Opinion: How urban planning can improve civic discourse – Deseret News

Report on Urban Design’s Impact on Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Executive Summary

This report analyzes the critical link between urban design, social cohesion, and the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It posits that post-war, car-centric urban planning has contributed to social isolation, political polarization, and violence, thereby impeding progress on key SDGs. The report advocates for a shift towards walkable, mixed-use, and inclusive neighborhood design as a foundational strategy for building sustainable, peaceful, and equitable communities, in alignment with SDG 11, SDG 10, SDG 16, and SDG 3.

2.0 The Challenge: Unsustainable Urban Planning and Social Fragmentation

The dominant model of urban development in the past century, characterized by the strict separation of functions (living, working, shopping), has created significant challenges to sustainability and social well-being.

• Autocentric Design: Cities built around automobiles have prioritized highways and parking lots over human-scale public spaces, leading to environmental degradation and resource inefficiency.
• Social Isolation: This development pattern physically segregates communities, reducing daily interactions and fostering social isolation, which can contribute to a decline in civic engagement and an increase in societal friction.
• Erosion of Public Realm: Investment has disproportionately favored private infrastructure (highways, single-family homes) over public assets like parks, plazas, and civic buildings, weakening the spaces that foster community identity and interaction.

3.0 Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

The consequences of current urban planning models directly impact several SDGs.

3.1 SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

The prevailing suburban sprawl model is fundamentally at odds with the objectives of SDG 11.

• It fails to provide access to safe, affordable, and sustainable transport systems for all.
• It creates environmentally unsustainable and resource-intensive human settlements.
• It diminishes access to inclusive and safe green and public spaces.

3.2 SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities & SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Urban design has a profound effect on social equity and peace.

• Increased Inequality (SDG 10): Zoning and development patterns have entrenched segregation based on income, race, and age, creating homogenous enclaves and limiting opportunities for diverse social interaction.
• Undermining Peace (SDG 16): By engineering isolation and reducing opportunities for developing empathy through daily contact with diverse groups, car-centric design contributes to the social fragmentation and polarization that can fuel conflict and violence.

3.3 SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The built environment is a critical determinant of public health.

• Mental Health: The loneliness and alienation common in sprawling suburbs negatively impact mental well-being.
• Physical Health: A lack of walkability discourages physical activity.
• Community Safety: The erosion of community ties and public oversight can contribute to environments where violence and fear are more prevalent, directly impacting community health and safety.

4.0 Recommendations for a Sustainable Urban Future

A strategic shift in urban planning is required to align development with the SDGs. The following actions are recommended:

1. Reform Zoning Regulations: Municipal and regional governments must reform zoning codes to prioritize and incentivize the development of walkable, mixed-use, and mixed-income neighborhoods. This is a crucial step towards achieving the targets of SDG 11 and SDG 10.
2. Invest in the Public Realm: Public and private investment must be reoriented towards creating and maintaining high-quality public spaces, including parks, squares, and pedestrian infrastructure, which are essential for fostering community and supporting SDG 3.
3. Promote Human-Scale Development: Developers and planners should be held accountable for creating communities that are designed for people, not just cars. This approach supports social interaction and the development of strong, inclusive institutions as envisioned in SDG 16.
4. Foster Civic Engagement: Individuals and community groups must advocate for policies that support walkability and community-oriented design, creating a partnership-based approach (SDG 17) to building a more sustainable and humane environment.

5.0 Conclusion

The physical structure of our cities is inextricably linked to the health of our society. By consciously designing communities that promote interaction, diversity, and empathy, we can create the physical foundation for a more civil, equitable, and sustainable society. Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly those related to cities, inequality, and peace, depends on our collective commitment to building environments that bring people together rather than keeping them apart.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

• The article’s central argument focuses on urban planning, the design of cities, and community living. It critiques “autocentric landscapes,” “suburban development,” and the “strict separation of living, working, shopping and recreation,” while advocating for “walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods” and investment in public spaces like “parks, plazas and civic buildings.”

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• The article begins by discussing specific acts of violence, such as a “campus shooting” and an “attack in a Michigan church.” It links this violence to a broader societal issue of “political discourse collapses into hostility,” “extremist rhetoric,” and political polarization, arguing that better urban design can foster empathy and reduce the conditions that lead to violence and division.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• The text explicitly points out that current urban design leads to social segregation. It states, “Our neighborhoods are often segregated by income, race and age, physically entrenching us in communities where our neighbors tend to look, think and vote like us.” The proposed solution of traditional, mixed-use neighborhoods is presented as a way to foster “economic and cultural diversity.”

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Targets under SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

• Target 11.3: Enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management. The article directly calls for a “new civic vision” where “Zoning codes need reform to allow and prioritize walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods.” This is a clear call for changing human settlement planning.
• Target 11.7: Provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces. The article laments that “investment has shifted from public to private space” and that “parks, plazas and civic buildings deteriorate.” It explicitly calls on individuals to “invest in the public realm, including the parks, squares and sidewalks that bind us together.”

Targets under SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere. The article is motivated by recent shootings and expresses the hope that its proposed changes will lead to a future where “violence slow and schools and churches will feel safe again.”
• Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels. The article suggests that the current social isolation feeds political polarization and that living in more diverse communities will lead citizens to “elect leaders less interested in division and more committed to unity,” thus improving the quality of representative decision-making.

Targets under SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• Target 10.2: Empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, race, or economic status. The article critiques neighborhoods “segregated by income, race and age” and promotes an “architecture of community” with “mixed housing types” that “naturally fostered economic and cultural diversity” to counteract social isolation and exclusion.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Indicators for SDG 11 Targets

• For Target 11.3: The article implies an indicator related to urban planning policy. Progress could be measured by the number of municipalities that have reformed zoning codes to permit and prioritize mixed-use, walkable developments.
• For Target 11.7: An implied indicator is the level of public investment and the quality of public spaces. This could be measured by the proportion of municipal budgets allocated to the creation and maintenance of public parks, squares, and sidewalks.

Indicators for SDG 16 Targets

• For Target 16.1: The article explicitly mentions shootings. A direct indicator is the number of deaths and injuries from violent acts like public shootings. A secondary, qualitative indicator is the public’s perception of safety in community spaces like schools and churches.

Indicators for SDG 10 Targets

• For Target 10.2: The article describes residential segregation. An implied indicator to measure progress would be the level of residential segregation by income and race within cities. A decrease in segregation would indicate progress toward more inclusive communities.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

Source: deseret.com