artists
End oil and other harmful corporate sponsorship
We talked long enough about politics in art. Time for action and art-as-politics.
Dr. Andreas Weber is a German academic, scholar and writer who holds degrees in Marine Biology and Cultural Studies. Andreas explores new understandings of life-as-meaning or ‘biopoetics’ and ‘biosemiotics’ in science and in the arts, and has authored 8 books.
Andreas Weber
I wonder what we will make of the insight that we are suddenly so vulnerable. I watch the glittering insects in the sun, much less numerous than some years ago behind this same window, and listen to the nightingale that plucks those insects from the twigs to feed their young. I sit in silence, until the first bat is out and shatters the pale sky with its ragged path.
The window of the room stands open and allows the late sunlight in. Outside, there is a big maple unfolding its green blossoms. On the small plot between my condo and the railway tracks stands an apple tree. The sun makes the blossoms shine with a creamy white. Insects oscillate in the air like dancing crystals.
Every couple of minutes a commuter train passes. I see a few people inside, widely dispersed, wearing face masks. After the train is gone, bird voices fill the silence. In the past, which ended a month and a half ago, this would have been a noisy work day afternoon in Berlin. Now there is stillness, and the quiet signs of all those which are not human.
Last summer I taught a seminar about “Collapse”. The summer had started like this, with a series of flamboyant and beautifully sunny days, for weeks in a row, without one drop of rain. I showed a movie from the early 2000s, “Children of Men”, by Alfonso Cuarón. The plot was set in a future about two decades on from the release date. Everything was pretty much the same, apart from the fact that no children were being born.
I retained the picture of a society trying to function in its usual incomplete way, while there was something deeply, profoundly off. It seemed invisible at first, but then you understood that the balance between birth and dying had invisibly shifted towards death. It felt like a grief over something immensely bad that could not be undone, like having killed somebody, or having lost a child. The birds sang, the sun poured its light into the evening, and somehow there was grief, and horror, and would not go away.We will live with the virus for some time to come. It is a strange plague that hits hard in some places, and is near to nonexistant in others, that seems to be terribly present and apathically absent at the same time. I sit at home and write and avoid the S-Bahn and the city, and the sun is warm, and something feels just slightly off, and unconsolably so.
I have been asking myself how much I will miss the clean air stirrend by the shining insects’ wings and the sweet waves of birdsong, when corona will be behind us. But in truth I doubt that we can plan for a time after. I watch the apple blossoms shiver in the sun, and I wonder that what awaits us, what has actually begun, is the time with corona.
It is a time where something is slightly off, and everything is changed, although we will be trying hard to pretend that we are going on with our business. It is a time where life has become radically cheaper. It’s a time where I won’t know if my next speaking gig, or the dinner with my son and his friends, will turn out to be life-threatening, for me, or for others.
I wonder what we will make of the insight that we are suddenly so vulnerable. I watch the glittering insects in the sun, much less numerous than some years ago behind this same window, and listen to the nightingale that plucks those insects from the twigs to feed their young. I sit in silence, until the first bat is out and shatters the pale sky with its ragged path.
Diana Wiesner is a landscape architect, proprietor of the firm Architecture and Landscape, and director of the non-profit foundation Cerros de Bogotá.
Diana Wiesner
We are the birds that make up their nest with everything they find: branches, bark, feathers, leaves, hair, and even strands of wool, any material to protect the essential: creatively reinventing what will emerge from this process of caring for the global nest.
We can imagine various scales of nests, of ways of housing, of inhabiting. From the constructions of the insects, to the planet nesting in the inhabited universe. This strange period, during which we live within a micro shelter, makes us understand the termite nest, the bird’s nest, and the social system of many forms of life. Some keep their social group, as it happens with bees or ants. Insects make their homes as protection for their offspring because they are delicate and in their immature stages need it. Thus, we are seeing ourselves in a global fabric of shared feelings and uncertainty. The nest contains the process of what is brewing inside it. Inside the social group, or the being itself. We are not even clear about what form that which is evolving is going to take.
Nest. Jewelry by Ligia Ceballos de Wiesner. Photo: María José VelascoImage of Okaina’s basketry. Photograph by Cecilia Duque. Creative language of the ethnic groups. Indigenous people of Colombia. Suramericana Publishers. 2012.
Bogota, a tropical megacity now led by an exceptional, gay woman, full of energy and enthusiasm, has managed to orient the supportive citizenry towards the self-care and care of the elders and the most vulnerable. In this period of another speed of perception and reality, where both in Bogota and in the other cities of Colombia development plans are being reconciled, the pandemic gives us an opportunity to rethink the ways of planning cities and territories. These plans will surely adjust to the new priorities that are being developed in the minds, of each individual, family niche and social group: to take care of the other is to take care of any manifestation of life. Participation and action take a priority role.
The world reacts to the ways of being connected and understanding that we function as a system and we must remain and decide together. Nesting has given us new time to relate, to slow down, to be more observant and to have a thought tied to the speed of the ancestral steps and paths. This vital interconnection is evident in networks: the world sings simultaneously. The neighbors integrate in gestures of solidarity and talk between balconies. This period, where the desire for the green becomes the great opportunity for those of us who have dreamed for years that the order would dance to the rhythm of the water and the soil. The public and mental health, which has finally taken relevance as never before, show the importance for each human being to feel their own breath walking in a place that privileges nature.
In the case of Bogota we hope that this will happen.
Ecology and economy are coming closer than ever, the era of valuing what is really productive has begun.
Nesting from our homes of introspection, we feel this great universal connection that will derive in new forms of education in a great global conversation.
In this period we have created and are perfecting the channels to have this great conversation. This pandemic has opened a crack for consensus among all global inhabitants. In this crack, citizen actions are already flourishing: consumption from local producers, strengthened solidarity and support networks, questioning of traditional pedagogical methods, forms of citizen participation, and valuing the essence of the inner nest.
We are the birds that make up their nest with everything they find: branches, bark, feathers, leaves, hair, and even strands of wool, any material to protect the essential: creatively reinventing what will emerge from this process of caring for the global nest.
Nested necklace, jewelry by Ligia Ceballos de Wiesner. Photo María José Velasco.
* * *
TIEMPOS DE ANIDAMIENTO: Elogio al cuidado del otro
Somos las aves que componen su nido con todo lo que encuentran: ramas, cortezas, plumas, hojas, pelos, y hasta hebras de lana, cualquier material para proteger lo esencial: reinventando creativamente lo que va a emerger de este proceso de cuidar el nido global.
Podemos imaginar diversas escalas de nidos, de formas de alojarse, de habitar. Desde las construcciones de los insectos, hasta el planeta anidando en el universo habitado. Este extraño periodo que vivimos dentro de un micro resguardo nos hace comprender el nido del termitero, el de las aves, y el sistema social de muchas formas de vida. Algunos, guardan su grupo social, como sucede con las abejas o las hormigas. Los insectos, hacen su casa como protección de su prole, porque son delicados y en sus etapas inmaduras lo necesitan. Así nos estamos viendo en un tejido global de sentimientos e incertidumbre compartida. El nido contiene el proceso de lo que se está gestando en su interior. En el interior del grupo social, o del propio ser. Ni siquiera tenemos claridad de qué forma va a tomar aquello que está evolucionando.
Nido. Joya de Ligia Ceballos de Wiesner. Foto: María José VelascoImagen de la cestería de Okaina. Fotografía de Cecilia Duque. Lenguaje creativo de las Etnias. Indígenas de Colombia. Suramericana Editores. 2012.
Bogotá, una mega ciudad tropical recientemente liderada por una excepcional mujer gay, llena de energía y entusiasmo, ha logrado orientar a la ciudadanía solidaria hacia el autocuidado y el cuidado del abuelo y del más vulnerable. En este período de otra velocidad de percepción y de realidad, en donde tanto en Bogotá y como en las demás las ciudades de Colombia se están conciliando los planes de desarrollo, la pandemia nos da una oportunidad de replantear las formas de planear las ciudades y los territorios. Estos planes seguramente se ajustaran a las nuevas prioridades que se gestan en las cabezas de cada individuo, nicho familiar y grupo social: cuidar del otro, es cuidar cualquier manifestación de vida. La participación y la acción toman un papel prioritario. El mundo reacciona respecto a las formas de estar conectados y entender que funcionamos como sistema y debemos permanecer y decidir juntos. La anidación nos ha dado nuevos tiempos de relacionarnos, en ir más despacio, ser más observadores y tener un pensamiento atado a la velocidad de los pasos y caminos ancestrales. Esa interconexión vital se evidencia en las redes: el mundo canta en simultáneo. Los vecinos se integran en gestos solidarios y conversan entre balcones. Este periodo, donde el deseo por lo verde se convierte en la gran oportunidad para quienes soñamos desde años que el ordenamiento baile con el ritmo del agua y del suelo. La salud pública y mental, que por fin ha tomado relevancia como nunca, evidencian la importancia para cada ser humano a sentir su propia respiración caminando en un lugar que privilegie a la naturaleza. En el caso bogotano esperamos que suceda.
La ecología y la economía se acercan como nunca, se inicia la era de valorar lo realmente productivo.
Anidando desde nuestros hogares de introspección, sentimos esta gran conexión universal que derivará en nuevas formas de educación en una gran conversación global.
En este periodo hemos creado y perfeccionado los canales para tener esta gran conversación. Esta pandemia ha abierto la grieta para consensuar entre todos los habitantes globales. En esta grieta ya están floreciendo acciones ciudadanas: consumo a productores locales, redes de solidaridad y apoyo fortalecidas, cuestionamiento a métodos tradicionales pedagógicos, formas de participación ciudadanas y valoración a lo esencial del nido interior.
Somos las aves que componen su nido con todo lo que encuentran: ramas, cortezas, plumas, hojas, pelos, y hasta hebras de lana, cualquier material para proteger lo esencial: reinventando creativamente lo que va a emerger de este proceso de cuidar el nido global.
Collar anidado de Ligia Ceballos de Wiesner. Foto María José Velasco.
Working since the 1980s on social change issues while encouraging civic activity across North America, Dar provides support and consulting for localized food systems, especially farmers markets.
Darlene Wolnik
My work supporting farmers’ markets across the U.S. remains very much the same. The markets are innovating contactless procedures at a furious pace: new “drive-thru” markets, ticketed entry walk-thru markets, curbside pickup, “click and collect” pre-ordering procedures. My days start early and go late, and at the end of each I wonder if I could have done more. Yet it is such hopeful work.
/Today, on my walk around my neighborhood, I saw a total of around 40 people in the French Quarter where I would have seen thousands of workers, hustlers, visitors, and residents a month ago. And with the festivals cancelling until 2021, we expect a very slow return to our single economy (tourism) for the foreseeable future.
Even with that sobering reality looming over us in the next year or two, most residents still support our fierce public health-focused mayor who is determined to slow and then stop the massive rate of infection that New Orleans has suffered with since mid-March. That rate has as much to do with the health inequities that African-Americans live with at a higher rate as it is about the huge carnival celebration we hosted in January and February. Black New Orleans, who make up 60% of the city and only 34% of the state’s population, have a 70% of the infections. Even so, blaming it on our hedonistic Mardi Gras is the narrative assigned to us, and feels like the same misguided reproof we felt after Hurricane Katrina. That doesn’t help our mood.
On the other hand, my work supporting the field of farmers’ markets across the U.S. remains very much the same. Our national organization has always been a remote workplace, providing technical assistance and advocacy for around 10,000 market sites, managed by about 4,000 different sizes and type organizations. Depending on their sophistication and their support, these organizations have (a) been able to open without too much trouble, (b) been delayed by government authorities in reopening when other food retail has not, or (c) unable to open at all because authorities too often confuse farmers markets with festivals. The markets are innovating contactless procedures at a furious pace: new “drive-thru” markets, ticketed entry walk-thru markets, curbside pickup, “click and collect” pre-ordering procedures. My days start early and go late with calls, video conferencing, texts, and emails asking for a resource, to share a triumph, or for me to connect them with a peer having the same issue. Right now, I work 7 days a week and wonder at the end of each if I could have done more, answered one more email, hosted another webinar or group call.
Yet it is such hopeful work.
I pick up food from local farmers and fishers a few times per month, having contacted them by phone or email. (Ironically, my nearby farmers markets have not yet reopened.) Tomorrow a group of friends will meet a fishing family outside of a friend’s house to get our seasonal drum, sheepshead, catfish, softshell crab, and shrimp orders. My family and friends check in with me regularly and my 80-year old mother keeps in touch by text. Yesterday I dropped off beignets outside of her door, which were made by a relatively new upstart bakery downriver that has pivoted its bustling sit-down café to a 3-hours per day window service offering its culturally appropriate items like Chantilly cake, yak-a-mein, and golden beignets covered in powdered sugar. She texted me later that they were the best she had eaten in years.
Xin Yu (aka Fish) is Shenzhen Conservation Director and Youth Engagement Director of The Nature Conservancy China Program. Since 2017, he has overseen TNC’s first City project in Shenzhen, China, focusing on Sponge City
Xin Yu
Will the pandemic flame urban residents’ passion to get in touch with Nature? I really hope so. Will people further respect and take care of Nature after the post-pandemic world becomes the new normal? We need to find out and do more.
I have often chatted with my colleagues at The Nature Conservancy about why we should pay more attention to urban conservation. Many don’t quite understand my overwhelming confidence in urbanism and its relationship with conversation or biodiversity. Some of them are used to working in the field and not in favor of being engaged in human society, and some of them might not be able to imagine what can happen to people’s urban world when one (re)integrates biodiversity.
Talking about COVID-19 pandemic, I’m certain that its enormous impact over the economy, governance, and people’s lifestyles is bringing us a different urban world, leaving us no choice but to change our ways of working. For those who are not familiar with urban conservation, I believe this has opened a door to them, allowing them to rethink based on the recent evidence from around the world showing a visual increase in urban biodiversity in just a few months, when most urban residents are staying home. These images press us to look at our cities as habitats shared by so many other types of creatures. This is a new lesson to teach most of us that urban land, rivers and coasts have never been truly taken away by humans from mother Nature.
Urban conservation is all about introducing changes to people’s minds and behaviors. However, due to COVID-19, urban residents are now changing themselves in many ways. It has become more difficult to organize them physically to participate in conservational actions.
In Shenzhen, the third largest city in China, after the pandemic curve has been flattened for a couple of weeks, we recently launched a responsive action called the “Grow together” Community Pro-nature Project. As a comforting nature education activity, social media and Zoom-like online conferencing tools were used to organize online workshops to provide trainings to community members about gardening. At same time, we distributed seed packets to the community while adhering to social distancing measures. Residents are now growing plants at home and will later transfer them to local community gardens or public green spaces.
It seems that rebuilding the relationship between people and Nature, as well as between people themselves are the keys to our future work. We need to gain more skills on communicating with people via remote platforms to encourage them to stay closer to Nature in a more united way. Will the pandemic flame urban residents’ passion to get in touch with Nature? I really hope so. Will people further respect and take care of Nature after the post-pandemic world becomes the new normal? We need to find out and do more.
Dr. Carly Ziter is a new Assistant Professor in the Biology department at Concordia University in Montreal, associated with Concordia's hub for Smart, Sustainable, and Resilient Cities and Communities.
Carly Ziter
I desperately miss interacting with family, friends, and colleagues in person—but I do plan to be more intentional about the choices I make, and to appreciate every family visit, conference, and chat in the hallway a little bit more as we make our way to a new normal.
As a new professor, I’ve spent the past year working with my very first cohort of graduate students, preparing for our first big field season, and generally setting the stage for a long-term research program. Covid has brought disappointments (the inevitable cancellation of professional opportunities), and tough decisions (which projects to put on hold, or let go entirely). It’s hard not to feel some sadness—or maybe self-pity—watching career opportunities fade away just when I felt I was gaining momentum. However, the increased media focus on urbanism and the importance of local nature has also re-invigorated my commitment to build a research program centred on co-production of greener, more sustainable cities.
I also feel incredibly fortunate to have a relatively secure position. Having made this transition so recently, I can’t help but empathize with students and early career researchers entering an (even more) uncertain job market. It’s clear Covid is no equalizer; disproportionately affecting those already disadvantaged by our current systems. Moving forward, I hope we can collectively find equitable ways to account for the inevitable disruptions to productivity, and protect those at vulnerable career stages. I know I will continue to reflect on how I can better use my position to support those facing difficult circumstances—Covid-related or otherwise.
Despite the many challenges, if there is a professional silver lining to our work-from-home reality it’s a strengthening of communities. Colleagues and collaborators have been incredibly generous with their time and advice throughout this transition, and I sincerely hope this collegiality and kindness continues long after we’re back in our physical workspaces and the hectic pace of academia resumes. I’m also encouraged by my students’ resilience—adjusting to online courses, developing new research directions after cancelled field seasons, and supporting peers. I’ve worked hard to build a positive lab environment this past year, and recent events have affirmed that a culture where we make time for and support each other must be a priority as we enter post-Covid life.
Finally, days full of Zoom, Slack, Moodle, and more have of course highlighted technological promises and pitfalls. Our department has embraced virtual communication, and my lab has finally developed a decent online workflow—changes that will improve communication long term. I will soon attend my first online conference, and am optimistic that virtual meetings will catalyze more climate-friendly, accessible options post-Covid. On a personal note, I video chat with family weekly, my college roommates have revived our years-old group chat, and my 85-year-old grandmother has learned to text. While I wish it hadn’t taken a pandemic, I am grateful for the reminder to slow down and prioritize connecting with the important people in my life. I won’t say I’m ready to go fully online or flight free in my work or personal life—I desperately miss interacting with family, friends, and colleagues in person—but I do plan to be more intentional about the choices I make, and to appreciate every family visit, conference, and chat in the hallway a little bit more as we make our way to a new normal.
