Sodel Vladyslav/
Shutterstock.com
6
suggests that COVID-19 is primarily transmitted through close contact in enclosed spaces. Internal population density within buildings and, more specifically, within shared rooms inside buildings, is what drives this—not the compact urban form of the city. In New York, for example, COVID-19 cases were concentrated in the outer boroughs, and suburban Westchester and Rockland counties have reported nearly triple the rate per capita than those of Manhattan. The real issue is the systemic economic inequity, which forces lower income people to live in overcrowded conditions, regardless of location. This is no different in New York than it is in New Delhi, where the urban poor have the highest risk for any number of life- expectancy reducing outcomes. Innovative approaches to urban planning, equitable housing policies, and a reversal of over a century of environmental discrimination in our cities are absolutely necessary, but vilifying the city is counterproductive. Moving out of dense cities into the open space and social distancing afforded by the suburbs is exactly the type of knee-jerk reaction that we must avoid. Cities are not at fault.
Cities, in fact, are the answer—if we plan them carefully. Among the many human activities that cause habitat loss, urban development produces some of the greatest local extinction rates, and has a more permanent impact. Habitats lost due to farming and logging, for example, can be restored, whereas urbanised areas not only persist, they also continue to expand. The Atlas for the End of the World 15
,
conceived by Richard Weller at the University of Pennsylvania, is one of the best sources for documenting our collective risk. Mapping 391 of the planet’s terrestrial ecoregions, this research identified 423 cities with a population of over 300,000 inhabitants situated within 36 biodiversity hotspots. Using data modelling from the Seto Lab16
at Yale University, the Atlas predicts that 383 of these cities—about 90 per cent—will likely continue to expand into previously undisturbed habitats.
QiuJu Song/
Shutterstock.com 7
Degraded habitats of any kind can create conditions for viruses to cross over, whether in Accra or Austin. The disruption of habitat to support our suburban lifestyle is bringing us closer to species with which we have rarely had contact. By infringing on these ecosystems, we are reducing the natural barriers between humans and host species, creating ideal conditions for diseases to spread. This is already evident in the fragmented forests of many American suburbs, where development patterns have altered the natural cycle17
of the pathogen that causes Lyme disease. When humans live in close proximity to these disrupted
ecosystems, they are more likely to get bitten by a tick carrying the Lyme bacteria. When biodiversity is reduced, these diluted systems allow for species like rodents and bats—some of the most likely to promote the transmission of pathogens—to thrive. This essentially means that the more habitats we disturb, the more danger we are in by tapping into various virus reservoirs. The more densely we build, the more land we can conserve for nature to thrive, potentially reducing our risk of another pandemic from a novel virus. When it comes to where the next virus might emerge, Wuhan isn’t really that different from Washington DC. If the American model of an over-indulgent suburban sprawl is the benchmark for individual success, we all lose.
So, what can landscape architects do? We can remember that our purpose is to be at the forefront of safeguarding public health. In the late 19th improvements18
and early 20th century, cities benefitted from engineering
to water supplies and sewerage. This has set the foundation for luminaries like Frederick Law Olmsted to design some of our most beloved parks. By the mid-20th
century, the environmental crisis
documented by prominent thinkers like Ian McHarg further exposed societal inequities that still exist today. The luxuries of wealth and the cruelty of poverty are exacerbated in the current pandemic. The threat of disease remains greater in the most vulnerable corners of society. People hardest hit by COVID-19 are the urban poor, whose pre-existing conditions are a result of our complacency when it comes to issues of environmental justice and equitable access to nature.
It is incumbent upon landscape architects and allied professionals to adopt a more vocal, activist stance.
We must petition government leaders to stop funnelling money to signature projects in already wealthy neighbourhoods, and instead ensure that new parks are built in underserved communities. And if that doesn’t work to help reshape broken policies and enact more equitable legislation, we must run for political office ourselves. By demanding equitable policies for public open space, we can leave a legacy that allows all citizens of our post-pandemic cities to thrive.
6 & 7 The time has come to relook at current large-scale, industrial agricultural practices that are unsustainable
18 FUTURARC
SUPPORTING ADVANCED AGRICULTURE Habitat protection doesn’t only benefit wild animals. Conservation efforts also provide enormous benefits to humans, most notably for one of our most basic needs—the food we eat. But if we continue our current agricultural practices, by the end of the century our arable lands will likely be about half as productive as they are today, with the same land producing half as much food in a world that needs to feed at least 50 per cent more people. And most of those people—an estimated 80 per cent of us—will be living in cities. So how can we invest in food systems that will create more resilient cities in the future? Most investment strategies are based on the principle of diversification—to reduce risk, create a portfolio that includes multiple investments. That said, our current food system does just the opposite. Its success depends on concentrated, large-scale industrial agriculture in only a few places. For example, the vast majority of the fruits, nuts and vegetables grown in the United States are from California alone. With limited additional
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119
