NetZeroCities

The concept of the 15-minute city is one of the most prominent attempts to avoid or shorten trips in people's everyday lives. This can be achieved if essential services (e.g. shops, pharmacies, schools, work places, hospitals, leisure destinations etc.) are physically close to people's residential bases. The 15-minute city concept is thus tightly linked to spatial planning strategies and places strong emphasis on neighbourhood-based planning.

The 15-minute city can be a major contribution to carbon reduction strategies because fewer and/or shorter trips obviously mean fewer emissions but also because shorter trips are easier to cover on bike or by foot. A 15-minute city is also beneficial in terms of convenience, accessibility, safety and public health. Shorter trips also improve social equity because people who do not want to or are not able to own and/or drive a car can still reach their destinations.

Although related spatial planning ideas have been around for centuries, the "15-minute city" idea as a slogan has gained enormous prominence within the last few years. This is due to a large extent to the official endorsement and practical pursuit of the 15-minute city concept in Paris. It also resonates with the growing awareness that technical fixes alone (e.g. electromobility) will not be enough to achieve climate neutrality.

Within the widely established A-S-I pyramid, the 15-minute city concept falls firmly within the first, most effective and most important category to "A"void unnecessary trips; but it also contributes to a "S"hift from private motorized vehicles to more sustainable modes of transport (public transport, cycling and walking). It does not - and deliberately so - contribute to the attempt to "I"mprove mobility through technical fixes (e.g. alternative propulsion, smart traffic management etc.) and thus to "Improvements" to reduce the harmful effects of private motorized mobility.

Generally speaking:

The full grasp of factors that can foster the move towards a 15-minute city requires a corresponding understanding of related barriers in the sense that the absence of the latter can be interpreted as a conducive factors. It is therefore recommended to also read the section about obstacles.

Political:

Helpful – if not a precondition – for the 15 minute city idea to flourish is a critical attitude towards „technical fixes“, that is, the assumption that technological advances can solve all transport-related problems. This goes hand in hand with a realisation that transport-induced challenges are much more than exhaust-point emissions of carbon.

Economic:

A courageous implementation of the 15-minute city concept will require some infrastructural adjustments to facilitate safe and convenient trips, primarily by walking or cycling, within the 15-minute perimeter of people’s homes. This comes at a cost. However, these costs (investment and long-term maintenance) are far lower than investments in conventional road infrastructures.

Social:

A 15-minute city or neighbourhood is far more conducive to serendipitous social interactions and is therefore likely to be particularly welcome in areas with an existing high appreciation for friendly social encounters. This is by no means a precondition though, but can be a beneficial result of spatial and infrastructural features, which make it easy and likely to interact with other people.

Technical:

Implementing the 15-minute city concept is not dependent on special sophisticated technology. It can be fostered though through digitally assisted tools like MaaS applications, car- and bike-sharing platforms, ISA (intelligent speed assistance), various approaches to enforce certain regulations (e.g. UVAR, urban vehicle access regulations) etc.

Legal:

Most elements of a 15-minute city make it easy, safe and convenient to meet people’s daily needs on foot, by bicycle or by public transport. To steepen the relative advantage of these modes of transport vis-á-vis the privately-owned car it can be beneficial to reduce the attractiveness of the latter through various car-discouraging measures. Some of them are dependent on (national) legal settings, such as camera-based techniques to enforce access regulations.

Political:

Underlying the 15-minute city concept is a quite comprehensive understanding of challenges as a complex conglomerate of issues around spatial planning, transportation, urban design, politics etc. It can therefore be challenging to promote and pursue this approach if the political discourse tends to focus narrowly on the expectation that isolated "fixes" can solve complex problems. Similarly, political fragmentation can be a stumbling block when cities are composed of multiple political jurisdictions, each with its own set of priorities and interests. This can make it difficult to coordinate efforts to create a 15-minute city across the entire urban area. Also, a lack of political will and ambition can hinder the path towards a 15-minute city because it requires significant investment of time and resources, as well as a willingness to challenge the status quo of urban planning.

