The city, this great charmer. Its tumultuous growth, which began in the 19th century, continues according to an accelerating principle that shows no signs of reversing itself. Increasingly global, epicentre of a multiplicity of services and branched out into a combination of physical and digital infrastructures, it makes its management a complex challenge, impossible to govern through a simplified control room.

By navigating this web of interconnections, some architectural theorists believe that rethinking urban space according to conceptual metaphors inspired by laws and assumptions of a scientific nature may prove to be an effective key to optimising its resilience. It is from this vision that biourbanism came to be, an urban planning model that equates the city with a living organism, endowed, like any organic biological structure, with a non-linear functioning system.

According to biourbanism, the city would in fact be an 'anthroma', an ecological system redesigned by man through his multiple and layered interventions throughout history. Mending the distance between nature and the built environment, improving the flow of the integration and systemic management of all elements, would achieve better urban quality and psychological well-being for those who inhabit and use the city.

Equally many theoretical layers help to define the conceptual application of biourbanism. Some, such as biophilic design and bioarchitecture, have a more specifically design-related reference, and refer in particular to the theory of fractals and the need to identify and pursue specific geometric and formal models, peculiar to the organic world and often also deeply set in vernacular architecture, in order to harmonise the integration between the built environment and nature. Others, more distinctly meta-planning, look to statistical mechanics, thermodynamics, evolutionary biology, biopolitics and epigenetics as areas from which to optimise the planning of the connections and flows that regulate the use of exchanges and services in the urban fabric.

The objective of this sartorial action of stitching up, as Christopher Alexander, an Austrian-born American architect and theorist who is among the references of the biourbanism movement, has called it, could be shrewdly summed up in the formula ‘building beyond time’, so as to imbue buildings with an imperishable quality and a more adaptable and effective governance.

“The emergence of biourbanism as a discipline is the result of unexpected connections,” says Antonio Caperna, president of the International Society of Biourbanism, a non-profit scientific network that promotes ideas and research on biourbanism worldwide. “Christopher Alexander's ideas, generally boycotted by the academy, have been the starting point for a number of architects, physicists, philosophers, biostatisticians, psychologists and ecologists who have looked at architecture and urbanism through the lens of complexity science and neuroscience. Together, we came up with a manifesto outlining a new epistemological and paradigm approach to architecture based on the life sciences, deep ecology and the processes of morphogenesis.” The manifesto, from 2011, emphasises the kind of scientific contribution that biourbanism can make to the broader discipline of architecture, including a strengthening of the interconnection between cultural and physical factors within the urban environment and the reorganisation of the city following the progressive abandonment of fossil fuels.

A topical perspective of studies on biourbanism thus becomes one that focuses on the adaptability of urban space to climate change. Australian biourbanist and architect Adrian McGregor explains this in his book Biourbanism, published in 2022 by Biourbanism Publishing. Cities emit approximately 75% of man-made greenhouse gas emissions. Solving the equation of the sustainability of our consumption can therefore only come through the decarbonisation of urban environments, which must be enabled to become more efficient and sustainable.

In this context, McGregor's endeavour is to systematise the levels that make up the life and anthropic structure of the city-environment. When balanced, its ten principles of living, landscape, water, food, citizens, economy, energy, infrastructure, mobility, technology and waste, effectively govern the well-being of a city. Optimal urban resilience is achieved when one of these ten systems is not negatively impacted by another and when the interrelationships of these systems are managed in a targeted and mutually beneficial manner.

One of his most recent projects, the one for Sydney's ‘Mega Park’, aims to be a very large-scale park for the Australian megalopolis. The ambitious proposal envisages the creation of a new 1,000-kilometre ring of open space within which the more than 50 existing parks and waterways would converge and be brought together under the aegis of a single body. With its 1.5 million hectares of green space located in the bay of the same name, the park would not only be the largest urban park ever created, but also a true green lung for the city, capable of mitigating emissions as well as counteracting heat waves and the growth of sprawl. This effort is in line with the Australian government's commitment, which since COP 26 has formalised its commitment to oppose forest area limitation in the country.