We hope that this paper will inspire and initiate a Gen-Z led movement for advocating towards the urgent actions needed for restricting the frequency and severity of such epidemics globally.
The lessons learnt by teenagers today will assist us as global leaders of tomorrow, to make better and more informed decisions to prevent any such future epidemics. The Covid-19 crisis and widespread epidemic has infected more than a million people and is increasingly causing agony to billions. While the severity of epidemic is reflected by rapidly increasing numbers of infected cases, the perception towards its impacts and effectiveness varies from country to country and with age group. A unique and key respondent group includes teenagers as the most upcoming global citizens, whose experience with and opinions on today’s events could be a resource for governments to combat such situations in future.
Foster Street, New Haven, USNo people visible in the otherwise lively East Rock Neighbourhood. Photo: Sabrina LiangKamothe, Navi Mumbai, IndiaThe extremely busy Khandeshwar station road, now empty and vegetation in the Khanda Lake beside it. Photo: Anvay Akhil Palherkar
What do teenagers think about the crisis? This essay captures the perception of a focus group of 12 current teenagers from different cities in a few impacted countries namely: New Haven, New Jersey and Amherst in the United States, Belfast in the United Kingdom, Stockholm in Sweden, Delhi and Mumbai in India, Hunan and Nanning in China, and Mexico City in Mexico. Building on the valued suggestions of these teenagers, the paper aims to serve in a way as a time capsule for our future governments and education systems to look back and reflect on their views. The author constituted a panel by identifying and inviting teenagers from among the recent and past social contacts established while residing in the US, UK and India. All the panellists are high school students or have recently started college education and are aware and concerned about the pandemic and its impacts within their country and globally.
The methodological approach included a few online focus group discussions organised during the ongoing lockdown period through participation of the panel of teenagers from the cities mentioned above. Discussions were initiated with a focus on first noticed impacts in each panellist’s city and changes they experienced in daily routine during quarantine. Further, the discussions focused on a few overarching questions relating to the linkages between Covid-19 epidemic and nature, decisions taken by governments and societal differences, coping mechanisms adopted by schools, and impacts on global and local economies. Outcome of the online discussions have been analysed and further complemented through review of a few relevant publications.
This paper acknowledges the participation of Ms Sabrina Liang (Amherst, US), Ms Anna Kolosenko (Stockholm, Sweden), Ms Ayla Leval (Stockholm, Sweden), Mr Matthew Alexander (Belfast, UK), Mr Luis Fernando Sobrino (Mexico City, Mexico), Ms Matilda Debesai (Stockholm, Sweden), Ms Nikita Agarwal (New Jersey, US), Ms Katherine Van Tassel (New Haven, US), Mr Anvay Akhil Palherkar (Navi Mumbai, India) and 2 anonymous teenagers (from Hunan and Nanning, China), in the online focus group roundtable discussions structured and moderated by Mr Vishisht Singhal (Delhi, India).
Mexico City, MexicoAn empty market road in the otherwise very busy Mexico City. Photo: Luis Fernando Sobrino
Covid19 – a natural calamity or a manmade disaster? Have we completely failed in human-nature interactions?
The panel acknowledged that while there are many theories revolving around how the coronavirus came into being and spread to humans, one aspect is confirmed that viruses spread from animals to humans due to our poor human-nature interaction such as wildlife trade, poaching, and forest fragmentation.
A report from the World Health Organisation (WHO, 2020) also indicates that new viruses emerge when destruction and encroachment of wildlife habitats, forces the wildlife to initiate unwanted dangerous interactions with humans causing the spread of unique and infectious diseases from species to species.
Research by Shereen et al (2020) mentions that COVID-19, which is a highly transmittable and pathogenic viral infection, emerged in Wuhan, China and is related to SARS-like bat viruses, thus drawing an inference that bats could be the possible primary reservoir. Shereen et al reiterate that the rapid human to human transfer of virus has been confirmed even while the intermediate source of origin and transfer to humans is unknown.
Hillsborough neighbourhood in New Jersey (USA) has cleaner sky with no traffic and noise pollution. Photo: Nikita Agarwal
The teenage panel was in consensus that the spread of Covid-19 is an example of poor human wildlife interactions. The panellists felt that in general people have been rapidly straying from natural lifestyle and consuming food items that are exotic and are sometimes substandard modifications of age old food traditions and practices. It is evident that this has resulted in new and never before faced diseases affecting humans with no immunity against it and the rapid interspecies spread of such diseases. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention also highlights that this phenomenon has happened in past as reflected through the spread of Ebola and HIV/AIDS (CDC, 2019 a, b).
The panellists from India and Mexico raised that significantly higher number of Covid-19 cases are being reported from metropolitan cities such as Delhi, Mumbai, and Mexico City mainly due to rapid spread of the infectious virus among highly dense population living in and around such cities. Such cities are already home to even denser pockets of slums such as Dharavi in Mumbai and Ciudad Neza in Mexico City where, due to poor living conditions, the community is more vulnerable to such epidemics.
We should definitely be more proactive in the future. Stricter food regulations and improvements to sanitary conditions may minimize the number of infected individuals.—Katherine Van Tassel (New Haven, US
These panellists shared that during the lockdown and quarantine period, however, better air quality is being reported in these cities, mainly due to very restricted traffic and footfall. This situation has led to decreased consumption of crude oil resulting into noticeable reduction in carbon and greenhouse gas emissions that shall also slowdown the rate of climate change. Entire panel was in consensus that several anecdotal evidences were reported in media about nature’s revival reflected through increased bio-diversity coming towards cities. Low levels of sound, air and water pollution due to limited anthropogenic activities, show signs of increased flora and fauna within cities, a phenomenon that was earlier rarely observed. However the panel speculated that unfortunately this shall be mainly limited to the lockdown period. The teenagers advocate that governments of all countries should substantially amplify measures to enhance planetary health and environment especially to meet climate goals after the pandemic is over and not wait for nature’s such unfavourable reactions.
Stockholm, Sweden. A gloomy Sunday morning on the busy Drottninggatan Shopping Street in Stockholm. Photo: Ayla Leval
Government strategy and the influence of societal difference: How proactive and effective have strategies by the government been? Do these reflect societal characteristics?
Completely empty Stockholm Metro, even during peak hours. Photo: Ayla Leval
In India, China, and the UK, the governments have taken an all-hands-on-deck approach to tackle the Coronavirus pandemic by introducing the most restrictive mass quarantines. The panelists from these three countries felt that these measures were imposed mainly to keep the country’s population—specifically poor, uneducated, and elderly population—far from the grips of the highly infectious Coronavirus. The panel was concerned that in developing countries such as India, the health care system is extremely weak and fragile. Thus, an epidemic of such severity could result in complete breakdown of the health care system.
The panellists from India offered that society in the country is structured in a way that many social activities occur engaging large numbers of people, ranging from religious activities to open markets and a generally densely packed housing system in large metropolitan cities. The panellists thus strongly felt that in India, such an outbreak, if uncontrolled, could grow to an exponential level infecting a huge population in a matter of days.
Sweden has ultimately saved our society from collapsing by still granting us our freedom.—Ayla Leval (Stockholm, Sweden)
On the contrary, panellists from Sweden highlighted that the Government of Sweden has come up with a unique strategy that appears to be focusing on the herd immunity that emphasizes on creating a large number of people immune to reduce the future risk of spread to non-immune individuals. They feel that their government considers that citizens are highly educated and hence their strategy had been limited to just recommending a quarantine instead of forcing the nation into a lockdown.
I trust the government and all of their decisions. If Swedish government feels that a balance between the economy and healthcare must be made, then I trust that’s what we should do.—Matilda Debesai (Stockholm, Sweden)
These panellists were of the opinion that government has done this to ensure the survival of small businesses that are given high importance by the government to keep country’s economy in balance while maintaining the social order. They felt that while this strategy appears to be liberal, the panellists trust the government and their decisions as they felt that their government is much aware of all negative consequences extreme quarantine would have on their mental health and societal function.
The Indian culture establishes cleanliness as a key aspectsintertwined with every aspect of one’s life thus perhaps reducing the spread of this disease drastically.—Anvay Akhil Palherkar (Navi Mumbai, India)
The teenage panel was concerned that Mexico and India are under an unusual threat. Since there are few social safety nets, unemployment in Mexico for daily wage labourers or those having small businesses, the panellist from Mexico felt that the income sources of such labourers will be completely halted during the quarantine leading to an uncertain future and many hardships.
Under such pandemic situations, the Government of the US and other impacted countries must prioritize providing necessary healthcare to their citizens as opposed to focusing on economic growth. —Nikita Agarwal, US.
Similarly, the panellists from India were of the view that India, being home to a large population living below the poverty line, weak and unenforced unemployment schemes may also lead to a challenging time for the majority of the poor population. The panellists highlighted that this aspect is only partially being addressed by the State governments in India. Likewise, the World Economic Forum (2020a) highlights that the existing social safety nets in the US are also facing challenge due to around 20 million (as of 16 April 2020) citizens applying for unemployment benefits.
The Government of Mexico should provide aid to low income homes and inform the population about situations of this type, mostly for them to know how to react and avoid panic.—Luis Fernando Sobrino (Mexico City, Mexico)
The discussion between the panellists uncovered that the Government of Mexico has adopted measures that are mainly observant in character with a nation-wide lockdown but without any legal enforcement. Despite this, people of Mexico have chosen to stay inside. In China, first country combating Covid-19 epidemic, the country’s economy has been crippled while the country now appears to be moving towards normalcy. The panel is of the opinion that the approach of lockdown and quarantine that has been adopted by the governments in India, UK and China is very effective and shall prevent the number of infected cases to rise giving a control over the pandemic and shall result in economies being able to open sooner. The steps taken by various governments that panel appreciated are the efforts towards management of misinformation spread via social media and other sources during the lockdown period.
Experimental schooling during quarantine:
It’s definitely not ideal or sustainable but online classes help me and my friends keep on track with schoolwork.—Anna Kolosenko (Stockholm, Sweden)
Will online schooling continue to serve as a means of alternative education, keeping at par with the established institutions?
The global pandemic has led to everyday activities grinding to a halt with uncertainty about resumption. This has led to a huge impact on the teenage population as well as the entire student community, as their schools and leisure activities cannot continue due to the fear of the spread of the virus.
Carrickfergus, Northern Ireland, UK. Increased traffic at a checkpoint despite lockdown in place. Photo: Matthew Alexander
A common approach adopted by the school education systems globally is a shift towards or extensive use of an online teaching and learning system. In Sweden, the schools have successfully managed to keep their students and teachers in a “lockdown” situation without enforcing it simply by encouraging them to opt for an online education from the comfort of their homes. The panellists from Sweden felt that the online schooling is more engaging, comprehensive, and at par with face to face learning and will result in students being able to concentrate more on studies than the fear of getting infected. However, the panellists from India, Mexico, and the UK have contrary views on online schooling, mainly owing to technical glitches, such as poor internet connections due to which the lessons they feel are less interactive. The panelists further highlighted that poorer households mostly even do not have money to pay for the basic needs thus paying for internet, computer or any technological service is impossible for them and they are inevitably left out of the online school setup.
The online classes definitely do not meet the same standards as face to face teaching. It makes asking questions a lot harder and limits the details that a teachers can explain.—Matthew Alexander (Belfast, UK)
Globally, the university entrance examinations such as GCSE, SAT, JEE and many more were postponed, resulting in stress, anxiety, and confusion over immediate future prospects for the currently quarantined high-schoolers. The panellists felt that authorities should place very high importance to conducting such exams and sharing the information relating to their scheduling/rescheduling. Overall, the panellists felt that greater emphasis on online education during the lockdown period, if continued, may result in developing countries like India and China realising the need to strengthen their rural education. This may in turn result in higher literacy rates and people having greater exposure to the thoughts and ideas of the global community.
Kamothe, Navi Mumbai, IndiaGenerally Crowded and High Density Neighbourhood in a Greater Mumbai suburb, now with deserted roads. Photo: Anvay Akhil Palherkar
Economic side effects of Covid-19: Economy or public health, can there be a balanced approach?
The ongoing Covid-19 outbreak has proved severely detrimental to the global economy and is likely to push it towards recession. While most governments around the world are primarily focusing on facing the current and future challenges of epidemic, the discussion among panelists indicates that some countries such as Sweden and some states in the US are parallelly focusing on their economy. The discussion highlights that in most of the impacted countries whether lockdown had been enforced or not, small businesses, hospitality, tourism and entertainment sectors have been completely shut down even if not ordered to close down, mainly due to the impact of self-quarantine of people and/or lockdown ordered by the law. The panelists reiterate the fact that losses in these sectors are directly contributing to the plummeting GDP in all impacted countries. While acknowledging this aspect, the entire panel strongly feels that public health must be prioritised over the economy. The World Economic Forum (2020b) also advocates for giving prime focus on public health through government and business partnerships to prevent a short-term recession from becoming a global depression.
The report by UNCTAD (2020) speculates that since India and China had taken timely decisions to combat the epidemic, their economies may face milder impact. The panelists from Sweden felt that their Government’s efforts to save economy against realising urgency of the epidemic may however result in a surge of infected people as in the US, but will be handled by their healthcare system as long as older population is kept completely out of contact. The panelists from the UK and Mexico were of the opinion that to reduce effects of pandemic, their governments seem to have compromised with potential losses in GDP. They felt that while this shall cause huge losses in their economy but they may be able to prevent the infection spreading altogether and have comparatively easier economic recovery with time. The entire panel perceived that Covid-19 epidemic has led to significantly reduced social interactions between people with increase in digital transactions that may lead to increased transparency, better management of currency and faster transactions thereby increasing business outputs after the pandemic is over.
Innovation and connectedness is what defines our generation and is the quality that will guide us through tomorrow’s challenges.—Vishisht Singhal, Delhi
Learnings for the post Covid-19 era
The author feels that teenagers are the most immediate generation who would shape the way governments shall form decisions in future to tackle such epidemics. Although quarantines and their varied impacts have been tracked for years, this event is unique as an entire generation is experiencing this globally for the first time. A new perspective is formed and therefore it will be useful to understand and take cognizance of our opinion.
Indirapuram, Delhi National Capital Region, IndiaA high rise neighbourhood with empty streets in a suburb of Delhi NCR. Photo: Ashim Bhattacharya
Based on analysis of varied aspects as deliberated by teenage panellists and through review of relevant articles, the author summarizes here the derived learning and his observations for the future:
This is the time that global leaders of various countries must forget differences and significantly increase their cooperation in order to best prevent and manage any such global epidemic in future.
With an aim to enhance social justice, the governments of all countries must make momentous progress towards providing adequate inexpensive health care services for the disadvantaged population. Effective measures must be in place for spreading awareness especially amongst the rural and impoverished urban population. This must include simple basic acts like maintaining hygiene, cleaning surroundings, and reducing consumption of non-indigenous material. Our unsustainable consumption over time has resulted in nature retaliating, this needs to change substantially.
The governments of all countries must establish advance early warning systems for people to quickly adapt in order to prevent an epidemic. Governments must give more attention to advance research for drug discovery such as creating adaptive vaccines for viruses in order to overcome adaptive diseases like influenza, COVID-19, Ebola and others.
The governments of all countries must establish advance early warning systems for people to quickly adapt and prevent an epidemic.
More interconnectedness between the global scientific community shall lead to greater and more efficient results in creating solutions for epidemics in the future.
Continue to advance research for creating adaptive vaccines for viruses in order to overcome adaptive diseases like influenza, COVID-19, Ebola, and others.
Based on success in a few countries, it is necessary to initiate schemes by governments to provide subsidies for essential items like sanitizers, masks and medicines during pandemic situations. Governments should also keep dedicated funds for medical supplies and for additional support to health care workers mainly for epidemic situations.
It is essential to enhance the shift towards digital financial transactions leading to increased transparency, better management, less printed money, faster transactions and minimised person to person contacts.
Schools must create better learning strategies for students to engage in classrooms even without physical presence. Not much change has been brought into the mainstream schooling system since the past 50 years whereas society has progressed greatly ever since.
It is also important to continue with the already initiated transition towards online lifestyles even in the rural areas of developing countries by increasingly making technological services affordable and accessible through government interventions, particularly the online schooling. This way even a crisis situation shall not hamper the education of children in future.
Government often refuses to take the younger generation seriously. —Sabrina Liang, Amherst, US
The author hopes that this paper will inspire and initiate a Gen-Z led movement for advocating towards the urgent actions needed for restricting the frequency and severity of such epidemics globally. The steps that are taken now would result in a future that each one of us can live in without constant fear and hostility. We hope that the solutions to this virus are collectively found through combined efforts of global community. Our connectedness and unbroken faith in wake of this crisis has shown how much we can accomplish.
World Economic Forum, 16 April 2020a, Coronavirus: Over 20 million Americans have now applied for unemployment benefit, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/united-states-unemployment-claimants-coronavirus-covid19/
COVID-19 lockdowns will not only leave a mark in our history books but will obligate us to rethink many aspects of our current way of living—for instance, with nature.
