As we continue to tackle the spread of the coronavirus, it is worth wondering what “change” would endure the pandemic. In parallel, the discourse on urban densities has resurfaced, questioning the need for cities to be concentrated. Urban density, simply put, gives a measurement of the number of people in an area, the number of dwelling units in an area, or the built area on a given site. The lack of a universal definition has played a part in fueling the debate with values attached to certain places or ideas. Therefore, it can either imply diverse and lively communities or overcrowded settlements and dirty streets, depending on where one comes from.
In India, the debate has been shaped by attaching high density with the latter, bringing visuals of informal settlements, packed roads, and poverty. This misconception has led to people blaming our dense cities for spreading the coronavirus. However, the answer to the rapid spread of cases in our cities is not that simple. It is influenced by the agility of governing bodies, socio-economic structure, and the systems in place to fight a public health scare.
Urbanist Alain Bertaud refers to cities as labour markets to highlight that the labour force is pivotal for a city’s functioning (Bertaud, 2018). The concentration and the network of people, ideas, and opportunities are why people come to cities. Regulating density only limits the built area, it does not limit people coming to cities. Regulation, in fact, reduces the livable space available per person drastically. For instance, Mumbai with an average of 4.5 sqm livable space for a person falls below the recommended 9 sqm per person by WHO due to its draconian restrictions (Bertaud, 2011, 1). Such conditions highlight the threat of coronavirus. However, high-density world cities like Seoul, Tokyo, and Taipei controlled COVID-19 cases and deaths through social distancing, peer pressure, clear communication, and leveraging technology to reconcile public health and governance capacity (Wiener & Iton, 2020). The South Korean government, for example, has invested $100 million to scale up testing and use “high-tech solutions”, with citizens’ consent, for contact tracing. Moreover, their “smart city” database, similar to India’s smart city initiative, was optimized for COVID-19 tracking in addition to monitoring city pollution and traffic (Holmes, 2020).
What gives cities an advantage over rural areas are its unique levers, a reflection of its citizens’ needs, to steer robust development. For example, Bangalore builds a favourable atmosphere for tech-start-ups that other Indian cities don’t support. The pandemic calls for a similar approach, where the response can be efficient when decentralized. Empower the urban local bodies to take action according to the local demography, economy, culture, and social structure. However, for India, with its involved governing hierarchies, we should be mindful of overlapping responsibilities, limited fiscal space, and misinformed communication strategies.
Denser cities indeed saw a rise in COVID-19 cases even before it was reported in smaller towns. Dharavi with about 10 lakh people in just 2.1 sq km was a hotspot in Mumbai (Bertaud, 2011). With the first case reported on the 1st of April 2020, it soon saw a surge of an outbreak with a 12% growth rate. However, Dharavi soon emerged as a model to “chase the virus” with door-to-door screening, surveillance, arranging quality isolation and treatment facilities, and disinfecting 425 public toilets. The COVID-19 growth rate reduced to 1.09% in June (Golechha, 2020). This was made possible with community participation, active governance, and public-private partnership, which together called out the myth attached to urban density. Kerala, often cited for its response to the pandemic owes its success to a public healthcare system, which, with its recent Nipah virus outbreak, was equipped to tackle a spread of a similar extent. Moreover, Kerala is characterized by its large towns, that are neither urban nor rural. They are governed by Rural Local Bodies (RLBs) that tend to be more rooted with the civic society for decision making.
This pandemic is a reminder that this isn’t the first or the last threat to our cities. To blame only urban densities, that foster cities’ social capital and build economic value, limit the purview of our problem and ignores other influencing factors. It is tempting to fall for generalizations drawn from cities that have poorly managed the spread of the pandemic. They also warp policies that, ironically, create further problems making cities more vulnerable. As urbanists and problem solvers, we have to respond to the ground realities of urban India which is developing with a growing appetite for space. Restricting urban densities, even with the best intentions, only pushes the underrepresented communities to unhealthy living conditions. Hence, this pandemic is an opportunity to rethink how we can leverage our mandates and their implementation for cities to be equitable and resilient.
References
Bertaud, A. (2011, July 20). Mumbai FAR/FSI conundrum. 01. https://alainbertaud.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/AB-Mumbai-FSI-Conundrun-Revised_June-2013_kk-ab1.pdf
Bertaud, A. (2018). Order without Design — How Markets Shape Cities. MIT Press.
Golechha, M. (2020, August 19). COVID-19 Containment in Asia’s Largest Urban Slum Dharavi-Mumbai, India: Lessons for Policymakers Globally. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). Retrieved November 22, 2020, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7437383/
Holmes, A. (2020, May 02). Home›Tech›News»South Korea Is Relying On Technology To Contain COVID-19, Including Measures That Would Break Privacy Laws In The US — And So Far, It’s Working South Korea is relying on technology to contain COVID-19, including measures that would break pri. Business Insider India. Retrieved November 22, 2020, from https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/south-korea-is-relying-on-technology-to-contain-covid-19-including-measures-that-would-break-privacy-laws-in-the-us-x2014-and-so-far-itaposs-working/slidelist/75507188.cms
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2020, July 31). COVID-19 and fiscal relations across levels of government: OECD Policy Responses to Coronavirus (COVID-19). The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Retrieved November 22, 2020, from http://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/covid-19-and-fiscal-relations-across-levels-of-government-ab438b9f/
Wiener, S., & Iton, A. (2020, May 17). A Backlash Against Cities Would Be Dangerous: Undue fears of urban density warp public policy — and make Americans more vulnerable. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/urban-density-not-problem/611752/
If this interested you, here are some links to explore further. Enjoy!
Varma, A. (n.d.). Episode 191: Our Cities After Covid-19. The Seen and the Unseen. Retrieved November 22, 2020, from https://seenunseen.in/episodes/2020/9/20/episode-191-our-cities-after-covid-19/
Shah, K., Tandel, V., & Agrawal, H. (2020, January 27). Why India has the fastest-growing cities. Mint. https://www.livemint.com/news/india/why-india-has-the-fastest-growing-cities-11580053066942.html