Economic:

Budget constraints can be an obstacle on the way to a 15-minute city because it requires significant investments in infrastructure, public transportation and public spaces. This can be difficult in times of economic austerity. Also, resistance from developers can be problematic because they not always embrace the idea to prioritise walkability and accessibility over other factors like maximizing profit or accommodating car traffic. Very importantly, the benefits of a 15-minute city are unlikely to manifest immediately in monetary terms. They tend to show in the longer-term through the retention of jobs, stabilisation of decentral economic activities, avoidance of expenditures etc. Conventional cost-benefit analyses can therefore be problematic.

Social:

Social obstacles on the way towards the 15-minute city can emerge, at least initially, if people feel insecure about the impacts of the planned changes on their daily lives and routines. Also, retailers might be concerned that they might lose parts of their customer base if their stores cannot be accessed by private car any longer. In some cases, even conspiracy theories developed around the 15-minute city concept as an alleged way of the government to corral people into their neighbourhood and to control their every move in the sense of pervasive surveillance.

Technical:

The 15-minute city concept does not rely on specific critical technical or technological components. However, the 15-minute city only works if – by definition – services and amenities are safely and conveniently accessible within short distances. This can be seen as a technical challenge because it requires creating new public spaces like parks and plazas, as well as investing in public facilities such as libraries, hospitals, community centres and schools. Furthermore, the 15-minute city rests on the availability of transportation infrastructure that supports walking, biking, and public transit. This requires rethinking the way streets, sidewalks and the public realm in general are designed. Thirdly: In order to design effective 15-minute cities, planners and policymakers need access to accurate and up-to-date data on population demographics, land use patterns, transportation patterns and other factors. This requires large amounts of data and their analysis, which in turn necessitates funding, competences and new partnerships between government agencies, private companies and citizens.

Legal:

Some spatial planning and zoning ordinances at the local and regional level are ill-compatible with the 15-minute concept if they stipulate a strict separation of spatial uses like retail areas, recreational destinations, residential quarters etc. Also, minimum parking requirements are a form of legal obstacle as are historic preservation rules if they prevent multifunctional uses of buildings. In some cases, the right to appeal can be challenging if it is used by NIMBY groups to prevent (infra-)structural changes in their neighbourhood.

Measuring the success of a 15-minute city can be challenging, as it involves a wide range of factors, including social, economic, environmental, and health outcomes. Here are some possible success indicators:

Walkability:

One important measure of success for a 15-minute city is the degree to which it is walkable. This can be measured using a variety of parameters, such as the length of pedestrian-friendly streets, the availability of sidewalks and crosswalks, and the overall safety of walking and biking in the area.

Accessibility:

Another key measure of success for a 15-minute city is the degree to which residents have access to essential goods and services within a short distance of their homes. This could be measured by looking at the number and variety of businesses and services in the area, as well as the affordability and accessibility of public transportation.

Social equity:

The success of a 15-minute city could also be measured in terms of social equity, such as whether the benefits of the initiative are shared equitably across different socioeconomic groups. This could be measured by looking at factors such as income levels, race and ethnicity and access to affordable housing and transportation.

Environmental sustainability:

Another important measure of success for a 15-minute city is its impact on the environment. This could be measured using a variety of indicators, such as the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutant emissions, the amount of green space and public parks in the area and the degree to which the area is designed to be energy-efficient and sustainable.

Economic vitality:

Finally, the success of a 15-minute city could be measured in terms of its impact on the local economy. This could be measured by looking at factors such as job retention and creation, business development and the overall vibrancy of the local economy.

It is advisable to develop indicators that are easy to understand and easy to communicate. An example of such a directly graspable indicator would be: “The percentage of parents who let their nine-year-old child go to primary school without supervision.”

Explore

Comments ()

Authors

Tags

Tags Climate Transition Map

Log out

Explore

Comments ()

Authors

Tags

Tags Climate Transition Map