With the massive migration of people from agricultural lands to cities over the last few centuries, an important change came to Earth: our total human population went from being mainly non-urban to being mostly urban at the beginning of the 21st Century1. While the concentration of people in the urban world varies among regions, nevertheless, it is greater than ever before. With the growth of cities and the establishment of new urban centers, natural habitats, and ecosystems are replaced with artificial structures required to fulfill modern urban housing and work expectations. Although such structural changes have been documented to have important effects on wildlife species2, lock-downs and cessation of non-essential activities as measures to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 across the globe have surprised urbanites with unexpected sightings of wildlife species across cities around the world..
Cartoon by Ian MacGregor-Fors
Within days of stay-at-home orders, wildlife have been stunningly and unexpectedly sighted in major urban centers globally—including animals that are threatened or endangered. This has captivated the general public and scientists alike. Mountain lions in the USA, wild boars in Italy, manatees in Costa Rica, a leatherback sea turtle, a jaguar and vulnerable great curassows in Mexico—all of these have been seen in cities and resort towns recently, potentially driven by the lack of humans3–10. And at the same time, some animals who rely on human waste, such as jackals in Israel, and feeding by humans, such as Nara Deer in Japan and macaques in Thailand, have been going further into cities in search of food 11–13. Chronicling these sightings, rigorously examining how animals’ behaviors change as people leave city centers, and then investigating what happens once humans begin re-populating our cities will not only help us answer fundamental questions in animal behavior and urban ecology, but will also help us rethink how wildlife can live within our cities, and how resilient these populations truly are.
Human lockdowns have had positive effects on the one side, controlling the spread of the new SARS-CoV-2 and as side effect, decreasing greenhouse gas emissions, but has also had important negative effects, including the devastation on so many people’s lives through the sheer lack of means for the most basic needs of food and shelter. With the social and economic aftermath of lockdowns being yet unquantifiable, COVID-19 lockdowns will not only leave a mark in our history books but will obligate us to rethink many aspects of our current way of living—for instance, with nature. With the almost immediate responses of wildlife to our absence in cities, many of us start to reconsider the type of world we want to live in, and whether and how that includes the majestic creatures who, for much of the last few centuries, have mostly made their lives around us humans.
Eleanor Diamant, Ian MacGregor-Fors, and Pamela Yeh Los Angeles, Xalapa, and Los Angeles
My lab is interested in measuring, understanding, and predicting the ecological and evolutionary trajectories of populations when they encounter novel environments, particularly environments with multiple disturbances or stressors.
Dense and poor neighborhoods in Africa have special challenges for Covid-19 response, from the need to communicate health recommendations in local languages to the fact that migrant laborers, who fear deportation and retaliation by employers, have little incentive to embrace community-wide testing and report symptoms.
We live in, to say the least, a risky urban world. It is a historical fact that pandemics always impact cities differently. From the Athens plague in 430BC, which led to fundamental changes in city regulations and identities, to the Black Death in the Middle Ages, which disrupted class power structures in European societies, to the 2014-2015 specter of Ebola across sub-Saharan Africa that brought to bear the interconnected nature of cities in the global north and south, pandemics often reinvigorate urban systems. In the COVID-19 era, the most hard-hit areas in the world have been the cities of Wuhan (China), Milan (Italy), Madrid (Spain), and the New York City metro area (USA).
Richard Sennett, a professor of urban studies at MIT and senior adviser to the UN on its climate change and cities programme, believes that in the future there will be a renewed focus on finding urban design solutions for individual buildings and wider neighbourhoods that enable people to socialize without being packed “sardine-like” into compressed restaurants, bars and clubs—although, given the incredibly high cost of land in big cities like New York and Hong Kong, success here may depend on significant economic reforms as well[i]. By drawing on this expert opinion and the facts on ground, it is fair to argue that the stealth transmission of COVID-19 means getting comfortable with muddled urban systems.
Muddling urban systems
Ever since the introduction of COVID-19 transmission control measures, such as frequent hand washing and social distancing, there have been tensions between what urban dwellers (including health workers) are used to and the dramatic change in daily routines that are associated with the guidelines passed on by mayors and governors. Besides the constitutional scrutiny of COVID-19 measures at national and municipal levels, which has put technocrats in city halls on their tentacles, the public is increasingly asking when and how will mobility restrictions be unwound. Should lock downs be phased, extended or lifted sector by sector? These urban governance questions require clarity and consistent messaging, as scientists and their colleagues in policy circles take on the risky endeavour of presenting evidence that speaks truth to power. The stealth nature of COVID-19 transmissions and the possibilities of its rebound if restrictions are lifted, are making mathematical and epidemiological models muddled, thus yielding tensions between public health imperatives, economic decisions and civil liberties[ii].
The global stress of addressing critical supply shortages, including respirators, gloves, face shields, gowns, and hand sanitizer, has already indicated how the recycling and re-use of urban waste can be the solution to an unfolding global health and economic crisis. Medical health workers are fashioning personal protective equipment (PPE) out of clinical waste bags, plastic aprons and borrowed skiing goggles[iii]. Muddling life, however, is not only restricted to urban health systems—like a cardiac arrest in a body that already carries the scars of chronic, untreated disease[iv]—but also water, transport, sanitation, waste management, food, and energy systems. Auto parts like existing drugs and vaccines are being repurposed into the much-needed ventilators and clinical trials respectively, as part of the efforts around flattening the curve in American cities[v].
In Africa, COVID-19 has been confirmed in all nations, except Lesotho, between 12 March and 15 April 2020[vi]. Urban households in informal settlements, which are often logistically challenging areas in terms of executing the WHO guideline of identify, test, trace, isolate and treat cases due to poor-resourced local health units, may only practice prudence and patience around social distancing, hand-washing and self-isolation, if food, waste management services, and water are channelled to them either free-of-charge or at a much reduced cost. In addition, local communities in African cities need to understand the behavioural changes required using local dialects. Mobile phone penetration has been repurposed as a COVID-19 tech that educates the public through the use of USSD Codes (an Unstructured Supplementary Service Data code that is programmed into your SIM card or your cell phone to make it easier to perform certain actions, e.g. #165*2#). The USSD Codes have enabled mobile phone owners check and exchange information about exposure and testing for COVID-19, in a way that speaks to local dialects in Africa[vii].
South Korean soldiers in Seoul trying to control the spread of COVID-19, 6 March 2020. Credit: World Economic Forum
Looking ahead, cities across the world will inevitably have to make important public health, economic, governance, and ecological decisions with less information than usual and reverse recently adopted policies. This argument is based on latest research published by medical professionals, the World Health Organisation (WHO), Center for Disease Control (CDC), and other highly-regarded sources. Doctors and clinicians will need to assess disease severity and work out treatment options without being able to examine patient or measure pulse, blood pressure, respiratory rate, or oxygen saturation[viii]. Effective measures that match the constraints of the local context in African cities may call for a shift from reliance on centralised government-run water and sewerage systems, to innovative use of urban natural assets for water access (such as springs and swamps), and partnerships that create a safe and affordable system for sourcing clean water using locally-made water pumps[ix].
Quicker case identification and strengthening surveillance to trace contact and transmissions in communities, means exploring the interdependencies between analogue and technological options. Case data gathered as the outbreak proceeds (such as infections recorded at a health unit) will have to be coupled to the use of spatial media technologies for digitally mapping transmission rates in urban settlements, smart phones for visual content and artificial intelligence[x]. This data will also have to be compared with information on increased frequency and reach of travel, changing patterns of land use, changing diets, wars and social upheaval and climate change[xi], for the reason that such factors influence interactions between humans and the reservoir hosts of emerging pathogens, facilitating exposure to zoonotic viruses and spill over infections in people, and allow emerging viruses to spread more easily through human populations.
Amongst digitally literate urban populations, social distancing may be replaced by distant socialising, where people stay connected using smart technologies, due to the stress, loneliness and depression that arises from families and workmates being apart for a long time[xii]. Debunking myths and misinformation about the origins, spread, and effects of infectious diseases, including COVID-19, is not only restricted to the mandates of Infectious Disease Institutes, CDC and WHO, but also Tech Companies like Google and Facebook, as well as governors and mayors of city states and parents using credible sources of information to talk to their children[xiii]. Street and urban artists in Vietnam have now stepped out from the traditional roles organising mass gatherings for launching their albums, to using digital technologies (such as YouTube) to educate their funs about hand washing solutions using songs.
Re-thinking urban sustainability along COVID-19
As the globe navigates the tensions and contradictions associated with COVID-19, cities will have to match their sustainability plans and policies with the need to not only pull back the speed of transmissions and infections, but also moderate the risk of exacerbating poverty, inequality, and environmental degradation. The suspension of intra-city public transport, closing entertainment venues and banning public gatherings[xiv] can bring about short-term gains, but there is need to know that such mobility restrictions may worsen existing sustainability challenges. Cities are habitats of mobile residents pursuing different livelihood options, which are part and parcel of the functioning of interconnected urban systems, including, employment, transport, food, water, security, energy, health, sanitation, waste management, and housing systems.
The lessons from the Ebola Outbreak of 2014-15 indicate that quarantines, which were used as response measure in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, resulted in large waste disposal needs and other water, sanitation and hygiene vulnerabilities that put a strain on the governance and delivery of services[xv]. At one point in Freetown-Liberia, nearly 50% of the population was under quarantine. This meant a huge number of households in often logistically challenging areas required food and water transported to them, coupled to flash floods that make neigbourhood paths impassable[xvi]. Migrants in urban neigbourhoods, who fear deportation and retaliation by employers, have little incentive to embrace community-wide testing and report symptoms of COVID-19 at designated health units and labs.
In the United States, 45 percent of adults between the ages 19 to 64 are inadequately insured and 44 million are underinsured as of 2018, leading to high co-pays and out-of-pocket costs[xvii]. These individuals may be less likely to seek care for early symptoms of covid-19, at high-risk of contracting the disease, and to then facilitate spread through whole populations. While they may help contain the spread of COVID-19, quarantines and isolation techniques that depend on demarcated borders between residential and commercial properties can be difficult to implement sustainably, because life and survival in cities is about inclusion, trust and power relations in urban spaces.
The resolve and determination of different urban dwellers can challenge the ability of municipal agents to sustain social distancing techniques. This has already been indicated by spring breakers in Miami who have continued to go for beach life despite dire health warnings over the coronavirus[xviii]. City lockdowns along apartment complexes and commercial routes did not stop Reilly Jennings and Amanda Wheeler to tie the knot on 20 March 2020 at a ceremony held on a small street in the Manhattan neighborhood of Washington Heights[xix]. Schools and universities across cities in the world are closing for weeks or longer and this measure may be challenged by families that lack home-schooling habits and technology for virtual education, leading to delays in realizing the gains of containment strategies[xx]. Therefore risk-sensitive COVID-19 urban plans are required to reduce accumulated risk and to better consider the limitations of strategies that have worked in China.
Conclusions
Actions and inactions towards COVID-19 hold a transformative turn in the promise of inclusive and sustainable cities, as per Agenda 2030 of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The argument that leapfrogging sustainability in cities means scaling up local solutions to incrementally upgrade urban systems, seems incongruent with the stealth transmission of COVID-19, the possibility of its rebound and the unprecedented breadth of restrictions that feed uncertainty into not only public health but also economic, social and ecological systems. Intrusive actions that lead to muddled urban systems is the reality we are being confronted with. Stay-at-home measures mirror the interconnected nature of urban housing, food, transport, energy, water, waste management and urban governance challenges, difficult to disentangle like the imperceptible or non-distinct nature of the illnesses associated with COVID-19. Therefore re-contextualizing the global goal of sustainable and inclusive cities will be necessary at international, national and municipal levels.
Humanity will not and should not abandon our cities because of coronavirus. Rather, we should view this horrible pandemic as a spur to improve upon, to make universal, and to include nature in humanity’s amazing invention of the Sanitary City.
We are all living a slowly unfolding tragedy, as Covid-19 (coronavirus) spreads in communities around the world, with (as of 26 April 2020) over 3 million confirmed cases and more than 210,000 deaths. This pandemic has led some to question the wisdom of living in cities. Dense urban settlement is being blamed for the rapid spread of the virus in hard-hit places like New York City, with more than 160,000 cases and 15,000 deaths. In a prototypical example described in the Washington Post, a young couple flees the San Francisco Metro Area because of Covid-19, renting a house in beautiful Big Sur, a rugged stretch of forested mountains along the coast south of the city. The Post called the movement of this couple and others out of cities the “Great American Migration of 2020”. Some commentators have gone farther, suggesting that coronavirus will cause people to permanently flee large urban areas like New York or Los Angeles.
We think the rumors of the impending demise of the city due to fear of pandemic have been greatly exaggerated. Cities have adapted to and overcome far worse disease outbreaks than this one over the centuries, by adopting “sanitary”, public health practices. Population density, per se, of a city is not strongly correlated with how rapid the spread of Covid-19 has been, and some dense cities have managed the disease well. Finally, the response of cities to Covid-19 should involve an expansion of the Sanitary City, not a retreat from it, and should include increasing investment in urban greenspaces.
The Sanitary City helps limit disease outbreaks
Cities put people in proximity to one another, speeding up interaction and boosting economic vitality, making them what one scholar called humanity’s greatest invention. However, urban settlements can help spread infectious diseases, if the conditions are right. Up through the 19th century, cities were relatively unhealthy places to be compared to rural areas, at least in terms of infectious diseases. As a result, people lived shorter lives in cities; a pattern urban demographers refer to as the “urban health penalty”. Shorter lifespans were caused primarily by poor nutrition among the urban poor and outbreaks from infectious diseases like cholera, typhoid, and tuberculosis, which killed thousands in cities each year. Yet people were attracted to the economic opportunities cities offered despite the urban health penalty, and overall urban population growth continued.
All of that is ancient history. The good news is that, since the 20th century, cities have mostly solved the urban health penalty. Urban areas are now on average healthier places to be than rural areas, in both the Global North and the Global South. In part this is because (in most years, in most places) infectious diseases no longer spread unchecked. Cities did this by creating what one historian called the “Sanitary City”. Rising standards of living and cheaper food improved the poor’s access to nutrition. At the same time, municipal governments (now aware of the germ theory of disease) began to create systems to deliver clean drinking water to their residents, as well as sanitary sewer systems. Cities made efforts to clean up their air quality, at least locally, by banning certain kinds of burning (e.g., coal for domestic use). Governments created public health systems and hospitals to treat those who did get sick. This enormously complicated transition (we are simplifying here) ultimately eliminated the urban health penalty in many places. Where these innovations of the Sanitary City have still not reached urban communities, as in the informal “slum” settlements of the Global South (or indeed, in homeless encampments in the Global North), the threat of infectious disease remains.
Given this history, we are skeptical that cities will be abandoned because of this pandemic. At the height of the urban health penalty in the 18th and 19th century, the death rate in London was often 50% higher than the national average (orders of magnitude higher morality impacts than Covid-19 will ever cause). Yet the city was not abandoned, but instead grew in population almost seven-fold. Globally, rapid urban growth has continued and will continue for the next several decades. With the invention of the Sanitary City, our cities are on average healthy places, and the trajectory of urban growth has advanced despite the occasional epidemic. The growth of cities wasn’t slowed after the 1918 Spanish Flu (of which an estimated 50 million died globally), nor after the 1957 (>1 million deaths) or 1968 flu pandemics (>1 million deaths). Cities have survived pandemics in the 20th century that were hundreds of times more lethal than the current outbreak has been to date. The organization of human society into urban agglomerations is robust and will likely continue.
Don’t blame density
In addition to predicting an exodus from cities, commentators have also pointed to urban density as the “enemy”, arguing that because rural areas may make it easier to social distance, they would likely see less rapid spread. But over the past few weeks, the pandemic has spread to more and more rural areas around the world, and there is little evidence that density per se is exacerbating spread of Covid-19. Available fine-scale global data is not complete enough for a statistical analysis, but a review of news reports finds little consistency. While New York City is dense (average density in metro area, 2000 people/km2) and struggling to contain the virus, Hong Kong (average density 6300 people/km2) and Seoul (16,000 people/km2) are significantly denser and have done quite well in containing the virus. A better predictor of how well cities have done at containing Covid-19 is the rapidity and strength of their public health responses, both within municipalities and nationally. Other factors, such as the per capita availability of hospital beds, and access to good healthcare, may also ultimately be more important than the density of the community where you live.
Similarly, in the US there is, at best, a weak relationship between density and spread of Covid-19. Here the data is complete enough to allow some analysis. We took data from the New York Times database of cases at the county-level, and divided counties into three categories based on their population density: Low Density (0.05 – 25 people/mi2), Moderate Density (25 – 60 people/mi2), and High Density (>60 people/mi2). These data show that high density counties in the United States (mostly urban areas) were the first to see cases, likely due to their connections with the outside world. Because of the earlier timing of outbreaks, the number of cases is greatest in these big metro areas. However, as the virus has spread into smaller cities and more rural communities, the spread of coronavirus appears to be just as rapid there.
Total number of coronavirus cases for low, medium, and high-density counties in the United States. Note that the Y-axis is logarithmic, which transforms exponential growth to appear as a straight line. The lines for each category are approximately parallel, indicating similar rates of growth. Data from the New York Times.
