Open-Air Prison Dystopias

 

To many urbanites, a short commute and having your grocery shop, favorite bar, and library branch all within walking distance are markers of a higher quality of life. But recent attempts to reduce commute times to 15 minutes and make cities more walkable have led to waves of weird conspiracy theories about an encroaching police state that must be stopped at all costs. The “15-minute city,” as this design paradigm has been dubbed, is not a city dweller’s dream in this addled conception, but an open-air surveillance prison nightmare that is being imposed by shadowy forces. 

The ‘15-minute’ city concept – developed primarily to reduce carbon emissions by decreasing the use of cars and motorized commuting time – is a decentralized urban planning model, in which each local neighborhood contains all the basic social functions for living and working. Many people argue that the concept of creating localized neighborhoods in which residents can get everything they require within 15 minutes by walking, cycling, or on public transport will ultimately improve the quality of life. Such spaces entail multi-purpose neighborhoods instead of specific zones for working, living, and entertainment, reducing the need for unnecessary travel, strengthening a sense of community, and improving sustainability and livability. Today most cities have ‘operation-based’ neighborhoods, with separate areas used predominantly for business or entertainment; and fragmented urban planning results in sprawl, with people having to travel long distances across the city to get to their destination. In contrast, compact cities of the future, or ‘hyper localization’, prioritize strategies for urban infrastructure that aim at bringing all the elements for living and working into local communities.

The ’15-minute’ city is an iteration of the idea of ‘neighborhood units’ developed by American planner Clarence Perry during the 1920s. The theory of ‘new urbanism’, an urban planning and design concept promoting walkable cities, subsequently gained popularity in the US in the 1980s. Similar versions of ‘urban cells’ or 30- and 20-minute neighborhoods have also emerged across the globe in the past decade. The re-zoning model will gain further traction in the future, boosted during the COVID-19 pandemic by new ways of working that require less transport. With climate change as a major global concern, C40 in its C40 Mayors’ Agenda for a Green and Just Recovery 1 has recommended this model for cities worldwide, arguing that its pedestrianization approach contributes to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and supports environmental sustainability. Most notably, the ‘15-minute city’ was popularised in 2019 by Paris and is a flagship initiative in the current program for the city.

The aim is to make essential amenities, different housing types, and more green spaces available within a 15-minute walking or cycling distance. Some cities like Paris and New York, which are relatively more mature with regard to this concept, have launched participatory budgets to promote local engagement as a part of their city transformation strategy. Cities that focus on new urbanism and flexible concepts, such as Bogota, Seattle, and Milan, are prioritizing investment in walking and cycling infrastructure. While this approach may not be entirely applicable to every city – for example, it is probably more suitable for a big metropolis than for smaller cities – remote working and the digitalization of services have increased the impetus to apply the principle of neighborhood planning regardless of city size.

But conspiracy theorists saw something more sinister in the proposals, even expressing alarm that the 15-minute city concept has been discussed and promoted by the World Economic Forum, which is already at the center of conspiracy theories around its COVID recovery framework, the Great Reset. Sinister intimations were already percolating when they were boosted by Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson, who retweeted a tweet containing 15-minute city maps and the caption “It’s already happening…” and the hashtags #GreatReset and #JailSchwab, referring to WEF chairman Klaus Schwab. 

“The idea that neighborhoods should be walkable is lovely. The idea that idiot tyrannical bureaucrats can decide by fiat where you're ‘allowed’ to drive is perhaps the worst imaginable perversion of that idea--and, make no mistake, it's part of a well-documented plan,” Peterson wrote. After receiving its own share of misinformation—including from former Independence Party leader Nigel Farage, who called the Canterbury plan a “climate lockdown”—leaders in the Oxfordshire County Council in the U.K. had to put out a statement and video to fact-check claims about the proposal. In the video, Councillor Liz Leffman said they were receiving panicked calls from residents fearing that they would be locked in their own homes. Councilors said the traffic filters would be rolled out in six trial locations in 2024. That video was in turn critiqued on TikTok with sinister music playing in the background.

While the proposals are different in every city, in no place would people be barred from entering a different neighborhood by automobile or any other method. People driving cars on roads that have been closed in the U.K. can get exemptions, but even without an exemption, they can just use another road. Another video suggests that the idea will lead to “invisible barriers” and the government tracking carbon footprints for individuals so that people will not be allowed to eat beef if they drive too far. Needless to say, this is not being planned. License plate readers have their fair share of problems, but Edmonton has not said they will be fining or ticketing people. The overall goal of providing people with local options for buying groceries or taking a walk is a good one; unfortunately, however, car culture is so deeply ingrained that even the suggestion of limiting automobile use results in some dark and imaginative paranoia.

