15-min City Conspiracy

15 minUTE-city controversY

In our last blog we described the 15-minute city urban planning concept that aims to create more liveable and more sustainable cities by ensuring essential services and amenities are within a 15-minute reach from people’s homes. It promotes the idea of reducing commute times, improving accessibility to facilities, and enhancing the overall quality of life in cities.  In this context, the 15-minute city promotes sustainable and healthy living. This concept came to prominence when it was made a large part of the 2020 re-election campaign for Paris mayor, Anne Hidalgo. While the concept of the 15-minute city has gained popularity and support among urban planners and advocates of sustainable living, it is not without its controversies and criticisms. As ABC news reports: “there is another viewpoint held by a small group of others who perceive it as a plot by “tyrannical bureaucrats” to take our cars away and control our lives, leading to a real-life Hunger Games” scenario in which people are separated into distinct districts.  

While the concept of the 15-minute city has gained great popularity and support among urban planners and advocates of sustainable living, it is not without its controversies and criticism.  All around the globe numerous protestors have targeted the movement. These people oppose the imposition of driving restrictions and push back against fines claiming limiting car use is government overreach and an attack on individual freedom and sovereign rights. These people are suspicious of council plans to police the scheme through number plate recognition cameras. This had led to accusations of pervasive surveillance with claims this is a slippery slope to government-run open-air prisons. Some people assert that the World Economic Forum is part of a global scheme of centralisation and control that effectively “turns your neighbourhood into a concentration camp” ABC news the-15-minute-city-conspiracy

In order to provide intellectual fairness for this topic, the Aristotlean tenet of entertaining a thought, without necessarily accepting or rejecting it, will be applied. This will provide us with a more nuanced view of the topic based on research, reflection and judgement.  Some of the key points that have been raised by opponents to the 15-minute city include:

Feasibility Critics argue achieving a fully functional 15-miinute city is challenging, especially when retrofitting existing cities. Ensuring a diverse range of amenities are within a short distance can be complex and costly

Inequality Some argue that the concept may inadvertently exacerbate existing inequalities. Wealthier neighbourhoods may have a higher concentration of amenities, making it easier for residents in those areas to access everything they need within a 15-minute radius. Lower-income communities may have limited access to essential services and amenities, perpetuating urban disparities 

Economic impact Critics suggest that the 15-minute city could have serious negative economic consequences, especially for businesses located outside the immediate vicinity of residential areas. Concentrating amenities within a small radius may lead to the exclusion or decline of businesses that can’t operate profitably within that model 

Urban sprawl Some argue the emphasis on creating self-sufficient neighbourhoods within cities may discourage regional connectivity and contribute to urban sprawl. If each neighbourhood aims to have all the necessary amenities, it may discourage residents from travelling to other parts of the city, reducing interaction and economic vitality 

Zoning and land use Implementing the 15-minute city concept may require significant changes to zoning regulations and land use policies, which can be a complex and politically challenging. Resistance from stakeholders with vest interests may pose obstacles to its implementation.

In addition to these points, opponents have identified other disadvantages associated with the 15-minute city concept, including:

1. Limited options and diversity Focusing on providing all essential services and amenities within a 15-minute radius may limit the variety and choices available to residents, potentially reducing diversity and access to specialised or unique services

2. Higher costs Developing and maintaining the necessary infrastructure to support a 15-minute city can be expensive. Concentrating amenities within a small radius may require significant investments in urban planning, transportation and infrastructure upgrades, which may be prohibitive for some cities, especially those with limited resources

3. Spatial constraints Finding space to accommodate amenities within a 15-minute radius can be challenging in densely populated areas. Retrofitting or demolishing existing structures may be necessary, leading to disruptions and displacements

4. Accessibility issues While the 15-minute city aims to improve accessibility, it may pose challenges for people who have mobility issues, disabilities or limited access to reliable transportation. Inadequately designed transportation options may make it difficult for these individuals to access services and amenities within the prescribed timeframe

5. Economic considerations Concentrating amenities within a limited radius may have economic implications. Businesses located outside the immediate vicinity of residential areas may struggle to attract customers, potentially leading to reduced viability, closures and the impact on employment opportunities and economic vitality in those areas.

6. Social segregation There is a concern the 15-minute city concept could inadvertently contribute to social segregation and creating disparities between neighbourhoods. Neighbourhoods that are unable to provide the full range of amenities within the prescribed radius may experience greater disadvantages, while wealthier areas enjoy better access to services.

It is important to consider these potential disadvantages and address them in the planning and implementation phase of the 15-minute city concept. A balanced approach that takes into account the specific context, community needs, and potential trade-offs is crucial for a successful and inclusive urban development. This may further require a reassessment of our relationship with the concept of nearness which will be central to designing the the cities of the future.