Most cases are in high-density counties with large urbanized populations. This is not surprising, since that is where most people live in the United States! There are 292 million people living in high-density counties, 21 million in moderate-density counties, and only 11 million living in low-density counties. An arguably more meaningful measure of the risk to a community is the attack rate, the number of cases of coronavirus per 1000 residents.
Viewed this way, the trends look different. Tracking outbreaks over time, we can see that the virus first appeared in high-density counties, then in moderate-density counties, and arrived last in low-density counties. However, the attack rate has not been consistently highest in high-density counties. Furthermore, while high density counties appear to have overtaken lower density counties (at least for the moment), the difference in attack rate is less than a factor of two, despite vast differences in population density. For reference, high density counties have a 28% higher attack rate than moderate density counties (0.68 vs. 0.53 cases/1000 people) and a 61% higher attack rate than low density counties (0.68 vs. 0.42 cases/1000 people). In other words, if you encounter someone at random, the risk of them having coronavirus is only slightly lower in low density counties than in moderate or high-density counties.
Tracking the attack rate (cases per 1000 people, over time of coronavirus) in high, medium, and low-density counties in the U.S. Data from the New York Times.
The Sanitary City after Covid-19
This history of the invention of the Sanitary City is helpful as we think about the spread of Covid-19. The modern city was designed to prevent the spread of waterborne illness, and it does a remarkably effective job at that. Diseases that are spread by airborne, person to person contact like Covid-19 can still spread in cities, although public health systems and hospitals can help treat the disease and slow its spread. What then is the likely response of cities to the Covid-19 pandemic, over the long term? We argue it will not be a wholesale abandonment of cities, but instead some subtle changes in urban form and function.
For the public sector, the response will likely look a lot like a continuation of the “sanitary”, public health response cities have taken following other infectious disease outbreaks. Cities may work to strengthen universal access to clean water and sanitation, especially among populations like the homeless or those in informal settlements in the Global South. Public health systems may work to ensure greater access to medical care for all citizens, especially lower income or minority populations that currently are being hit harder by Covid-19. There may also be greater epidemiological surveillance of urban populations so outbreaks can be dealt with early, which new technology allowing the identification of outbreaks faster (while also potentially raising privacy concerns).
The form of metro areas may also change somewhat, as the great experiment with teleworking during Covid-19 accelerates a trend that was already occurring, with employers offering more flexibility for teleworking for white-collar workers. The experience of the pandemic may also accelerate a trend toward “hoteling”, as companies maintain centralized places to meet and allow for person, face-to-face interaction, but shrink their offices and reduce their rent by assuming a greater fraction of their workers will telework on any given day. But research has clearly shown that the Internet and personal, face-to-face interactions are complementary goods, not substitutions. While Covid-19 may make us more comfortable doing many meetings online, humans will still want and need to interact in person during critical work periods.
Increased investment in urban nature may be another response that expands the Sanitary City. As millions of urban residents adjust to life under shelter-in-place orders, having access to urban greenspaces for fresh air and exercise has become ever more essential. Providing accessible and equitably distributed greenspaces is being discussed now to facilitate outdoor recreation during a pandemic. If this greenspace expansion occurs, it would also support biodiversity, reduce urban temperatures, and provide the mental health benefits of nature access. Using greenspace designs that reduce transmission during pandemics could also bring along other benefits. For example, designing greenways wide enough to promote social distancing, and connecting urban parks to one another using greenways could enable cooped up urban residents’ greater access to nature during pandemics. These same design elements would also support the movement of wildlife, plants, and people during a post-pandemic world.
Urban form has changed over the centuries, both to make the Sanitary City and in response to changes in transportation and other technologies. We hope changes to urban form motivated by the pandemic will allow for greater access and more equitable distribution of nature in cities. Humanity will not and should not abandon our cities because of coronavirus. Rather, we should view this horrible pandemic as a spur to improve upon, to make universal, and to include nature as part of humanity’s amazing invention of the Sanitary City.
Robert McDonald and Erica Spotswood
Washington and Oakland
This essay represents the views of the authors and not necessarily those of their employers, The Nature Conservancy and the San Francisco Estuary Institute.
Dr. Erica Spotswood is a Senior Scientist at the San Francisco Estuary Institute. Her work creates tools and approaches for bringing scientific information into the planning and design of urban nature. Current projects address how regional planning can integrate with local project-scale design, and how urban greening efforts can be coordinated to contribute to broader regional goals for biodiversity and climate resilience.
We need to go beyond just discussion about mixing elements, infrastructures, and place in cities. Mixing has to be done at the ideation stage where inclusion and diversity in thinking and decision-making can be allowed to flourish.
When many voices come together, they create a sound so loud it moves you. What you hear when you experience this is the very same thing that gives a good choir the power to deliver you from your sins—a powerful element called resonance. When two frequencies stream in harmonic proportion to each other. Or in the case of this workshop, it is the resonance when the ideas of diverse people come together in a hum of productive chatter under the same roof at exactly the same time.
Photo: M’Lisa Colbert
The roof in question sat atop a beautiful gazebo housed in Parque Vincentina Aranha in São Jose dos Campos, Brazil, just north of São Paulo. Parque Vincentina used to be a quarantine site of a hospice for tuberculosis suffers in the 1920s. Since then, it has been lovingly restored as one of the main public parks in the city. The grounds and buildings are beautifully landscaped in a fit-for-royalty fashion. You enter the park through a towering gold-paint encrusted steel gate. The path to the main park building is meticulously cleaned each day and paved with careful craftmanship.
Galinha D’Angola (Helmeted Guinea Fowl)
Gawking around corners throughout the park is a special speckled bird—the Galinha D’Angola (Helmeted Guinea Fowl), which I learned is a common variety of turkey in Brazil. A far cry from the time the grounds were used as a hospice, the beautiful exterior stone corridors and archways are now filled with footsteps and purpose as people saunter to and from throughout the day enjoying the park and the community programming the city organizes weekly. The Nature of Cities, ICLEI South America, the City of San Jose dos Campos, and a host of other international partners designed a public engagement workshop to gather local knowledge, and map community visioning and meaning of food, water, and energy innovations in São Jose dos Campos. This public engagement was part of an international research project called IFWEN, which looks at how green and blue infrastructure in cities support innovations in integrating and governing food, water, and energy in a nexus approach. The goal of the workshop was to engage the community and design a collaborative space where the knowledge and social imaginaries of people living in the cities collided with those of the international scientists.
Community Mapping Exercise
Fifty people joined us from the community in São Jose dos Campos, and they were all from very different walks of life. A few of them were teachers, two came from an eco-fashion label, and another handful were a mix of municipal officials, activists, children, and everyday citizens. The maps created by the community were rich in detail and experience. In total there were eight maps created. The picture below details both the satellite maps and the inner-city maps that community members used to highlight points of meaning along six question prompts we created based on the research focus of the international study. The data mapped was both tangible, such as the location of natural assets, roads, transport links etc., and intangible, such as place attachment, safety, belonging, stress and smells, etc., that exist in their city.
The maps were not only an opportunity for the international researchers to mobilize citizen science to better understand the context of city life in São José dos Campos, but they were also a learning experience for the community to have access to such rich physical details about their city from both the city database and the international team.
Community members worked with satellite maps to show both natural landscapes, and inner-city detail to map points of meaning in their city along six question prompts we developed based on the research focus. The data mapped was both tangible, such as the location of natural assets, roads, transport links etc., and intangible, such as place attachment, safety, belonging, stress and smells, etc., in their city.
Findings from the workshop
Energy Trade-offs
Energy is a very visible issue area in São José dos Campos. due to the fact that the city has a sequence of high voltage towers that conduct electricity to the capital São Paulo. The transmission lines are imposing throughout its landscape. This was a point of contention for the city residence, and a common mentioned innovation was the desire for green infrastructure to be placed around the site of these towers to make the space useable and more pleasant for residence. The city has recently launched a project called Linha Verde to address this issue.
Water Contamination
Water was the most important element mapped on each of the eight community maps. Flooding in the inner-city region was a very big concern for most, along with a heightened sense of risk of industrial
Map Analysis by Juliana Landolfi
This map is a synthesis of all of the local knowledge mapped by the community during the workshop. The map highlights areas of importance for green and blue infrastructure (green), food including markets, super markets, gardens, etc (yellow), areas where difficulty or distress is experienced in the city (red), and areas where the community desired innovations and change (purple).
leaks, illegal dumping sites, poor soil quality and traffic pollution that cause water contamination in and around the city. Innovations centered around a desire for infrastructures that could facilitate greater river tourism, leisure sites for swimming and river revitalization to make fishing sites a possibility.
Food Sustainability
Overwhelmingly most community residences that participated in our work shop got their food from public markets more than super markets, although access to both was clearly important. São José dos Campos supplies the capital São Paulo with an important volume of food, as well as destines much of its agricultural production for export. This production comes from large agricultural producers, who represent an important part of the city’s economy. Residence expressed a desire to continue to innovate infrastructures for local food such as, community gardens, urban farming, and composting.
The workshop was noted by many community members and the scientists to have been a really inspiring collaborative space. Such a collaborative space is an important aspect of any research study, especially an international one. Where researchers strive to support knowledge gathering and exchange in cities, and not simply aim to extract data, their results are richer and the co-benefits for the community are empowering for capacity-building and innovation creation in cities.
Designing a public engagement
There are a few important aspects of collaborative design that we have found at The Nature of Cities, within our approach called the Forum for Radical Imagination on Environmental Cultures that make events that bring diverse groups together more or less successful depending on the goal of the engagement. The insights listed below can ultimately help researchers, urban planners, developers, municipal decision-makers and many other actors to meaningfully involve the public in city building.
Use the earth: Find a way to connect with nature
When you say, “a breath of fresh air”—consider the underlying meaning of this popular metaphor that appears in different forms in various cultures around the world. As humans, we often crave “a breath of fresh air” to incite a change of pace, regenerate, or help us think through something difficult. Nature has a way of humbling people. A stroll in the park, or a breath of fresh air grounds you and helps you clear your mind. Including nature as a key element to the design of a community engagement can support creative flows of discussion and inspiration—especially as you are bound to invite diverse peoples, personalities and partialities to work together towards a common goal. The end of September in Brazil is just the beginning of the summer months, so there was a good chance our hopes to host this event outside would be thwarted by rain. It did rain. But by then our discussions were well underway, and nobody really cared at that point.
Draw from the arts: Materialize your ideas
Dialogue and discussion are important as an ideation stage, but its critical we carry those ideas through so that they can materialize into the changes we want to see in our cities. Art is an incredibly powerful capacity humans have that can help us achieve this. What is art? Often, we consider “art” to be the product or result of something we produced in a creative state of mind, like a painting or a film. Sure, it is. But we shouldn’t forget we are fundamentally talking about a process, or the expression of human creative skill and imagination that sometimes manifests itself in a painting, but other times manifests itself in the scientist who is trying to decipher exactly what the numbers they tabulated mean.
For our event, we began with dialogue and discussion. When we were all in this ideation stage, we were imagining. The Nature of Cities worked with a gallery in São Paolo called Choque Cultural to find an artist who could help us channel our inner creativity. Pedro Jurubis took a mix-media approach combining paint, sketch and collage to visualize our ideas. He worked with the community members, and everyone drew their ideas.
Community Collage led by Pedro Jubris
Inclusivity and voice: Let everyone speak
Depending on the size of the group, you want to parcel activities so that everyone can participate and ensure all voices are heard. This is important, there is nothing worse than having to bottle up something you had to say and leaving a place with the frustration of knowing you didn’t get a chance to say it. So, set some grounds rules for respectful discussion, but let everyone speak. To get around the size of our group, we mixed people and separated everyone up into groups of 5 or 6. Each group had a map, a facilitator and a few tools to help them map their local knowledge, ideas and visions for the future. At the end of the group exercise, we came together and each group presented their maps, and discussed among the other groups what common themes and thoughts had emerged. It doesn’t matter how many people attend, but it is ideal to try and ensure you have as much diversity as possible. For example, though we had diversity in the types of people, we lacked diversity in geographies. We suffered a capture issue at our event. Though the invitation was completely open, we learned that most people who had attended, tended to live closer to the inner city. There were not very many participants from the neighborhoods along the periphery of the city. This is something we reflect on as we think about designing other such events.
Collaboration: Bringing diverse actors together encourages social learning
Cities are growing at a rapid rate. The more they grow, the more complex they become, and the more difficult it is to manage and live in them sustainably. Ideally, most planners will tell you, that the key to making this complexity work for us is density. A huge opportunity to mix elements in cities like transportation, public services and neighborhoods that can make all of our footprints smaller and more sustainable. I am all for mixing, but I am one of the many that understands that mixing involves stepping outside of your comfort zones, accepting lifestyle change, making different personal choices and thinking in new and different ways. This can be a difficult thing for many of us who are habituated and comfortable in our current urban environments. Yet, if we can achieve this both on a personal and social level than we create the environment we need for livability and resilience. .
To truly create viable transitions and sustainable, enabling environments in cities to foster these kinds of changes, we need to go beyond just discussion about mixing elements, infrastructures, and place in cities. Fundamentally, mixing has to be done at the ideation stage where inclusion and diversity in thinking and decision-making can be allowed to flourish. Not only will this move people to involve themselves and better accept and participate in sustainable changes, this collaboration will improve the outcome and make for more liveable and resilient cities.
For example, when you put a doctor and an architect together in a room, suddenly a city building design is forever changed by the insight of the health professional along with the insight of the designer. Add an energy engineer and now the building is following energy efficiency standards. Add an artist and the building is likely to become more colorful, expressive and a source of cultural beauty, and inspiration. These are the kinds of collaborations and innovations you should be looking to push together when designing events and engagements with the public.
Our societies are siloed, and we have all learned to work that way. We need to unlearn this. Each time we collaborate together on an issue, we encourage social learning and build an environment that facilitates collaboration in our cities. So, this century, this is our challenge. To reimagine our cities, what it means to be urban, and make our cities and ourselves more collaborative.
I like to talk about “changing the world” because it cuts to the heart of our purpose as educators, as institutions of higher education, and as individuals and citizens. Many eyes are rolled when they hear this phrase, yet nothing less is needed right now.
At a time when many national governments fail to recognize the urgency of climate action, universities have emerged as key subnational actors, well positioned to bring knowledge to action around this issue. While governments debate whether and how to act, universities can educate, empower, and inspire a new generation of wise and thoughtful leaders, while simultaneously reducing their own investments in fossil fuels.
But are we, who work in the Academy, moving fast enough? Are we exchanging mixed messages with our students?
At first glance, the role that universities can and do play in addressing the climate crisis appears self-evident and natural. By design, universities generate and house all sorts of knowledge that can and must be leveraged to address the climate crisis. Whether it is in the natural sciences, the applied sciences, the humanities, or public health, university researchers routinely describe how and how much the climate system is changing, and to what extent these changes could affect the health and well-being of people, infrastructure, and ecosystems. These facts and causal relationships establish the intellectual basis for climate change science, resilience, and advocacy for sustainable development.
However, in the increasingly compressed period of time in which we can avoid the worst, and mostly irreversible, impacts of climate change, this knowledge is only valuable if it begets action—and in this area, I believe, many universities fall short. The challenges before us require radical, decisive, and disruptive actions, unprecedented and transformative shifts in direction that are currently perceived by many entrenched interests as counter-cultural and threatening. It is the very students who listen to our lectures and who do our homework problems who will be asked to make these decisions in the critical decades ahead of us. Are we equipping these students with the skills needed to be persuasive in spoken word, in writing, and through application of the laws of supply and demand that reign in the circular economy? Are we exposing them to a wide range of divergent perspectives, and making sure they understand contemporary dynamics of power and systemic oppression? Are we being honest about the uncertainty associated with future projections, the divergence of many mainstream interpretations of the past from reality, and the implications of contemporary lifestyles on earth’s life support systems and the lives of the poor and marginalized? Are we equipping them with consensus building and conflict resolution skills necessary to act coherently and cogently when they encounter resistance? Are we teaching them techniques in multi-parameter decision analysis? And most importantly, are we inspiring them to care and to believe that through their work they can change the world?
I believe that if our students do not graduate feeling energized, excited, and well versed in the scale and the scope of the problems that we have left them, they will not only fail to sufficiently change the world, but will also be psychologically burdened by the intractability of these problems. That outcome bodes very badly for the rest of us. I like to talk about “changing the world” because it cuts to the heart of our purpose as educators, as institutions of higher education, and as individuals and citizens. Many eyes are rolled when they hear this phrase, yet nothing less is needed right now. A key question we should be asking ourselves is: are we graduating individuals who will be our future enemies in the climate crisis—individuals who either through their cynicism, or through their faulty conceptualization of the causes and implications of human activities, or through inadequate skills, are making our problems worse? Or are we graduating empathetic and strategic partners—individuals who through their formative academic experiences understand that the constraints on future decisions need to be very different from those of the past?
On the flip side, I feel compelled to ask, are we, today’s decision-makers, thought leaders, and educators in higher education, the enemies of our students? Through omission, sanction, or silence, are we not sufficiently challenging the problematic paradigms of the past, reducing the opportunities that these individuals will have in the future? Are the investments of our university endowments, our procurement decisions, and our pedagogical priorities actually perverse subsidies on an outdated global order? Are university policies, classroom discussions, and grading rubrics truly and comprehensively inclusive, and appropriately scaled to the scope of the global dilemma? And are the socioeconomic barriers to higher education so high that only an elite few are equipped with the knowledge and skills so urgently needed to avoid global catastrophe?