Edmonton, Canada is the latest city getting backlash, including a planned in-person protest that will have a prominent anti-vaccine conspiracist in attendance. “You will spend 90% of your life in this 15-minute area as they are monitoring your ‘carbon footprint,’” the flyer reads. In January, another protest in the U.K. was held to oppose 15-minute city proposals in Oxford, where participants connected the plan to COVID-19 lockdowns and vague notions of government control. The conspiracy theory has been circulating on Twitter, TikTok, and Instagram, stemming from proposals in the U.K. and Canada. Nearly all the videos inject made-up details. One TikTok out of Canada with 670,000 views compared Edmonton’s proposal to the Hunger Games in a video with the song “Folsom Prison Blues” playing in the background. Another video in the U.K. by a Gen Z TikToker compared the proposal to Black Mirror and attributed the idea to Tories. “You’re going to have to apply for a fucking permit to leave your zone,” the TikToker says. For decades, urbanists have pushed back on the car-centric development of cities that proliferated after the Second World War. Highways were erected, buildings went up at great distances from one another, and urban sprawl became the norm. The effects of these decisions are now being felt: Commuting long distances by car increases carbon emissions, leads to congested streets, and, arguably, wastes a lot of time. 

The emphasis on walkability in cities has gained traction in recent years. With an emphasis on the time it takes to commute, the 15-minute city idea suggests cities should be reimagined so that most people can get their needs met in a 15-minute walk or bike ride. The term was coined by Franco-Colombian urbanist Carlos Moreno in 2016. In a 2020 TED video, Moreno said that because of urban sprawl, “our sense of time is warped” as we adjust to the long commutes of car-concentric cities. Moreno was in turn inspired by American urbanist Jane Jacobs, who is the reason many contemporary urbanists in the U.S. praise walkability in urban planning. 

In 2020, Paris adopted the term, prompted in part by the urgency of COVID-19 restrictions. To Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo, it was a way of branding a set of pedestrian-centered redesigns, including street closures and the expansion of bike lanes, actions that mayors in the U.S. also took during the pandemic.  Such plans tend to be popular over time but can invite blowback in the short term. Until recently, that opposition has come from the expected groups: people who enjoy driving, hate parking spaces being taken away, or fear that denser urban areas will put them in touch with the working class. Conspiracy theorists believe that 15-minute cities will be a pretext for open-air prisons enforced by a police state, where citizens will be prevented from leaving their enclosed zone. To reduce carbon emissions and respond to the greater number of people working from home, Edmonton Mayor Amarjeet Sohi proposed creating “15-minute districts” by, in Sohi’s words, “widening sidewalks or multi-use trails that encourage walking, or sustainable infrastructure in communities where they make sense,” according to Western Standard. The city first proposed the plan in 2021, suggesting that city planners would focus on neighborhood-level planning that intermixes commercial and residential uses, in an effort to reduce commute times and widen the variety of services and amenities available in residents’ immediate areas. 

While residents are right to openly debate the details, the overall strategy seems more realistic than putting the genie of remote work back in the bottle by forcing people to commute to commercial downtowns again, as some cities are trying. In response to Sohi’s plan, conspiracy theorists began circulating a map purportedly of Edmonton, color-coded into separate neighborhoods, with a text box saying that vehicles will not be permitted to drive between zones. Except the map was actually of Canterbury, England, which had rolled out its own 15-minute city proposal. Edmonton has made no proposal to hinder travel between neighborhoods, and its plans are mainly focused on ensuring neighborhoods have a healthy mix of businesses and services available. Canterbury’s plan involves closing off traffic on roads through the city’s center to reduce congestion through the use of license-plate readers that will fine motorists, which it calls “traffic filters.” Taxis, delivery vehicles, bikes, and pedestrians would still be able to use the roads. Drivers can still cross into different neighborhoods, but it would take a little longer, possibly prompting them to walk or bike instead. Of course, many cities have various schemes to limit car use as traffic congestion has increased—Colombia’s famous pico y placa (peak and plate) rules ban cars from driving on certain days of the week based on the digits on their license plates. 

In the end, I have a question, would you rather live in a ‘15-minute’ city or on the Croatian coast in a house like this with this view and the first neighbor who is two or three miles away from you?

Notes:

C40 Knowledge: Cities, Coronavirus (COVID-19) and a Green Recover; The Case for a Green and Just Recovery. (2020)

Financial Times: Welcome to the 15-minute city. (2020)

C40 Knowledge: How to build back better with a 15 min city. (2020)

Ibid.