As defined by the World Bank, social inclusion means improving the terms on which individuals and groups take part in society. People are frequently unable to participate in political, economic, and social life to the full extent. This exclusion can be very costly, both at the individual and national levels. The barriers are usually rooted in poorly designed legal systems, labour markets, health systems, as well as discriminatory attitudes or perceptions.

All these elements have figured prominently on both social and political agendas. Nevertheless, one factor that has not been given enough attention, i.e. transport and mobility, has gained its momentum now. Transport-related social exclusion is widely discussed on all levels, from municipal councils to international forums. 

A revealing insight

International Transport Forum (ITF), the only global body to cover all transport modes, puts inclusivity high on its agenda. Transport ministers from around the world met on 18-20 May in Leipzig, Germany, for the Annual Summit. Its theme – "Transport for Inclusive Societies". The Moroccan Presidency prioritized various aspects of the theme of inclusion: from connectivity for rural communities to the digital divide, from workforce diversity in the transport sector to inclusive planning and design.

The first meeting held as an in-person event since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic was the occasion to promote the transition toward more accessible mobility for all. As emphasized by the Moroccan representative Larbi Fahim, Head of the Road Works Department: “Inclusion is a key element of sustainable societies, capacity to fully participate in the life of a community”.

The Young Researcher of the Year Award, granted annually by the ITF, went to a PhD Researcher at the Delft University of Technology Malvika Dixit. Her study on the effects of public transport design on equity was a perfect illustration of Mrs Fahim’s words. Dixit pulled from a database of smart card data covering all journeys made on the public transport network and combined with the neighborhood-level income data. It turned out that residents from the lower-density peripheral areas suffer from more circuitous routes, which usually results in higher fares. The research demonstrated a fundamental link between income and circuity: public transport users in Amsterdam’s predominantly higher-income areas have more direct routes, which translated into shorter distances and, therefore, lower fares. 

The combined effect aggravated the income disparity between the lower- and higher-income areas. As a result, it contributed to creating inequality within an already divided society.

What to do? An influential guideline for inclusive mobility

The World Economic Forum (WEF) joined forces with the Boston Consulting Group and the University of St Gallen, Switzerland, and in December 2021 published a White Paper on the ways that mobility shapes inclusion and sustainable growth in global cities.

Three different cities that represent the most common urban archetypes were closer looked at – polycentric Berlin, car-centric Chicago and the high-density megacity of Beijing. All three were struggling with soft spots, including traffic congestions and isolated underserved neighborhoods. Based on the examples of those metropolitan areas, the researchers came up with five imperatives that decision-makers must consider while creating more socially inclusive mobility.

First, improving inclusivity should be a top priority in urban transportation planning and design. If mobility is to be truly inclusive, the systems need to be adapted for people with disabilities and persons from low socioeconomic backgrounds.

Second, both demand and supply have to be taken into account by transportation managers. As authorities of Chicago found out, a simple increase in the frequency of late-night trains and additional transit lines does not necessarily lead to an increase in ridership. It must be combined with a real understanding of demand and the preferences of the users.

Third, more innovative and multimodal mobility systems that escape a binary logic with cars on one side and mass transportation on the other, need to be developed. Recent mobility innovations, such as on-demand shuttles, micro-mobility offerings (e.g. bikes, scooters) and car-sharing apps start playing a noticeable role in the city’s “mobility puzzle”.

Second to last, ensuring community engagement in the process of decision-making. All studies show that the mobility infrastructure is better designed when local communities are involved. Last but not least, collecting data and running mobility pilots is the only guarantee of successful scale-up. The pilot programmes ensure an in-depth analysis of a chosen solution and help to identify possible barriers that may occur.

Inclusive mobility means equal society

As WEF’s White Paper points out, the majority of transport systems look and function the way they did in the 1950s, when they served radically different societies. It is only now that the decision-makers begin to grasp the fundamental role of transport in providing jobs, access to quality education and healthcare, and, in consequence, leading to socio-economic growth and more equal societies. Mobility is not just about getting from point A to point B. It is the way to move people to a higher place on the social ladder. Therefore, the development of the right approach to equitable urban transport will take more and more place on the agenda of policymakers in the coming decades.