As we all know, a sustainable future is one in which future opportunities match or exceed those of the present. History sets the trajectory that the present generation can intentionally choose to alter, or not. I believe that we need to graduate students who, looking at a parking lot, see a former forest or prairie which could be restored; we need to graduate students who, upon becoming aware of the systemic and persistent poverty in society, see a failed economic system and instinctively seek out ways to modify it to better serve all of us; and we need to graduate students who, when they experience extreme weather, close their eyes and see images of tailpipes, smokestacks, and oil wells, as the left hemisphere of their brains starts to develop viable strategies for replacing them.
I submit that, in view of the science of climate change, these are not radical statements. Indeed, it is only by acknowledging these associations that we will graduate students who can conceptualize, and subsequently work to realize the sustainable future that we have thus far failed to deliver them.
Franco Montalto
Philadelphia
with Inspiration from Hugh Johnson and Korin Tangtrakul
Regularly, we feature a Global Roundtable in which a group of people respond to a specific question in The Nature of Cities.
show/hide list of writers
Hover over a name to see an excerpt of their response…click on the name to see their full response.
Thomas Elmqvist, StockholmWhat is still lacking so far is mechanisms for co-implementation where we, jointly with stakeholders, work on implementation processes. Academic professionals may have a very important role in implementation, both in evaluation and monitoring, but I think this has been overlooked so far.
Nina-Marie Lister, TorontoOur work in the Ecological Design Lab is founded on community research-practice partnerships. For example, we train 35 professional planners every year who will plan, design and build cities all over the world. We can and do influence new models of design and planning practice—indeed new communities of practice—from studio classes to field trips and internships.
François Mancebo, ParisI think that it is about building trust. It is not just a professor going out the “street”. It’s also about the “street” getting involved all along in the research. It is promoting more inclusive action research. Today, I have the feeling that the more we speak about going out and doing action research, the more we paradoxically stick to our own kind and our way of thinking.
David loves urban spaces and nature. He loves creativity and collaboration. He loves theatre and music. In his life and work he has practiced in all of these as, in various moments, a scientist, a climate change researcher, a land steward, an ecological practitioner, composer, a playwright, a musician, an actor, and a theatre director. David's dad told him once that he needed a back up plan, something to "fall back on". So he bought a tuba.
Introduction
How can professors better mobilize academic knowledge? How can professors get more engaged in practice knowledge? Or, in the prompt’s most provocative version: how can professors get out of the ivory box and into the streets? This was the theme of one of the Dialogues at The Nature of Cities Summit in Paris, with scientists and planners Thomas Elmqvist (Stockholm), Nina-Marie Lister (Toronto), and François Mancebo (Paris), and moderated by David Maddox (New York).
Scientists produce lots of knowledge, certainly. Is it connected to the practical needs of cities? Are scientists connected to practitioners in ways that produce useful co-productions? Well, yes and no. Most of the people at TNOC Summit would be deeply sympathetic to the idea of transdisciplinary co-production that includes academics. But it is not the norm. How might we make it the norm? What prevents us from doing so?
There were two common themes. One is the key idea of trust between scientists and practitioners. Trust is largely build over time, and with the shared understanding that ideas, credit, and benefits will be shared.
A second theme is the fact that academia is not good at incentivizing collaboration outside the academy. Reward structures are not build to credit work outride traditional scholarly venues. Long publication times are not conducive to the rapid needs to decision makers. Non-academics are rarely invited into the decision making of university leaders.
But there are ways forward, and the three speakers included here are experienced at created new venues for collaboration.
This is an output of The Nature of Cities Summit in Paris.
At TNOC Summit, we largely avoided long presentations in plenary—i.e. “Keynotes”. Rather, even when we gathered in our largest group, we met for “Dialogues”, similar to the Roundtable format at TNOC. For each dialogue there was a core question or prompt, such as the one in this Roundtable. We invited three people to participate, striving for a multi-disciplinary group, with diverse points of view, perspectives, and approaches. Each of the three delivered a short intervention (about 8 minutes), and then sat together for a longer conversation. We are publishing all of the Summit dialogues in oder to make the ideas widely available and keep the conversations going beyond the Summit itself.
In this Roundtable, we present both their written texts (essentially a transcription of their presentations) and video of their presentations. Also you can find a transcription and video of the conversation below.
A transcription of the conversation
David Maddox, moderator: Fantastic. Fantastic. The somewhat provocative title that we have was about getting professors out into the streets. Another version of the title is how do we mobilize knowledge, or even how we might democratize knowledge? So, if you can imagine one thing you would change—whether it’s a reward structure or whether it’s some sort of engagement patterns or … —what is one thing you would suggest we could do to change the current state of lack of engagement between these different sectors. Absolutely many people and many people in this room do this, and you guys are great examples of people who do this kind of co-production. But it is not the norm. So, how do we make it the norm? What is the one thing we could do to make it the norm Thomas?
Thomas Elmqvist: Well, I think this conference should be one thing. You have to make it a fun event. It must be very enjoyable to be engaged. We really need to think carefully how we design this to get people to talk to each other and engaged in a way that feels enjoyable and productive and gives hope for the future.
Nina-Marie Lister: Give university tenure to young people who are employed part-time in municipalities federal government, provincial government, and the university. Why? Because it fosters long-term research. And, by the way, Thomas you inspired me to answer it this way because we have no reward structure for the incoming generation of professors who do this kind of work at all. At least not in North American universities. You have to be something else before you are everything. And we don’t have time. And it’s not to say that I don’t value the enormous depth of research that science does. I’m still a recovering ecologist. I still respect the data. We use it all the time in our work, but we cannot spend time being duly certified in two or even three professions before the university system rewards us to communicate our knowledge in meaningful ways with our publics and our cities simply. When they do cross appointments with university… that’s just called having two jobs, people. That’s not good enough.
David Maddox: And why would we get the universities to accept that sort of change in the reward structure?
Nina-Marie Lister: Maybe they need to start counting the money that a lot of us are bringing in with our NGO Partnerships and work that we do with The Nature of Cities, which frankly doesn’t count in the academy.
David Maddox: Although I am gratified that some people I know, I think Timon [McPhearson] might have been the first one to actually use The Nature of Cities publications as part of his tenure review. [Laughing] I think he was denied tenure, wasn’t he? No. No, he wasn’t of course. He got tenure. Francois?
François Mancebo: Yes, to carry on with the metaphor: let the giant into the room. Basically, as an ecologist as well as an urban planner, and I have the feeling that when try to address an issue it is important, to involve from the start everyone concerned in the answer that will be given to his issue: all the stakeholders, residents, inhabitants. We have to get them into it and accept their common knowledge is significant and makes a lot of sense. I remember a colleague of mine working in Bangladesh. They were developing a program about how to protect areas from floods, using people’s common knowledge. Traditionally, when people saw sand-worms get out of the sand, it meant that flood was coming in within a few days, so they moved. So simple. But it was very difficult to make local scientists accept this common knowledge was more adequate than their expert knowledge about flood in this specific situation. More so to include the people who had this knowledge within their research.
I think that it is about building trust. It is not just a professor going out the “street”. It’s also about the “street” getting involved all along in the research. It is promoting more inclusive action research. Today, I have the feeling that the more we speak about going out and doing action research, the more we paradoxically stick to our own kind and our way of thinking.
David Maddox: Many people on this stage have talked about the idea that building trust in collaborations is a key factor, maybe the most important factor, and so from your side of the equation, as professors who are trying to build collaborations beyond academia and be useful in policy and planning from your side, what builds trust for you? And maybe on the flip side of that is what do you do to demonstrate that that you are trustworthy as a partner?
François Mancebo: Basically, people are very pragmatic. Inhabitants and NGOs want more decision-making power on their lives, scientists need some ideas and topics that they can develop in their own field and increase their recognition. Thus, any stakeholder that is not considered to have the provide what they expect and can be useful for them in real life, lose legitimacy even if he has great expertise. Then action research doesn’t work. How do you say: you are f****d, pardon my English. Thus, legitimacy has a lot to do with trust, and you build trust through common interests. Making sure that if people trust you then they can have something in return that would better their life. A research is not just a report that will end in a drawer, or in a publication. It has to have consequences in their life, and positive ones.
Nina-Marie Lister: We use Rules of Engagement that are fair for everyone. We don’t take more than we give. We reference and give acknowledgement to our community partners all the time. We make sure that if we’re working with vulnerable communities, they tell us what they need, not us telling them what we will give. So, some of it is what I would say is courteous. The other is what would be contractually, ethically required. We make sure that we are available for information to be asked of us. We share everything we make. We don’t keep it and we never publish or photograph without permission. So some of those are really basic rules.
The other thing we do is something that Thomas has already mentioned. We try to have fun. We try to host dinners. We try to go out into the community and have our students and our researchers working together with community members in a personal way, much as I think The Nature of Cities does to build trust. I don’t think I’ve ever received funding for a dance party though. So if anyone’s got a line on that, let me know.
Thomas Elmqvist: Well, just a few words to compliment. I think on building trust, one important part is to really show that you have a long-term engagement and that there’s something that is a joint goal you want to achieve in the long term. And also that there is some sensitivity of any asymmetry, whatever it could be in power resources and to address that asymmetry in a sort of in a trustful way.
David Maddox: And, I guess this could go for any kind of collaboration that you might build, what else, beyond the question of loss of trust, are the most common things that go wrong? What can go sideways in collaborations when they don’t work. I know there’s a long list of things that can go wrong, but what if…maybe the question should be: what are the things that could go wrong that that wouldn’t have to go wrong as much if we planned better these collaborations.
Nina-Marie Lister: Where to start?
David Maddox: Nina-Marie’s mind explodes.
Nina-Marie Lister: Okay, just one thing would be the ill fit between community-based research partnerships and co-design / co-creation with traditional universities bureaucracies and their own siloed way of thinking, based very much on a kind of linear reductionist accounting that makes it very difficult for us to do things that are kind or nice for our partners. I mean, I used the example of a dance party, which is not really a line item on my grants right at the moment, but even for us to do things like pay honoraria to indigenous Elders with whom we work is a difficult thing to do and it takes so much time and energy from us, away from the good work of collaboration. So that you end up feeling simply clobbered by the work and it can be very draining. These are [individually] very simple things, one by one, but they stack up and they consume an enormous amount of oxygen, energy, and time.
David Maddox: So, the rules are stacked against you, against anything that’s unconventional.
Nina-Marie Lister: Absolutuely.
David Maddox: Even if you want to do it that way and everybody else wants to, the rules are stacked against you?
Thomas Elmqvist: Yes, one other thing we know is that a lot of projects fail and I think one way of handling that is important is that maybe you already from the start have the attitude: Well, we’re doing this together as an experiment and, whatever comes out, it will be a learning experiment rather than the feeling of sort of a joint failure, which I think could be a legacy that it’s hard to get over.
François Mancebo: Yes, and it is a matter of adaptation to structural perturbations. More than often, as researchers, we are on our track and anticipate from the beginning what what we are searching, how we are going to search it and what we are going to find. But in real life there is political struggle, personal interests, it is completely different. Besides people change constantly. Things are not the way they were supposed to be. And sometimes, we don’t adapt fast enough. It is about our incapacity to adapt to chaotic situations. And it is really weird because at the same time we expect that the people in the street adjust to us and our methods, but we don’t adapt to them and their needs. It is very difficult, and a lot of research fails on that basis. We listen, but don’t really hear what is going on.
Nina-Marie Lister: I’d like to follow up on the idea about failure. We have written a lot about the idea of “safe to fail” experiments and design so that when they do fail, they’re not catastrophic and nobody gets hurt. But I’m not a bridge engineer. So, I’m allowed to talk like that. But I have to say, nobody rewards me for failure and there’s a lot of them [failures]. I mean some of you in the academic world might know about the CV of failures. It’d be a nice idea, rather than showing us your impressive CV, show all the things you tried and didn’t get. I would like to develop a casebook of failures for community-based partnerships because, boy would it be a great learning tool! But there is so little incentive to talk about your failure publicly. So that’s another thing we could do.
David Maddox: It feels like an another element that is stacked against these kind of collaborations is the length of time it takes to publish the work. If the work is very alive and on its feet, and you’re going to be writing about it but it’s not going to appear for a year, year and a half. For the practitioners it is really frustrating. Can that be changed?
Nina-Marie Lister: That’s why I would advocate for different models of tenure that allow for our community-based practice and co-design to have evaluative formulas. We certainly say that we value, in my university at least, experiential learning. We value scholarly research and creative activity. And those of us that are in the creative design disciplines and in the arts have [different]models for tenure as well. But they’re an ill fit. One of the ways to do that is to begin to change those formulas, and that means we have to sit on tenure committees. But sometimes we may be the lone voice that’s advocating for work that’s being done as valuable in tandem, with different kinds of peer adjudication.
Thomas Elmqvist: One other mechanism to address this could be: some journals have already started a sort of pre-publication process. You can put out your preliminary paper with the authors being fully transparent and that is open for comments from a wide community. And then the preliminary results can be used in some sort of process. Then that open review process and maybe some other more formal review process will eventually result in [a decision on] whether this paper will be accepted or not. But you still have some process where it’s out there discussed and scrutinized and the results could be used [immediately].
François Mancebo: One big problem is that officially there are incentives for interdisciplinary research—at least in France but I guess it is about the same everywhere else— more multi-disciplinarity … blah blah blah. But in fact, everybody keeps working inside his disciplinary field. Not that much when you are a city planner scholar, who is constantly involved in action research, but go meet a biologist, a chemist, or lawyer and ask him: “Hey come and work with me on this matter, it’s quite interesting”. What does he usually answer? “Well, they’ll never publish what we will do together. We won’t have any incentive for that. I’m not going to be recognized.” This is a big problem: sectorization. I would like the emergence of a synthetic, multi-disciplinary field, but it looks like it is not going to happen soon.
Nina-Marie Lister: Well, some of us just make a concerted effort to publish in applied sectors, or we publish our work in policy.
David Maddox: Questions?
Question from the audience: Thank you very much really stimulating session. My name is Polly Mosley. I went as a mature student to start PhD two years ago after having worked with the community one mile away from the University for 10 years. My question is about ethics. I think for me in a Natural Sciences Department, I found ethics a massive hurdle to get out and actually start the research. I think we need a new land ethic and I think the university’s role in our city is massive. It’s a massive land owner. Its Estates Department puts plastic trees in our foyer. We have enormous impact on city life. It calls itself and modern civic university, yet it feels like it is designed to break down trust with communities, to stop adaptive behaviors that can build on trust that’s already there, and the local feels a lot less easy to talk about for the natural scientists than the global, far away issues. So, I just wonder how can ethics be used in a much more positive, bridging way. I feel it’s really key to research.
Nina-Marie Lister: I would just like to ask a clarification question when you say ethics. Do you mean an ethical imperative for the University to bridge those gaps or do you mean research in ethics as a tool? Okay. Can you sit on the committee? But that really is of course the solution, in a serious way, that more people who are doing interdisciplinary, practice-based research have to be on those committees and that does take time and you’ve heard me say certainly and others echo in different ways, that we don’t have a lot of time. So we have to find some way of being creative to use existing rigorous methods that take a long time, that take turn around time, and journals combined with those universities that have an imperative for either community-based practice research. You often find it in the health disciplines. You’ll find it in the artistic disciplines sometimes, so there are strategic connections one can make with those departments.
This is not advice that I would necessarily give to untenured faculty. It’s much harder for you and for them sometimes. I think that’s our responsibility, for those of us who have tenure and are already on those committees. We need to take that up and make it very clear. And besides we can be as irritating as we like.
François Mancebo: I agree completely with what you are saying. Unfortunately, I think it’s not only about being in the committees. I am vice-rector of my university, with a special focus on sustainability. This is what I am supposed to do, but every time you try to achieve something in this direction… good luck. So, it is something that has to come in the long term.
Question from the audience: My late mother was an urban Anthropologist and Professor but also very much an advocate. If you wouldn’t mind, talk a bit about the role of professors as advocates going beyond the Ivory Tower out into the community and maybe taking a stand on something that could be political, could be about the subject manager research where you go out on a limb. Have you done that? And what do you think about that?
Question from the audience: I’m glad that you changed the title from getting me out of a box. I was feeling a little bit coffin-like. I was in my Ivory box earlier. I just wanted to suggest that perhaps there are some University environments and indeed national research cultures where this work is actually now pretty much institutionalized. For better or worse, actually. If you speak to any UK academic about the RED—the Research Excellence Framework—you’ll find that at least part of our research evaluation, which is done periodically about every five or six years, is on how much societal impact we are having as a university. We are evaluated on that. It’s part of our promotion criteria, progression, tenure appointments, everything now means that you as an academic have to be doing this kind of work, to one degree or another.
But the problem is that nothing else has gone away. So you also have to do all the other things as well. I also have the pleasure of convening a Horizon 2020 project and it’s absolutely essential that this is the kind of work that’s done within Horizon 2020 or you don’t get the research funding so, all across European universities this is embedded in what they’re doing. The Australian research grants Council funding and the Australian academic culture is the same; increasingly so in The Netherlands. And so there is a lot of institutionalization of this at the moment for good reasons, but part of the challenge is how that then becomes institutionalized, how it’s evaluated, what kind of things get to count, and how it’s basically done on the on the basis of the Ivory Tower rather than on what the Giants or the communities might suggest would be ways of evaluating what was actually effective in terms of impact.
