Every journey I embark upon seems to reinforce some universal truths about cities and the people who inhabit them, while calling me to question others - usually the scale, pace or quality with which we do things. This constant state of relearning shapes my perception and understanding of the urban landscape.
One salient observation is how cities change over time. When you revisit a city, it's much easier to notice these transformations than when you are living in the constant flux of your own.
Some cities rapidly evolve with ambitious visions of what a modern human city should look like. Their progression is often spearheaded by forward-thinking individuals who embrace change, believe in a brighter future, and are undeterred by the challenges of reaching their goals.
On the other hand, some cities seem unable to adapt to the changing times, succumbing to economic or population pressures. There is a palpable decline as they grapple with growth and transformation, raising questions of resilience and, perhaps more importantly, adaptability in our urban spaces.
Still others are victims of their own success - changing first for the better of their own population, but later struggling to balance local needs and affordability with the real-estate and retail interests of a “great city visitor class”.
What separates the thriving cities from the ones in decline? In my experience, the best cities are those that harness the ideas and energy of their young people. They exude vibrancy in their street life, boast strong design elements, and focus on enhancing residents' quality of life. The perspective on if this is achieved more publicly or privately often comes second, but does have economic implications - important for adaptability in the “victim of own success” phase of life.
It's important to remember, however, that a perspective is just that - a viewpoint. Not all cities operate under the same parameters. Some are metropolises, others consist of many municipalities, and the level of private involvement varies greatly across the world. While it's crucial not to be shackled by history, it's equally important to appreciate that every model is a perspective on what might work. For every model we adopt, there's a thriving city somewhere that functions relatively effectively in a different way.
I think this is important as we move towards coalition governments, urgently explore new infrastructure delivery and financing models, focus on integration of technology into our services and adapting to climate change - we must be evangelists for the future outcomes we want, more than for structure to deliver it.
But of all the truths I am reminded of during my travels, the most potent is that there is indeed no place like home. Each return to my own city instills in me a newfound appreciation and confidence that this is where I belong. It's heart-wrenching to witness the meticulous design care and use of quality materials in the upgrading of low-income areas elsewhere, juxtaposed with communities in my city desperately seeking donations for mere cans of paint.
Despite its glaring issues, this flawed place is still home. Every trip strengthens my hope that one day we will rise to the challenge and build a better home. The cities I visit may offer lessons, but it is at home where these lessons must be put to use.
—
Through work, studies and personal travel I’ve had the privilege of visiting over 40 cities. I hope you enjoyed pictures of a religious site in Delhi, a public library in Seattle, autonomous transport in AlUla (more of a town than a city) and rainbows from rooftops in São Paulo - a little reminder of our common world.