The „15-minute city'' is also attracting attention from urban planners. The idea is that everyone can access the main destinations of daily life (work, food, school, recreation) within his 15 minutes from his residence on foot, by bicycle or by public transport. That way, you won't need a car for many daily tasks. Most Americans don't live the 15-minute city experience. for example, The average commute to work is typically about 25 minutes each way by car. For now, we'll avoid talking about the potential benefits associated with the environment and exercise, and instead move on to the next interview. Written by Edward Glaser, McKinsey Global Institute (“What is the future of the world’s cities after the pandemic?”)”April 17, 2024). When asked about 15-minute cities, Ed says:
In fact, I get 15 minutes of city views. And I certainly applaud the idea of having land use regulations that make it easier to put housing, workplaces, cafes, and stores all in the same neighborhood. There's something great about the 15-minute city, and the vision is that there's a lot of variety in the neighborhood. that's great. It's great to be able to access so many things without driving. But the idea that we should basically see ourselves as residents of some sort of small area rather than residents of an entire metropolis is a challenge, especially in America, where we have a history of racism and income discrimination. It feels very dangerous to me.
Together with Carlo Ratti and a series of other co-authors, we put together a paper that basically looked at mobile phone mobility and the 15-minute city. And what we've found in the United States is that the more wealthy people, the elite, live within 15 minutes, the more they actually integrate with other people. So in an elite environment, that's not terrible. If you come from a poor neighborhood, if you're African American, a 15-minute urban experience is a much more segregated experience for them. So if you want an integrated city, avoid 15-minute cities. We want to embrace a vision of the city that spans the entire metropolis, rather than one focused on a small region.
I recommend this entire interview, as Glaser always makes interesting comments about the history of cities and where they are headed. Here, he shares another of his thoughts about how racial discrimination within cities differs between adults and children by income and race.
I feel that residential segregation is very important in many ways. And I think that's very important for children. Racism has a very powerful influence in explaining disparate outcomes for white and African American children. But as a recent study using cell phone data by Susan Asay, Matthew Gentzkow, and their co-authors shows, experiential segregation among adults is very different from residential segregation. there is a possibility.
In most American cities, you wake up in the morning and leave your segregated area. You go to a general company. You interact with lots of different people. So neighborhood doesn't matter. But it's important for children. Because children don't actually work for integrated companies. They attend segregated schools. They are playing on an isolated street corner. I feel it's important for me to understand this. There's a new piece with Kody Cook and Lindsay Currier that attempts to look at the mobile phone travel patterns of poor and wealthy children differently, separating them from the urban wonders they see. It records how many people live in poverty. Even wealthy cities do not experience poverty.
Of course, Glaeser's argument is not a negative or unanswered argument against the idea of the 15-minute city. But between the idea that more people could work in walkable neighborhoods around their homes and be able to take on various aspects of their daily lives, and the argument that people should really mostly stay. It may be a fine line. Rather than being widely mixed throughout the city, it is divided into its own 15-minute zones.