So, in some senses institutionalizing this … yes, but it’s maybe a little bit of a cautionary tale to be careful for what you wish for, because it doesn’t always actually mean that you get better research or engagement or practice out of it.
Nina-Marie Lister: I was just going to clarify that I don’t think I know of a North American University—I can’t speak so much for the U.S.—but aross the Canadian landscape, this is totally institutionalized by requirement. What I should say is it is disincentivized in terms of promotion for the very reasons you suggest, and when we look at—frankly, I have to say it—the gender breakdown on service that’s related to Community Partnerships, it is overwhelmingly women who do it and, we are on average ten years later to apply for promotion to full Professor. So there are enormous built-in disincentives. I agree completely.
David Maddox: Can you be an advocate in addition to your role as a scientist?
François Mancebo: Of course, a scientist is not an ethereal and neutral person, without sex or opinions. A professor is a human being, completely, including his own opinions. What you have to do ethically, is to declare clearly what your biases are and where you are speaking from. If you do that explicitly in the prologue of what you are writing, your readers can discuss with you, fight with you. And it is normal. What’s your position from the beginning? Just distinguish your belief and your motivation, and how it impacts your scientific work. You cannot be neutral.
Thomas Elmqvist: I just want to reinforce that I think yes, absolutely, you could take moral and important stands, but declare transparency in where you’re coming from. I think that’s that’s a very important part.
David Maddox: Last word to Nina-Marie.
Nina-Marie Lister: Urban advocacy is what I think a lot of planners are trained to do but do it in a way that makes clear what both my colleagues have already said. I’d also say that there is a moral imperative. We are facing a biodiversity and climate crisis combined. We have an obligation as public servants in anchor institutions in our cities that shape and form our cities. I think it is in our code of conduct in Canada as planners. We are morally required to do public good. So, for me, I will say all the time: my role when I wake up every day is to think about making an urban agenda for biodiversity conservation. So, anyone who’s here from CBD in Montreal, please come and talk to me.
David Maddox: Thank you to François, Maria-Marie, and Thomas.
Thomas Elmqvist is a professor in Natural Resource Management at Stockholm University and Theme Leader at the Stockholm Resilience Center. His research is on ecosystem services, land use change, natural disturbances and components of resilience including the role of social institutions.
Thomas Elmqvist is a professor in Natural Resource Management at Stockholm University and Theme Leader at the Stockholm Resilience Center. His research is on ecosystem services, land use change, natural disturbances and components of resilience including the role of social institutions.
Thomas Elmqvist
What I think is still lacking so far is mechanisms for co-implementation where we, jointly with stakeholders, work on implementation processes. Academic professionals may have a very important role in implementation, both in evaluation and monitoring, but I think this has been overlooked so far.
One important thing I think The Nature of Cities have been doing for many years now and many other people also are engaged in, is trying to break down silos and bringing people together to talk to each other not only among professors and other academics, which could be very difficult per se, but also outside the universities. In society, we have many examples of silos and breaking them down has to be based on creating arenas where people start to speak to each other. I think this whole meeting for the last three days represent a fantastic example of such an arena.
If we succeed to get a diverse set of people speaking to each other, coming from different silos, we will greatly enrich the picture of how we perceive the outside world. This illustration (FIG), which we call the spaghetti model, depicts how this may be done and how building a multiple evidence base could further strengthen knowledge exchange and knowledge generation.
There is valuable knowledge within as well as outside universities, among practitioners, among policymakers, among public servants, among local citizens. Knowledge is everywhere and constantly evolving and we need to find models how we may harness and use all that knowledge.
One important aspect in this process is the value of respecting each other and building trust and I think that’s the key for this to happen. It probably makes the process a bit slow. However, even though it will take some time to build trust, I think it’s absolutely essential for a successful process of co-creation of knowledge.
But even if we succeed, how do we turn this into action? How do we get the urban professor out in the street, doing something that is really valuable? An important starting process is co-design where stakeholders from different walks of life come together to design the challenge or prioritize among the problems they want to address. Then, the next step would be using a multiple evidence-base approach to come up with new knowledge that actually address and provide an answer. This step we may call co-production of knowledge. I’m quite optimistic and I think we’ve come quite a bit of on the way of doing this in practice.
For example, we may look at how the incentive structure and the reward system in the Academia has changed during the last five or 10 years, it is very much in this direction, partly driven by funding agencies. Now, you are often requested in grant proposals to include a diversity of stakeholders and you are evaluated on basis of the extent you involve them in a deep and real sense.What I think is still lacking so far is mechanisms for co-implementation where you jointly with stakeholders work in implementation processes. Academic professionals may have a very important role in implementation, both in evaluation and monitoring, but I think this has been overlooked so far, for which there are obvious reasons. Currently there are no strong incentives for academics to engage in very long-term implementation processes. However, there are interesting examples, some municipalities are creating shared positions with the university researchers, with 50 percent position with the university and 50 percent with the municipality. This would better enable engagement in the whole process of co-design, co-production and co-implementation.
I think the question of how do we get professors out in the street, could be answered by that we are partly there and there are encouraging developments on the horizon. Of course there are challenges and barriers we need to overcome but I have quite an optimistic view.
François Mancebo, PhD, Director of the IRCS and IATEUR, is professor of urban planning and sustainability at Reims University. He lives in Paris.
François Mancebo
I think that it is about building trust. It is not just a professor going out the “street”. It’s also about the “street” getting involved all along in the research. It is promoting more inclusive action research. Today, I have the feeling that the more we speak about going out and doing action research, the more we paradoxically stick to our own kind and our way of thinking.
Professor Jack and the Beanstalk
This is a tale about why professors are reluctant to go into the streets. From my own observations
Once upon a time, there was a professor named Jack who lived in a poor research center. His only means of income was a cow named “research funding”. When this cow stopped giving milk one morning due to budget cuts, he went into the street to sell his expertise. There, he met an old man who offered “magic” beans in exchange for this expertise. Jack took the beans but when he arrived at the research center without money, his colleagues became furious, threw the beans out of the window and send Jack to bed without supper…
What exactly is it about here? Legitimacy.
His colleagues considered that going into the street and exchanging expertise for the beans of common knowledge, was not good deal: these beans could not possibly end in good science, and they sure could not provide solid funding. Thus, poor Jack lost all is credibility.
But wait: as Jack was sleeping in despair, the beans began to flourish into a gigantic beanstalk. In the morning all the research center started looking in disbelief at this huge and cumbersome production. This was not supposed to happen, they said. It doesn’t fit into our theoretical frameworks at all. Better look away and let Jack deal with this “monster”.
So, Jack climbed the beanstalk and, with great efforts, arrived in a land high up in the sky, where he followed a road to a house. A house which was the home of a giant. A giant who had many names, such as “local communities”, “groups of interest”, or “people in real life”. Jack entered the house and proposed to organize co-construction and knowledge-building with the giant. But the giant answered:
“Fee-fi-fo-fum!
I smell the blood of a Professor of no help to us.
Be he live, or be he dead,
I’ll grind his bones to make my bread.”
Lack of legitimacy again, but of a different kind: Why the hell would the giant (local communities, people, etc.) accept to work with him, or introduce him to local knowledge? He would do so only if he perceived that Jack had legitimacy enough to represent Giant’s interests and help him have a seat at the decision-making table.
Yes, action research into the streets entails trust. When there is not such trust, professor Jack may very well get side-tracked by biased or incomplete information, or worse be eaten alive.
However, let’s continue the tale: Jack escaped down the beanstalk, with some results plus a bag of gold coins he stole. What do you think happened? Do you think his colleagues recognized his efforts, applauded and joined him to further explore this new field? Nope! They denied any interest in what he had found. Why? Legitimacy, again.
Let me give you an example: Once upon a time, again, in a province of the Netherlands was a research-action study on sustainable planning which results were never published by the authorities who sponsored it. Why? Because (I quote): the researchers who worked on it “had no political mandate for defining sustainable development”. Wow… results were OK, but they were not going to take them into account because they had no right to write what they wrote.
Anyway, back to Jack. Jack was a resilient guy. He didn’t give up. He repeated his journey up the beanstalk and finally found something that convinced his colleagues: A goose which laid golden eggs and a magical harp that played by itself.
This time, at least, his colleagues celebrated him. His research became renowned. But they did so under one condition: That Jack chopped the beanstalk down and kill the giant who gave him the goose and the harp. What he did. They were frightened at the idea of the giant breaking into the hushed and consensual atmosphere of their academic club.
Well professors getting out of the ivory box and into the streets … why not? Finally, they thought. But never let “the street” get into our ivory box!
Nina-Marie Lister is Graduate Program Director and Associate Professor in the School of Urban + Regional Planning at Ryerson University in Toronto.
Nina-Marie Lister
Our work in the Ecological Design Lab is founded on community research-practice partnerships. For example, we train 35 professional planners every year who will plan, design and build cities all over the world. We can and do influence new models of design and planning practice—indeed new communities of practice—from studio classes to field trips and internships.
Leading with Landscape: Designing our Cities with Green Infrastructure
I started my training and career as an ecologist, and later, as an environmental planner. I work today at the intersection of culture and nature in our cities, where landscape, ecology and urbanism mix and mingle. I think of myself as a “pracademic”, with one foot in the academy and another in the practice of making and shaping cities. I have made a career of cultivating the spaces in between disciplines, of jumping fences and building bridges, and of collaboration and transdisciplinary learning. At Ryerson University in Toronto, I founded the Ecological Design Lab as a collaborative community partnership grounded in experiential learning, making and doing. We work to reconnect living landscapes and to build green infrastructure for a more resilient future. In all our work, my students and I lead with landscape.
Why landscape? At the edge of the Anthropocene, at a time when cities are growing faster than ever before in planetary history, landscape is a concept most people understand intuitively rather than technically. Landscapes are real places, grounding us in who we are, where we live. Landscapes are both cultural and natural; they are ecological, social, cultural and spiritual places that brings us together. If we can plan and design our urban landscapes with best available ecological, cultural and economic information, we can invest in a more resilient and sustainable future. If we lead with landscape, we can have hope for nature. As cities are fast becoming the dominant landscapes on the planet, urban nature may soon be the only nature our children will ever know.
As we face unprecedented loss of biological diversity loss coupled and compounded by climate crises, we have an urgent need – and opportunity – to do things differently. Now more than ever, we have a moral imperative and an ethical obligation to plan and design how and where to live differently. This doesn’t mean we don’t need research, or theory and models, but rather it means we ought to use this knowledge differently, in a more direct and applied context, to experiment quickly, rapidly prototype, at scales that are necessarily small, safe-to-fail, in which we co-create with and in our communities.
One way we can re-invest our knowledge and our capital is in nature-based solutions, or in a combination of both natural and designed green infrastructure. We have an abundance of good reliable ecological and engineering data that show clear benefits of ecosystem services of green infrastructure that range of stormwater filtration to biodiversity, to human health and wellbeing. There are ample opportunities to pilot test, implement and study as well as to co-create green infrastructure, especially in tandem with community partners.
Our work in the Ecological Design Lab is founded on community research-practice partnerships. In our graduate program for example, we train 35 professional planners every year who will plan, design and build cities all over the world. We can and do influence new models of design and planning practice—indeed new communities of practice—from studio classes to field trips and internships. These forums provide hands-on experiential learning as the backbone of co-creation and co-design within communities. This type of “practice-in-place” with our community partners offer context-specific in-situ opportunities for rapid prototyping and deployment of green infrastructure, as well as evaluation and assessment of landscape performance. All this means we can build a growing case for investment in green infrastructure more broadly.
In this context, landscape-based learning is at once possible and critical; landscapes that are designed as social places yet have clear, legible ecological performance are more likely to be valued by those who use them – from parks to trails to wetlands and green roofs. Widespread public adoption of green infrastructure means that people need to appreciate, understand and value—and therefore, care for—these landscapes as more than just recreational or amenity spaces. So it is essential that we make our landscapes and purpose-designed green infrastructure legible, accessible and beautiful! Green infrastructure is multi-functional with many value-added benefits: it ought to be ecologically performative and biodiverse, yet also provide multiple opportunities for recreation, relaxation, and rejuvenation for people. We know that working landscapes, from green roofs to living walls and wildlife crossings can be as beautiful and engaging as they are functional and performative.
In designing the next generation of green infrastructure, our Lab works with community members and professionals alike, engaging them directly in informed best-and next-practices, and together we co-design solutions that work. We use a collaborative hands-on method of working that is familiar to the design disciplines, modelled on a design charrette for the general public and for the allied professionals who work with us. Our ‘CoLabs’ are design and planning workshops—collaboration in practice—through which we develop and co-create site and context specific design solutions in the city. Our students use CoLabs to work on real policies in the city with partners who are our city building agencies. We also partner with not-for-profit groups who can influence decision-makers with examples from other cities, or pilot-test projects and trial demonstrations.
We’ve worked on nature-based solutions for urban flooding, where we focus on re-imagining cities that are structured by their rivers, rather than the conventional strategy of using rivers as urban drains and sewers. In Toronto, the largest post-industrial waterfront in North America is being restructured around a new river mouth for the Don River, and Canada’s largest urbanized watershed. Three levels of government have invested more than $1.5B (Cdn) to develop a new island, a new community for more than 50,000 people with 6 new parks all structured by a new river mouth. For the government, this is a flood protection strategy, but for most citizens, it’s just good place-making and green city building.
The performance values for green infrastructure should be revealed, highlighted and celebrated. Advancing nature-based solutions means communicating the values, services and benefits of landscape-based infrastructure legible and clear. For example, stormwater infiltration is a process of holding, slowing and cleaning storm water to manage quantity and to improve quality. But it must also be about making this process beautiful and accessible to citizens. We can turn gray infrastructure into green infrastructure through projects that celebrate these co-benefits. For example, we can use landscape-based green infrastructure to adaptively reuse and repurpose underused spaces beneath an urban expressway, transforming them into active public places for recreation, water infiltration and biodiversity. Ecological design strategies can be engaged to turn roadside waste places into pollinator pathways, bioswales and green streets. The technical term may be “infiltration basin”, but for most citizens, these are richly planted roadside rain gardens that are accessible, beautiful and legible. If people can understand how these green infrastructures work and the benefits they bring, they are more likely to value the investment and to care for or steward these solutions—nature-based solutions that we know work, and work well.
Green streets do more than just filter and improve storm water. Carefully planted with trees of many species and varied canopies along a gradient of available water and infiltration zones, green streets offer shade while they filter stormwater and sequester carbon. Green streets offer safe bikeways and footpaths, as beautiful places to ride, roll, walk, rest and commune. Although a growing part of the urban public realm, green streets and bioswales do work for more than humans, offering refugia and/or habitat for urban wildlife. For example, urban hydro corridors are being repurposed as combined public spaces, parks, and trail systems for people and wildlife, using different models of vegetation management, including less frequent mowing and stratified planting. In Toronto, the city’s primary hydro corridor is now known as The Meadoway: a 16 kilometer linear park initiated and managed as a public-private collaborative.
The Meadoway and other corridor projects can also include wildlife passages as part of urban natural heritage systems and greenway networks. Increasingly, as our cities stretch into the countryside, our roadways inevitably fragment habitat for wildlife—wildlife that need space to roam, and connected habitats to breed and feed. But roads are also a hazard, as everyone, people and wildlife need safe passage. Green infrastructure also includes adaptively reusing, repurposing or purpose-building passages, tunnels and bridges for wildlife to move safely through our urbanizing landscapes. [
But what about the birds? Green roofs are a nature-based solution in cities that do more than provide public space, improve storm water infiltration and insultation. It turns out they also provide biodiverse pollinator habitat and refuge for migratory birds, acting as “stepping stones” through the city. Toronto was the first city in North America to enact a green roof bylaw requiring a green roof for all new institutional commercial buildings, which has now become a precedent for many cities, including New York and Chicago. With more than 650 green roofs on over 5 million square feet of buildings, Toronto’s green roof bylaw has resulted in a large repository of data on water infiltration, thermal cooling, biodiversity, pollination and heat island effect reduction. Today’s next-generation of green roof infrastructure goes beyond these benefits: we are now building urban farms and prototyping new strategies for urban agriculture. Ryerson University’s rooftop urban farm produces more than 8,000 pounds of fresh produce in only 155 heat degree growing days in Toronto.
These and other nature-based solutions are technical, ecological and engineered infrastructure, yes, but they are also living landscapes that becomes places for people. As social-cultural designs, green infrastructure leverages more benefits and therefore more investment when connected with artists. The Nature of Cities blog and the summit conference is ripe with wonderful examples of artist collaborations that help tell stories about nature in our cities and the infrastructures that sustain them. When artists are involved in these projects, they help make technology legible through story-telling and design. For example, the hydrology of a watershed comes to life as a story of rain to river in this beautiful living “map” at Evergreen Canada, in Toronto.
In these projects, we lead with landscape because we know at these small projects add up to big change: they are green links in a living chain, across scales from the site to the city to the region. At scale, they represent a new and urgent shift in investment from grey to green infrastructure. Our urbanizing world needs cities based on nature-based solutions, rooted in the living landscape. Leading with landscape is timely way of rethinking, reaffirming, and redesigning our relationship with nature in the city, and of co-creating and co-producing next-generation practices integrating culture and nature for a resilient future.
A review of Min Joung-Ki, an exhibition of large-scale urban nature paintings at Kukje Gallery in Seoul, South Korea.
