top of page
Search
Writer's pictureVinícius Macêdo

Urbanism is NOT mobility


In October 1957, Sputnik 1 was launched, the first artificial satellite capable of orbiting around the Earth, and this in itself is a privileged condition for global consciousness. It was at that moment that we began to not only understand our incredible biosphere, but also its fragility and the scars caused by man in our daily lives. The truth is that we don't realize it on a daily basis, but the growth of cities has caused a disastrous impact on natural resources that directly interferes with the survival of a balanced and sustainable society.

If we stop to evaluate and think about the concept of city, most likely the term ‘quality of life’ will not be well remembered. In Brazil, for example, between 1940 and 1980, the proportion between the urban and rural population was inverted, the number of people living in cities went from 30% to 70%, emerging from there, the industrial revolution bringing several problems that previously they did not present themselves. The fact is that they have become true individual fields of interest, but the idea here is not to create the idea that everything is lost. If we think more optimistically, Brazilian cities have sought, in a certain way, to connect and transport individuals in the most diverse ways and this directly interferes with the vitality of this urban evolution. What may seem hidden in the face of all these views is that automobiles are perhaps the main responsible for the deterioration of cities, simply because they encourage and facilitate excessive movement, which in theory may seem like an interesting aspect, but at the same time, It made it possible to separate our activities, making people travel long distances daily.

Although mobility and urbanism are related terms, it is important to highlight that the first is much more associated with displacement and the second is about the quality of this displacement, and not just displacement. Mobility aims to develop social and economic relations, in the dictionary mobility means “ease of moving around”. Urbanism means “way of life characteristic of cities”.

Now what I bring to the agenda is the quality of these relationships. From a structural point of view, the means of transport that most negatively impact cities are those most privileged with infrastructure. In the last few months, I have been cycling a lot around the city and one of the days on the way home I was reflecting on this dynamic. According to the Brazilian Traffic Code, larger vehicles are always responsible for the safety of minors, motorized vehicles for non-motorized vehicles and, together, for the safety of pedestrians. What becomes visibly clear on a daily basis is that the lack of infrastructure for non-motorized vehicles and pedestrians always causes insecurity for these users and this ranges from the conditions of sidewalks, cycle paths and cycle lanes to the discomfort of traveling without vegetation, signage and lighting.

Ultimately, we don't know for sure the consequences of increasing urbanization. What we know is that cities are growing more and more intensely and what we can observe so far is that this game may never turn around. In some cities around the world, such as Copenhagen and Amsterdam, this has already become a reality and the numbers can prove the impact on people's quality of life and happiness. As an urban planner, in addition to always bringing these issues to the agenda, I continue to explore the city in other ways and always value the time spent looking at it more than the speed of travel. The city definitely cannot be a place just to pass through.

0 views0 comments

Commenti


bottom of page