Edith Hofer, Stefan Netsch, Katharina Gugerell, Walter Musakwa, and Trynos Gumbo: The Inclusive City of Johannesburg and the Challenge of Affordable Housing. (2020)

C40 Knowledge: How to build back better with a 15 min city. (2020)

Bloomberg Businessweek. The 15-Minute City—No Cars Required—Is Urban Planning’s New Utopia. (2020)

Smartcitylab: Governance finance Paris-15-minute-city. (2020)

Bloomberg CityLab: Paris Mayor: It's Time for a '15-Minute City'. (2020)

The Guardian: Paris mayor unveils 15-minute city plan in re-election campaign. (2020)

Financial Times: Welcome to the 15-minute city. (2020)

Bureau of Planning and Sustainability, City of Portland: Status Report: Twenty-minute Neighborhoods. (2009)

Ibid.

City of Portland, Oregon: Apply for a shared-use parking permit (pilot). (2021)

City of Portland, Oregon: Joint Bicycle-Pedestrian Advisory Committee Meeting. (2021)

Portland Business Journal: Portland OKs largest overhaul to zoning code since 1990s. (2020)

Sightline Institute: Portland just passed the best low-density zoning reform in US history. (2020)

Bloomberg CityLab: Make way for the ‘One-Minute City’. (2021)

Environment, Land, Water, and Planning; State Government of Victoria: 20-minute neighbourhoods. (2019)

Environment, Land, Water, and Planning; State Government of Victoria: 20-minute neighbourhoods, Creating a more liveable Melbourne. (2019)

Access to affordable energy

 

We are currently in the middle of a third energy crisis, as the Ukraine conflict rages on. With the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, climate goals may need to come second to energy supply concerns caused by higher energy prices and clogged supply chains worldwide. Europe has already seen its major gas supplier Russia collapse. However, multi-decade high inflation and soaring interest rates may still considerably worsen the situation. 

Industry players are all too familiar with the energy trilemma – the struggle that companies and policymakers face in ensuring a secure and reliable energy supply, at an affordable cost, with minimal environmental impact. Add increasingly frequent climate-related disasters, and we find ourselves at an energy inflection point as an industry and a society. Businesses and governments must develop new strategies to meet critical energy goals in an ever-more complex environment. 

While global reliance on hydrocarbons will decline, new dependencies on critical minerals and technology will arise. Minerals powering the energy transition – like lithium, copper, cobalt, nickel, and rare earth elements – need additional investment. Their supply sources and demand centers will become new points of vulnerability, as well as economic and geopolitical advantages, shifting the geopolitics of resource policy.

I am not convinced that the current energy crisis will expedite the movement toward energy transitions. The whole debate around energy transitions and climate change ignores the political economy of this highly important policy issue. However, fossil fuel investment is hopefully on the decline, as the UN’s Antonio Guterres urges G20 countries to “dismantle coal infrastructure”, branding further government spending on fossil fuels “delusional. According to Climate Action Tracker (CAT), countries’ net-zero aspirations are still inadequate. Only 6 of the 41 nations covered by the CAT, accounting for 8% of global GHG emissions, have set ‘acceptable’ net zero objectives. Those six countries are Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, the EU, the UK, and Vietnam. The US is evaluated as ‘average’, while Japan and China rank as ‘poor’.

Developing economies are more impacted by the energy crisis, with less access to resources, weaker economic frameworks, and volatile currencies. Thus, they are slower in phasing out fossil fuels, with insufficient renewables investment, often buying fossil fuels on the black market. According to the latest IEA figures, outlined in the World Energy Investment 2022 report global clean energy investment is picking up and is predicted to surpass $1.4 trillion in 2023, accounting for nearly three-quarters of global energy investment growth. Since 2020, the annual average growth rate in clean energy investment has increased to 12% from just over 2% in the five years following the signing of the Paris Agreement in 2015.

Governments will increasingly look to diversify supply chains and secure critical minerals and energy from domestic or friendly sources. Broader environmental, social, and geopolitical considerations will also impact policy and the success of energy transition projects. Higher costs, including higher interest rates, are forcing governments to trade-off between affordability and decarbonization, often favoring fossil fuels in the immediate term.

Several countries now find it cheaper to replace natural gas with coal. In Europe, where carbon pricing is well established, permit costs have moderated this shift, though Germany will now maintain some coal plants as mitigation against natural gas price spikes.

The situation exacerbates the already patchy implementation of nations’ COP26 carbon reduction commitments, with disparities in energy costs between high- and low-action regions potentially incentivizing offshoring. These realities fundamentally change the game for businesses, policymakers, and developing economies. Companies should prepare for short-term shocks and build operational resilience to avoid major losses while developing robust scenarios to inform new strategic directions.

Another major policy achievement was the US Inflation Reduction Act, which would allow $369 billion in energy and climate change investment, with the goal of reducing US greenhouse gas emissions by 40% below 2005 levels by 2030. However, these efforts may not be quite enough, as the World Energy Outlook 2021, mentions “Today’s pledges cover less than 20% of the gap in emissions reductions that need to be closed by 2030 to keep a 1.5 degrees Celcius path within reach.