Founded in 1982, Kukje Gallery is one of Korea’s most prolific exhibitors of international contemporary artists. Indeed, the institution is more of a small arts complex than a gallery, consisting of three modern buildings positioned gingerly within the fabric of an old urban neighborhood on the edge of Seoul’s ancient seat of power, Gyeongbok Palace.
Min’s paintings intensify thousands of years of human history, and relationships with nature in Korea’s capital city. For example, the varied story of Seoul’s famous Cheonggye stream, is offered here … seen out the windows from inside a simple barber shop.
As a city, Seoul has been the seat of government in Korea since 1392. It is interesting then that, in this particular exhibition, painter Min Joung-Ki literally conjures scenes from then to now. Obsessed with exploring the thin lines between urban development and nature, as well between modern and historical culture, Min, who was born in 1949, is somewhat of an oddity in the Korean arts scene. Unhappy with the direction of the domestic art world during the years of dictatorship in Korea, he refused to take part in state-funded exhibitions. In place, he co-founded a small collective of artists named the “Reality and Utterance Group” with an aim to move away from art that was “alienating” people from reality and each other, and instead to give art a role of re-connecting these spheres of human life. The works on view here—mostly recent, large scale oil paintings, focusing on urban nature—speak softly to this point.
Min Joung-Ki, “View of Sajikdan at a Distance,” 2019, Oil on canvas | photo by P.M. Lydon for The Nature of Cities, cc-by-sa
Works such as “View of Sajikdan at a Distance” present us with a typical Seoul thoroughfare, though the tree-lined street appears at first drab in color, smoggy, and somehow eerily dark. Min’s use of vivid color hides from us at first. On closer examination, we notice an undercurrent of clear, broad strokes of vivid, dayglow oranges and iridescent greens. This color treatment reappears often, and within it likely hides something of Min’s views about the nature/culture divide.
The physical situations that Min chooses to portray serve to intensify thousands of years of human history, and relationships with nature in Korea’s capital city. Many of the paintings here—modern buildings mingling with mountain Buddhist temples, both placed along winding stairways up and into mountain peaks topped with wiggling Korean Red Pine trees—show Seoul at is finest.
Though these depictions come across as unreal, they do in fact exist in the current day city.
Min Joung-Ki, “Baeksecheongpung 1,” 2019, Oil on canvas | photo by P.M. Lydon for The Nature of Cities, cc-by-sa
Familiar though the settings may be, stylistically these works place us in between worlds. Though most of these works feel light and bright, there is also an overwhelming dimness, a brown haze that infuses the scene. Min accomplishes this with exquisite subtlety, in a way that the effect is almost there, yet almost not. The longer you spend with these works however—especially his most recent works—the more a distinct tension, and even sadness, comes out in the color palette he chooses.
If one has just stepped into the gallery from Seoul’s seemingly omnipresent smog, the overall feeling of these works will not surprise. In the past year, the city has seen only 25 days where the air quality could be considered “good.” In air quality surveys, Seoul continually ranks among the worst in the world.
If we look back a decade in Min’s paintings however, we find that his paintings weren’t always bathed in the dim brown.
Min Joung-Ki, “Guiyuyean Pond at Yongchungukok Gapyeong,” 2005, Oil on canvas | photo by P.M. Lydon for The Nature of Cities, cc-by-sa
There is much wet green in Min’s portrayal of Guiyuyean Pond, not only wet in what it portrays, but in Min’s technique, a thick application of paint leaves the canvas literally dripping with glistening green. It gives the viewer relief. One of the few scenes here painted outside of Seoul, it seems one of the images that viewers stop and stay with the longest. Staring into the lush depths of this pond, reflecting a cool blue sky.
It’s something of a healing experience.
Water is a reoccurring theme in this exhibition, and indeed one of Seoul’s most well-known urban waterway projects is featured here. Many urbanists know well the story of Cheonggyecheon. During Korea’s rapid urbanization in the 1970s and 80s, this storied stream that runs straight through the core of the old city center was buried beneath a highway, only to be bought back to the light of day a few decades later. The varied story of Cheonggye stream, is offered here in the spirit of Korean poet Park Taewon, seen out the windows from inside a simple barber shop.
Min Joung-Ki, “Park Taewon’s Scenes from Cheonggye Stream,” 2019, Oil on canvas | photo by P.M. Lydon for The Nature of Cities, cc-by-sa
The series of three paintings, arranged side-by-side, explore the changing view of Cheonggyecheon over what appears to be a century, as the stream develops from a place of commerce and trade, to a highway construction zone, and finally as it is today, a social gathering space for citizens and tourists.
It is not until we reach the final room of this exhibition, that we encounter what is perhaps the defining work, a soft-yet-monumental piece that ties Min’s sentiments together. The divide between the “otherworldly” life of nature, and the concrete nature-devoid lives we tend to inhabit in most cities could not be more clear than it is in “Roving Mongyudowon”.
Min Joung-Ki, “Roving Mongyudowon,” 2016, Oil on canvas | photo by P.M. Lydon for The Nature of Cities, cc-by-sa
Here, tree-like mountains—or are they mountain-like trees?—act as shapes, morphing into the atmosphere, slightly unruly orchard blossoms fronting a brightly-painted traditional house, iridescent water flowing magically down through the entire scene.
And then it all stops.
Abruptly.
A concrete bridge for cars, walls of brick and mortar below, a scene solidified, a completely different world than the one above. What Min portrays above seems like the heavens, shapes of the universe; what he paints below, the comforts of our daily reality, come across here as a structure-obsessed life.
The colored water stops its magic at the vehicle bridge.
The broad strokes of bright greens and oranges that dance wildly in the skies and mountains, is covered here, with solid layers, roof tiles, streets, walls; traces of the elusive radiance peek through only in a few areas of unkempt urban weeds.
Through all of this, however, one is still never quite certain where Min’s heart lies, never certain if the paving over of these colorful gestures leaves us at a gain or a loss. His work on the whole plays with dualities, being at once graceful and powerful, loud and peaceful. Both urban and natural scenes elicit beauty, as much as they also lend us emotional quandaries.
In treading lines so lightly as Min does though, he leaves much room to question our own feelings about these scenes, about the interplay between nature, culture, and our urban structures, and too, about the history folded up so deeply within these elements.
In a city so rapidly developing as Seoul—and where development often comes at the wholesale destruction of thousands of years of culture and billions of years of nature—Min’s works might at first come across quaint.
Yet perhaps that is part of the power and magic unfolding here; paintings that allow us to access and contemplate the undercurrents within deceivingly simple scenes. If we spend enough time with Min’s work, these qualities offer us welcome room to contemplate not only what our cities were and are, but in turn, what they might become.
On the opening day, The Nature Conservancy invited politicians from Water, Urban Administration and Housing Construction divisions, press, and professionals across sectors of the city to bear witness to this innovative project. The green rooftop became not only a living space for nature, but also a living space for communities.
Shenzhen, a coastal city located in Southern China, exemplifies the idea of rapid urbanization. In just 40 years, Shenzhen has transformed from a fishing village to a bustling megalopolis. Today, about 50% of Shenzhen’s 13 million residents live in its urban villages. These urban villages are some of the few places left in the city that provide affordable housing. Urban villages used to be “real” villages, but rapid development has turned the farmland that once surrounded them into high rise buildings.
Aerial View of GangXia Urban Village. Photo Credit: The Nature Conservancy
Urban villages are characterized by their dense living conditions, where resident buildings are built so close together that neighbors can shake hands with one another from their windows. Inside the villages, the streets are filled with markets, restaurants and shops, making people’s lives convenient. However, very few green spaces, such as parks or gardens, exist inside the villages. Gangxia Village in Futian district is one of them, where the high density of built environment has replaced nearly all vegetation. Coupled with a limited underground sewage system, during the city’s six months long wet season, urban villages like Gangxia are especially vulnerable to floods.
Dense, urban environment inside the Village. Photo Credit: The Nature Conservancy
To address this problem, The Nature Conservancy (TNC), along with other key partners, launched an innovative pilot project— Green Cloud —on an old building in Gangxia village, transforming its rooftop into a “living sponge” space. The project utilizes three-dimensional light steel structures that are simple to construct and have the capacity to hold over 420 plant containers filled with plants mostly native to Southern China. The original concrete rooftop is transformed by vegetation, which is capable of absorbing and preserving rainwater, creating a nature-based stormwater management system for the residential building, achieving a 65% of run-off control rate. As a result, a living “green cloud” is formed on a rooftop of Gangxia village.
The Green Cloud Project became a prominent example of the “Sponge City” initiative, a Chinese national policy framework that focuses on sustainable urban stormwater management led by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development. In 2016, Shenzhen became a pilot city of the “Sponge City initiative. Since then, TNC has been working with the local government to help urban communities in Shenzhen become more resilient to urban flooding through the utilization of green infrastructure.
Green Roof Construction in Progress. Photo Credit: The Nature ConservancyThe Green Cloud Project. Photo Credit: The Nature Conservancy
The green roof not only serves as a sponge for rainwater, but it is also a sponge for community engagement, education, and culture, even when things don’t go as planned. During the first two weeks of construction, neighbors filed complaints as many thought the renovation taking place was illegal construction. Due to the housing shortage in urban villages, it was not uncommon for land owners to build additional floors to existing buildings.
After receiving complaints, local authorities arrived asking for an approval document in order to continue contrusction. However, the concept of a sponge roof was still so new that approval papers do not yet exist within current government agencies, and unfortunately, the construction of the green roof had to be temporarily shut down. To resolve the problem, TNC made various visits to local community centers, street government offices and bureaus to explain the project and its objectives in further detail. After many such meetings, TNC and its partners established a relationship of trust with the local stakeholders, and the project was given the green light for construction to resume. Realizing the importance of community and local support, TNC took the lead in engaging many university students, residents and youth volunteers in Shenzhen to come together and be a part of building the Green Cloud Project.
Stakeholders were invited to participate in the opening ceremony of the Green Cloud Project. Photo Credit: The Nature Conservancy
On the opening day, TNC invited politicians of Water, Urban Administration and Housing Construction divisions, press, and professionals from across different sectors of the city to bear witness to this innovative project. The green rooftop became not only a living space for nature, but also a living space for communities.
Live classical music concert held on the green roof, allowing nearby neighbors to listen in. Photo Credit: The Nature Conservancy
Even with just one rooftop, the possibilities for community-building are endless. One idea that was transformed into reality was a live musical concert on the green roof. With the support of a local youth education center, students volunteered to organize a concert for the residents of Gangxia village, many of whom may never have the means or time to attend a classical concert. So, one summer evening, a group of young musicians used the rooftop of an urban village as their stage and performed a classical music concert while sitting among native plants. The surrounding residents simply came to their windows to listen in, and the proximity between neighbors in this dense urban village suddenly became an advantage.
During the summer, the green roof becomes a place where urban youth can learn about nature (Photo Credit: The Nature Conservancy)
The Green Cloud Project has also had a positive impact on youth and their perception of nature. For the past two years, the green roof becomes an outdoor classroom for nature education every summer, where children take classes to learn about subjects such as biology, water and conservation. To provide urban youth with the opportunity to soak up knowledge while reconnecting with nature would be the project’s ultimate long-term achievement.
Aerial View of The Green Cloud Project. Photo Credit: The Nature Conservancy
In 2019, the rooftop was incorporated into Shenzhen’s Eco-Discovery Route by CityPlus, an official guidance platform of Shenzhen municipality, as the only sustainable architecture featured in the guide. It is open to visits by the public twice a week. By recreating community spaces such as the Green Cloud project inside urban villages, TNC hopes that they can become “green sponges” for culture and community —— where relationships between neighbors are rebuilt and the sense of community is re-cultivated while enjoying nature. This project has demonstrated the multifaceted benefits that green infrastructure can provide in improving the urban environment and people’s lives. In the future, TNC will continue to work towards building healthy cities through the integration of green infrastructure and community engagement. Vivin Qiang, Fish Xin Yu
Shenzhen
Xin Yu (aka Fish) is Shenzhen Conservation Director and Youth Engagement Director of The Nature Conservancy China Program. Since 2017, he has overseen TNC’s first City project in Shenzhen, China, focusing on Sponge City
I came to understand the garden as a space of sensual knowledge production, where sight, sound, smell, and taste serve to bring gardeners into intimate relations with urban ecology, building a sense of belonging that is both reminiscent of their homelands and a practice of placemaking in Philadelphia.
On Emily Street between 7th and 8th in Philadelphia lies the Growing Home community gardens—two discrete plots of land separated by an assortment of old and new construction rowhomes that are the architectural hallmark of the neighborhood. Chainlink fences separate the gardens from the street. Through them one can see dozens of raised bed planters packed into a tight grid. Despite the neat arrangement of planters, the gardens look unruly and a bit overgrown, which is to say healthy and well-used, with hoses and plastic sheeting strayed along the narrow dirt paths between rows. In late summer and early fall, the planters are full of herbs like roselle and basil, and vegetables like mustard greens, eggplant, green onion, and squash. By late November the beds are put to rest, although winter crops like garlic and onion remain active beneath the soil.
Growing Home community gardens, Philadelphia. Photo: Jake Nussbaum
The Growing Home community gardens (henceforth Growing Home) were started in 2010 and are primarily managed and maintained by Southeast Asian migrants—Nepali, Bhutanese, Burmese Chin, Karen Burmese, and Kachin—who have migrated to South Philadelphia over the past 20 years, many under refugee status. Other gardeners include Vietnamese and Cambodian community members who largely migrated to Philadelphia in the 1970s, some as refugees, and a handful of other African-American and white neighborhood residents. They work in conjunction with the Southeast Asian Migrant Aid Association Coalition (SEAMAAC), a nonprofit founded by a Vietnamese refugee in the early 80s.
The gardeners at Growing Home grow “culturally relevant” foods (herbs, spices, and vegetables commonly found in their home country’s cuisine) that can survive in Philadelphia’s climate. According to a report from the gardens’ first years, Growing Home produces over 5,000 pounds of produce each season, which provides economic relief and sustenance for what are largely low-income constituents.
While food is undoubtedly a major reason for Growing Home’s success, both for its gardeners and its various stakeholders (which includes the City of Philadelphia, who initially leased the land for the garden), my research there focused elsewhere. In particular, I came to understand the garden as a space of sensual knowledge production, where sight, sound, smell, and taste serve to bring gardeners into intimate relations with urban ecology, building a sense of belonging that is both reminiscent of their homelands and a practice of placemaking in Philadelphia. During many of my visits to Growing Home, gardeners would drop by to harvest only a few choice herbs or spices—sensational additions to the evening meal. This was an initial cue that this garden needed to be understood sensually, sensationally, and sensorially, in order to grasp just what (and who) it belonged to.
Building on conversations developed at the Center for Experimental Ethnography at the University of Pennsylvania and with sensory ethnographer Ernst Karel, I chose to approach my fieldwork at the garden through a practice of listening—paying attention to sound and using a variety of microphones and recording techniques to augment my ability to hear. This observational practice brought me into a specific kind of intimacy with the gardens and gardeners, one that was not based exclusively in language, but attuned to somatic experience, gesture, and physical sense.
The practice of listening immediately served to challenge my basic assumptions about the gardens and its context. To truly situate this place within dynamic ecological and cultural processes required listening past familiar categories like urban, natural, infrastructural, human/nonhuman, and giving myself over to a sensorial experience of place that, I hope, transcends more common intellectual paradigms.
Why is it that nature is required to be “financially rewarding” when compared to an obviously destructive development “business as usual”? How is it that the business as usual is not penalized for the destruction of nature and its services when the development is put in place?
There is no doubt that cities, especially since the industrial revolution, have by and large been built overriding local ecologies, obliterating topography, soils, streams, altering soils, ignoring seasons, breezes, sunlight. Nature based solutions, urban ecosystem services, however they are called, have emerged to try to remediate this historical modernist hubris which conceived of cities as technical systems to be placed on landscapes, and their inhabitants as insensate. I am staying in Manchester UK for 6 months investigating the city/region’s goal to become carbon neutral by 2030. A part of the goal is the implementation of the Natural Capital Investment Plan, outlined in 2018.
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Nature Based Solutions was known as design with nature, a term pioneered by Ian McHarg whose book on such principles was thusly entitled. Landscape architects like Ellen Spirn wrote about how cities needed to be designed/redesigned to take advantage of cooling breezes, sun for heating, vegetation for cooling, and more. But it was not until the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) that it seems such ideas began to take hold. The MEA was also underpinned by the quantification started by ecologists such as Robert Costanza and Gretchen Daily about the value of nature to the economy. This new turn created a fusion between ecology and economic value. Since that time, urban ecological science has been deployed to measure the attributes of natural systems in cities and their functions, such as CO2 sequestration, water retention, cooling by vegetation, and assigning monetary value to those services. Measurement and valuation have become normalized over the past several years. This has been accompanied by a quest to reintroduce nature in cities such that it could mitigate the impacts of the built environment whose construction so ruthlessly ignored place, climate, vegetation, rainfall, soils, and more. And now, the value of nature to cities can additionally be given a financial value to the economy.
Source: The Manchester Climate Change facebook page. https://www.facebook.com/McrClimate
Nature based solutions are being advocated to address multiple environmental and social challenges: biodiversity loss, mitigation of climate change impacts such as flooding, urban heat, improving human welfare, and addressing social inequality. For example, GrowGreen is a project funded by the EU Horizon 2020 program for Research and Innovation whose mission is to create climate and water resilient, healthy and livable cities by investing in nature-based solutions. It aims to embed nature-based solutions into long term planning, development, operation and management of cities. The program provides funds for cities to increase NBS by building parks or water retention facilities and other projects.
