Last time I contrasted two approaches to “designing” the human-nature relationship that are, essentially, diametrically opposed. The first is concentrating and/or contracting development into dense urban centers surrounded by nature—Roderick Fraser Nash’s “island civilization” model that I’d brought up earlier, and also embodied to some degree in the New Urbanism movement originating in the 1980’s. The second is dispersing development to create a relatively undifferentiated mix of urban and natural such that both terms essentially lose their meaning—the Landscape Urbanism movement from a decade later—supposedly a more honest representation of contemporary human-nature relationships that in theory inspires us to address environmental issues in a more productive way. I explained why Landscape Urbanism goes too far, but I’ve also talked about why the first approach is also too extreme, or at least an over-simplification—it pushes the natural environment too far beyond our daily experience. For the rest of this “Urban Wilds” series I’ll go into a few ways that the “island civilization” model could be tweaked or enhanced to bring nature (including urban wilds) into cities while maintaining the distinct identities of both.
The approach I’ll describe in this post is the ecocity vision, developed by artist, writer and theorist Richard Register. The concept has some commonalities with New Urbanism, namely a focus on urban density and walkability, but it also has a number of distinguishing features. One is a focus on “organism-like” complexity and three-dimensionality in urban structure. Obviously a dense, compact city relies on a strong vertical element, but the ecocity goes a step further in its focus on multi-level connectivity through tunnels and elevated walkways. For example a sea of skyscrapers may be the ultimate in vertical design but, as Richard puts it, it’s essentially a two-dimensional city turned on its edge—in a social wellness sense not necessarily an improvement on typical suburban sprawl (we know the fate of many inner-city developments modeled on Le Corbusier’s “towers in a park” concept).
Another feature, particularly relevant to the topic at hand, is the vision’s holistic emphasis on planetary health, giving cities and nature equal and shared value. Unlike Nash’s “island civilization” it obviously thinks of cities as more than a necessary evil or an afterthought, and unlike New Urbanism it treats the natural environment as more than a background or blank slate. This attention to the natural world takes two general forms. First, the environment beyond the city is incorporated into the urban experience though an emphasis on opening and framing views—views that exist in the first place because ecocities (and ecotowns and ecovillages) are sited and shaped in order to preserve and enhance them. And second, natural elements are more literally drawn into the city in the form of day-lit streams, ecological corridors, topographical features, or other spaces that could fit into my “urban wilds” category, plus on a more granular level as plantings of various kinds. Note that “drawing nature into the city” isn’t the same thing as “drawing the city out into nature.” Spatially these two moves may grade into each other, but while “drawing nature in” makes the urban edge a bit softer or more jagged, “drawing the city out” obliterates it (as with the Landscape Urbanism model). The ecocity model is one way to soften the “separate” in “separate but equal” just enough to maintain distinct, mutually beneficial urban and natural identities while avoiding the dangers of pitting one against the other.
I should add that Richard is a friend and collaborator of mine. I mentioned some time ago a project that he and I were working on together—an Evolution and Ecocities conference in the Galápagos Islands focusing on the interrelationships between biological and cultural evolution and ecocity design (particularly in terms of the “organism analogy” I mentioned earlier) in the archipelago and worldwide. The event didn’t end up materializing due to lack of funding, but hopefully the idea will be revisited in some form at some point in the near future. As Richard would emphasize, giving traction to these ideas is no small feat, but it’s becoming more and more critical every day for the future of the planet. (And for the Galápagos in particular, the pressures of development have become a much more serious issue for the Islands than most people realize.) He recently finished a book, The Gálapagos Islands: Evolution’s Lessons for Cities of the Future, covering many of the ideas that were going to be featured in the conference.
Richard is the founder of the International Ecocity Conference series, now having hosted a dozen summits around the world, as well as Berkeley-based Ecocity Builders and a new organization Ecocity World. He has written and illustrated 9 books and given talks in over 30 countries. If you’d like to learn more about the Galápagos project, the ecocity concept or Richard himself, please check out www.ecocityworld.org.
Darren