But, unlike traditional infrastructure—roads, bridges, sewage treatment plants—funding nature-based solutions (NBS) appears to be challenging everywhere, and seems to depend on, in Europe, EU funds. In the UK, there is a turn to attracting equity capital funding for NBS. Greater Manchester, for example, estimates a needed investment of 10 million pounds for a first phase of implementation of NBS. IGNITION is their strategy—Innovative financing and delivery of natural solutions. It calls for investible packages of projects to persuade businesses and organizations to invest in Nature Based Solutions. It defines investment in natural capital as Funding that is intended to provide a return to the investor while also resulting in a positive impact on natural capital (Greater Manchester Natural Capital Investment Plan 2019). The plan outlines key priorities and how the natural capital investment plan can help achieve them, including:
Improving place (making Manchester more attractive and supporting an uplift in property values)
Improving health outcomes by access to the natural environment and also redressing spatial inequalities in access
Building resilience, especially to flooding and climate risks
Supporting the local economy through regeneration toward improving the capacity to supply environmental goods and services
Conserving and enhancing habitat and wildlife
Sustainable travel (walking and cycling)
Climate regulation
Air quality improvements
A map has been generated to target projects and map existing projects. The darker areas show highest opportunities, and they seem to track with the least affluent areas of greater Manchester.
A map of existing and opportunities for natural capital in Manchester. Source: Greater Manchester Natural Capital Investment Plan: Final Report to the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA). January 2019, p. 4
The plan looks at the roles for different types of investors and identifies the pipeline of potential project types that need investment; finance models to facilitate private sector investment and the role of the public sector, and recommendations to put the plan into practice over the next 5 years. The finance models are vague in the plan, but seem to monetize such things as leasing green and blue infrastructure assets to trusts which could then exploit new revenue opportunities such as through prescribed health activities (e.g. Doctor’s prescribing walking around a lake, and charging the health service for the access). Ironically, this in a country riddled with public and free access walking trails . . . the other potential source of revenue is habitat and carbon banking wherein credits from additional actions that increase biodiversity or stored carbon are sold to organizations whose activities cause unavoidable impacts. A third option outlined is furthering the already established Sustainable Drainage Systems through a reduced water company drainage connection charge for developments. This could then, according to the plan, be turned into a special purpose vehicle (SPV) that would deploy appropriate capital at different project stages, allowing the Sustainable Drainage System to be deployed and the cash flows aggregated to enable investment to be scaled up as part of the Water Resilient Cities Program. The public sector would serve as an investment commissioner, developing a supportive financial environment and business plans for specific investment opportunities. Greater Manchester would also have to create an Investment Readiness Fund that would come from foundations, corporations, Corporate Social Responsibility budgets, High New Worth Individuals, and philanthropists to provide specialist finance, legal and other skills to help develop business plans for natural capital projects to improve their presentation to investors (pages 8-10).
The goal is to increase Greater Manchester’s urban green infrastructure by 10% by 2038 over the 2018 baseline. The University of Salford Campus living lab will demonstrate the potential real world returns that result from such an approach through the development and monitoring of the impact of green infrastructure on buildings. Funding models and finance mechanisms to deliver phase 1 of the Greater Manchester NBS pipeline will be established by April 2020. Tenders for investment by equity capital will be then be offered to build the NBS in Greater Manchester.
At this point, solutions include rain gardens, street trees, green roofs and walls and development of green spaces. The Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) explains in its official documents, that these technologies can help tackle socio-environmental challenges including increases in flooding events, water security, air quality, biodiversity and human health and wellbeing. But they need to be financed.
Currently the planning project is backed by €4.5 million from the EU’s Urban Innovation Actions initiative, and brings together 12 partners from local government, universities, NGOs and business. The aim is to develop the first model of its kind that enables major investment in large-scale environmental projects which can increase climate resilience. It is all predicated however on successfully attracting investments.
The EU Directorate General for Research and Innovation advocates the use of NBS for urban regeneration to improve the well-being of residents, for coastal resilience, for watershed management. A 2015 EU report of the Expert Group on “Nature-Based Solutions and Re-Naturing Cities” of the Horizon 2020, emphasizes the importance of NBS infrastructure for investment as “it is cost-effective and demonstrates financial advantages due to reducing initial capital and operational expenses” (p. 6). The peculiar thing, if you think about it, is that conventional development—which this is implicitly to remedy—is, of course, not quantified for its costs to NBS, human health and well-being, urban heat, and its other impacts. Why is it that nature must be financially rewarding against an obviously destructive BAU? How is it that the BAU is not penalized for the destruction of the NBS when it is put in place?
Urbanization processes are ever expanding, yet the NBS approach seems content to attempt to retrofit existing urbanized areas cost-effectively and returning profit to investors. If the impacts of contemporary urbanization are as significant as claimed, and they probably are, then the remedy is not cost-effective retrofits of nature in the city alone. Clearly the patterns of urbanization, building materials, and land transformation processes need to change too, but this seems rarely addressed. Rather, these are patches of interventions that must not cost the public sphere any money (as it has none), but indeed, must be profitable and make business sense, just like the original development that caused the destruction of NBS did. At the same time, development must go on to provide economic growth. In fact, Manchester is in the middle of a building boom, high rises underway dot the city, allegedly financed by Chinese capital. Who will occupy the space remains a mystery, but meanwhile, a lot of money is being invested in the built environment that does not seem to reflect any NBS principles.
Cities in the 20th century, as mentioned above, have been built according to modernist engineering guidelines and concerns, and using hydrocarbons to overpower place – cold, heat, rain, wind, natural topographies, rivers and streams. It is amazing what big machinery can do to level mountains, fill in wetlands, and construct new urban areas, heated and cooled with fossil energy. Land use patterns are thus increasingly similar because they are all predicated on the same economic assumptions and power source – fossil energy. We find big box shopping malls, endless single-family suburbs all ribboned together by roads nearly everywhere. In China, single family homes are supplemented by gigantic apartment buildings. But in the end, the land, the place and its specific NBSs, are not integrated into the development. And post hoc remedies must be implemented, at a profit.
NBS should not be an investment opportunity any more than is a sewage treatment plant. If NBS do contribute what is claimed, then clearly land use that impedes them should not be permitted. NBS needs to be infused into building codes, zoning and land use guidelines. Any new building should have to protect and enhance them, de facto, any redevelopment should similarly have to protect, enhance, rehabilitate NBS. This is not a new investment opportunity, it is a matter of health and safety. Just like there are codes for safe electrical wiring in buildings that are not contested (generally!), ensuring that water reinfiltrates into the ground should be a matter of code, or the provision of open space, or trees. That builders must adhere to certain provisions like providing plumbing in their buildings clearly must extend to the creation/recreation/rehabilitation of NBS in the existing urban areas. And the transformation or destruction of NBS must be addressed by regulation, fined, penalized and made illegal. It makes no sense to invest in urban NBS while losing it through careless new land development. No loss of NBS would be one metric. In fact, it maybe that there should be no new land conversion at all. Rebuild, densify, with nature.
Of course, there is the additional question of whether proposed NBS actually produce the services claimed. To truly know if they do requires extensive and expensive monitoring and evaluation. Each site will be different, designs developed that work there, and the NBS will need to be followed over time. NBS is, regretfully, not one size fits all. Slope, soils, hydrology, microclimate, aspect, contamination and more, all matter. And so, while NBS is seen as a relatively inexpensive—or rather cost effective—way to improve the performance of cities and remediate the impacts of land development, the monitoring and evaluation is not integrated into the costs. Nor is the potential of the NBS needing to be changed, or it not working at all. Design with nature is not about cost effectiveness. It is about recognizing the unsubstitutable human reliance on nature and creating the conditions for its success. Such commitment needs to be embedded in urban development and redevelopment, and the private sector which is largely responsible for that activity, must integrate NBS principles as a matter of course. Where they have been damaged, the developer must pay. Ultimately the health of nature is human health though we act as though it is other, outside of our lives on the planet. NBS could be a way to reconnect people to place, cities to their locality, but a mechanism that relies on equity capital to make a return on investment to create them seems desperate indeed.
Renewable Rikers is an opportunity to end an old, but ongoing wrong. For too long, New York City has disproportionately sited its polluting infrastructure in low-income communities and communities of color.
On 29 January 2019, New York City Council held a hearing on a trio of bills collectively known as “Renewable Rikers”. Rikers is currently home to the most infamous prison in New York City—the Rikers Island correctional facility an island penal colony with one lone bridge connecting it to the rest of the City. Introduced by the Council’s Environmental Committee Chair Costa Constantinides, these bills would remove Rikers Island from the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections, while simultaneously authorizing two feasibility studies: one on the feasibility of locating solar generation and battery storage on Rikers island, and the other on the feasibility of relocating four aging waste water treatment facilities to the island. A New York city council meeting.
The idea behind these three bills is to tie the pending shutdown of the Rikers Island correctional facility to restorative environmental justice in the communities most impacted by incarceration on the island. Calling Rikers Island “a symbol of brutality and inhumanity” for many New Yorkers, City Council Speaker Corey Johnson opened the Renewable Rikers hearing with a full-throated support for the proposal. Not to be outdone, Mayor Bill de Blasio announced his intention to issue an executive order detailing a “participatory planning effort” for re-imagining Rikers Island.
The journey to this moment was more than a century in the making.
Rikers Island has been associated with some of the most racially problematic aspects of New York history. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:USGS_Rikers_Island.png
Part of the traditional territory of the Rockaway Tribe, the island bears the name of a slaveholding Dutch family (originally Rycken but anglicized to Rikers) who exploited enslaved people to build a fortune, which they then parlayed into social prominence. Yet even as the Rikers socialized with New York’s political elite, their name cast a dark shadow over New York City. Richard Riker, New York City’s first district attorney and City Recorder (the municipal officer in charge of the criminal courts) was infamous for abusing the Fugitive Slave Act and using his position to sell black New Yorkers into slavery.
Abolitionist David Ruggles, head of the New York Vigilance Committee,frequently condemned Recorder Riker for his willingness to find that free New Yorkers were actually slaves, and for his role in returning escaped slaves to the South.
1835 cartoon by Edward Clay. Image Courtesy of Periodyssey.com [Ruggles is the center figure]Riker’s activities were so notorious that he and his police confederates became known as “the kidnapping club”. Even as black New York saw Rikers as “the spider at the center of a web of injustice” his abusive conduct did not put a dent his good name among white New Yorkers. After his death, the New York Times described Riker as a “good, kind-hearted judge,” and in the eyes of his white contemporaries, Riker was a near saintly man.
The parallel between Recorder Rikers’ conduct and the racially-charged abuses of power at the present-day Rikers Island correctional facility are striking. The era of mass incarceration saw black and brown New Yorkers imprisoned and abused at Rikers Island while for too long the white portions of the City largely noticed nothing amiss.
In recent years, Riker’s Island gained notoriety because of the shockingly high levels of violence, abuse, and neglect that inmates suffered there. In 2013, Mother Jones ranked Rikers as one of the ten worst prisons in the United States. Numerous reports and exposes documented gratuitous and excessive patterns of violence at Rikers, with force being used in a fashion “intended to harm rather than restrain and control inmates”.
The tragic case of 16 year old Kalief Browder came to symbolize the Lord of the Flies nature of the “cycle of unchecked violence” at Rikers. Browder was held for three years at Rikers, from 2010 to 2013, awaiting his constitutionally-guaranteed “speedy” trial on a minor theft charge. Browder spent two of those years in solitary confinement. Surveillance footage showed Browder suffering assaults at the hands of prison guards and inmates alike. When the charges against him were dropped, Brower was released. But his Rikers experience had been so traumatizing that Browder later committed suicide. Browder’s experience galvanized public calls for reform, and became a rallying cry for advocates bent on closing Rikers.
The next year, then-US Attorney Preet Bharara issued a scathing report on the “deep-seated culture of violence” among the guards and staff at Rikers Island. Bharara characterized the jail as “broken”, with a pattern and practice that violates constitutional rights. Bharara’s Report gave added impetus to a grass roots movement organized under the banner #CloseRikers.
Closing Rikers became seen as “a moral imperative”. The Report of Independent Commission on New York City Criminal Justice and Incarceration Reform (the Lippman Report) characterized Riker’s Island as “a stain on our great City,” and recommended permanently ending the use of Rikers Island as a jail facility.
The Commission explicitly acknowledged that racial injustice played a significant role in the harms done at Rikers Island.
In Fall of 2019, New York City Council voted to close Rikers Island and replace it with four smaller jails by 2026. Mayor de Blasio declared “The era of mass incarceration is OVER in New York City.”
The Lippman Report called for any post-prison planning for Rikers Island to take restorative justice into account. The Report also raised the possibility that Rikers Island could contribute to the sustainability of New York City.
Starting from that rather vague suggestion, a coalition of scholars, politicians and advocates developed the Renewable Rikers proposal as a way to promote restorative environmental justice.
The proposal would dedicate Rikers Island to wastewater treatment and sustainable energy generation in order to phase out noxious facilities sited in the environmental justice communities most impacted by incarceration on Rikers.
After two years of work and advocacy, New York City Council held its historic “Renewable Rikers” hearing. Environmental justice groups, formerly incarcerated individuals, and various lawyers and academics testified in favor of the proposal. Nobody testified against it.
Closing Rikers will be a transformative moment for the City. Renewable Rikers could make that moment an environmental justice transformation as well. These proposed laws are a critical first step. By enacting them, City Council will launch a visioning process for truly restorative environmental justice.
Renewable Rikers is a path to a more sustainable, more equitable City. New York State recently committed to 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040. To reach that goal, the City will have to transition away from fossil fuels. Replacing the City’s dirty and aging Peaker plants with clean energy is a good start. Peaker plants are gas-fired power plants that only turn on during peak power demand. They start and shut frequently, rarely running for more than a few hours at a time. Startup and shutdown are the moments in which power plants emissions are the dirtiest. These Peaker plants disproportionately sited in marginalized communities, and their replacement is both an environmental necessity and a public health imperative. Peaker plants contribute to the localized air pollution that harms people’s health in overburdened, frontline communities. Some South Bronx neighborhoods that host Peaker plants have childhood asthma hospitalization rates double the City’s average. For example, pollution-related emergency department visits and asthma hospitalizations in Mott Haven and Melrose are triple the NYC average. Replacing dirty Peaker plants with renewable generation and storage on Rikers would improve air quality in these front-line communities.
Harlem River Yard Peaker plant http://cdn.nycitynewsservice.com/blogs.dir/8/files/2015/09/Harlem-River-Yard-web.jpg
Renewable Rikers is an opportunity to end an old, but ongoing wrong. For too long, New York City has disproportionately sited its polluting infrastructure in low-income communities and communities of color. The 2000 Power Now! Project is a clear example. The New York Power Authority used Enron’s engineered brown outs across California to justify adding 10 peaker plants in New York City on an emergency basis—running roughshod over frontline communities to do so. These plants were all sited in environmental justice communities with no community engagement, virtually no environmental due diligence, and over vociferous community objections. Although these plants were pitched as temporary, a 3-year emergency solution to a manufactured crisis—they are still there. Anyone born the year they were installed is eligible to vote and nearly old enough to drink.
By seizing this opportunity to transform Rikers Island into sustainable infrastructure, New York City can right this old wrong. The Peaker plants could be shuttered and the land currently devoted to energy generation returned to these front-line communities for greenspace, affordable housing, or other locally-determined priorities. A recent Ravenswood power plant project shows that 316 MW of storage can be sited on 7 acres of land. Two such storage sites could provide more capacity than all the Power Now! plants combined.
Image from Ravenswood Energy Storage Project Expanded Environmental Assessment, submitted to the NY Public Service Commission.
By siting battery storage, solar generation, and wastewater treatment facilities on Rikers Island and moving these facilities out of environmental justice communities, Renewable Rikers leverages the transformation of the criminal justice system into wider transformation across multiple axes of justice. It benefits the City as a whole, while specifically benefiting the communities most impacted by mass incarceration, and incarceration at Rikers.
Enacting Renewable Rikers would be a moment for environmental justice. The proposed bills before the New York City Council would improve air quality for environmental justice communities, which are frequently the same communities most impacted by mass incarceration, and by incarceration at Rikers.
Enacting Renewable Rikers would be a moment for climate justice. The proposed bills would help ensure a just transition that reduces the burdens on frontline communities.
Enacting Renewable Rikers would be a moment for restorative justice. Solar installer and wind turbine technician are the two fastest growing job categories in the United States (albeit from a small base.) Renewable Rikers can create jobs with a pathway to prosperity for everyone—specifically for those most impacted by mass incarceration, and by incarceration at Rikers.
As plans for Rikers’ future mature, appropriate oversight mechanisms will be key to making sure that this project benefits the communities most impacted by Rikers and by environmental racism. Enacting the proposals currently before City Council would help ensure that closing Rikers does not devolve into a privatization land grab. The communities most impacted by incarceration at Rikers, and by environmental racism, must be part of the process. If these communities are consulted early and often, and that their representatives are part of whatever decision-making bodies will ultimately make choices about Renewable Rikers, it might indeed be the dawn of a new day for New York City energy generation.
1 Comment
Join our conversation