People Centred Cities: The Case Against Cars

By Isabel Davies - https://doughnuteconomics.org/members/27973

In 2003, Saturn released a TV commercial for their new car model, the ION, in which they stated:

 

“When we design our cars, we don’t see sheet metal. We see the people who may one day drive them.” 

Whether or not they intended to, the makers of the commercial highlighted the inefficient use of space that cars tend to occupy in cities. Commuters are seen moving through the city in an orderly fashion, going about their day in the invisible bubbles of their vehicle. Waving at neighbours from afar, stuck in queues of traffic and crucially, taking up an enormous amount of space relative to the size of each person. 

 

Which begs the question; did mass motorization really improve the quality of life for urban citizens?

 

Although large roads and motorways are common components of city design, when urban planners cater for cars over people it creates a host of problems. Not only does it exacerbate pollution in urban centres and create danger for pedestrians, it encourages urban geographical inequalities. This could be for a variety of reasons, from

• uprooting communities to make way for new road infrastructure;
• physically segregating cities both racially and economically, or 
• facilitating an increasing urban sprawl that isolates those who cannot afford to live and work centrally

As Montgomery (2013) explores in his book Happy City, this form of urban design doesn’t make us happy. Long commutes lead to isolation and a loss of community that create detrimental effects on our mental health. When designing cities for cars, planners unfortunately serve only the sheet metal and not the people who may one day live in them. 

 

Cities have, since the beginning of time, been shaped by hegemonic socio-economic ideologies. It’s no secret that our obsession with growth shapes and informs policy making at various scales and urban governance is no exception. As Fine and Saad-Filo (2017) assert "Under neoliberalism state institutions intervene upon and through markets and other institutions in specific ways that tend to extend and/or reproduce neoliberalism itself”.

 In an increasingly globalised world where cities compete for global capital and resources, growth influences urban planning as capitalist logic assumes that continuous growth determines a city’s success (Vives Miro, 2011). As Kate Raworth, founder of Doughnut Economics states – "What we need are economies that make us thrive, whether or not they grow". (Raworth, 2017). By taking a growth agnostic mindset, we view growth as an outcome rather than an indicator of success, moving away from the need to centre growth in our policy making. So, a growth agnostic urbanism means exploring other avenues besides growth to influence our urban design. 

Whilst cities today exist within vastly different contexts, many are facing problems from similar urban crises. Solutions as such may not be exactly the same, but we can learn from, and guide each other through these experiences, creating new possibilities for urban life. 

Pedestrianisation projects have emerged in major cities across the world to improve the lives of inhabitants. Moving away from cars encourages more physical activity, reduces the risks of vehicle collisions and importantly lowers the volume of air pollution. In 1974, Bogota started the weekly ‘Ciclovia’, where streets are closed to road traffic and opened to cyclists, walkers and skaters. This has since been adopted by other cities from Mexico City to LA, encouraging new possibilities for urban mobility across the globe.

  

Additionally, you can consider the sheer amount of space that could be transformed from parking lots, roads and highways, and alternative ideas for how this space can be used. A global initiative that challenges car centric cities at a multi-stakeholder level is the Park(ing) day project. Starting as a grassroots guerilla art project in San Francisco in 2005, it developed into a global movement where one day a year, citizens, artists, activists and urban designers re-imagine how parking spaces built for cars might be repurposed to serve the needs of urban inhabitants. The project encourages collaborators to be creative with the design of space by adopting principles of a circular economy, offering citizens and planners the opportunity to engage in transformative change of urban space in their own vision. 

Projects like these offer valuable insights into how urban spaces are valued and utilized, shaping policies that better address the needs of local communities. Imagining how individual parking spaces or roads accumulate within a neighbourhood’s public realm invites us to rethink their potential on a larger scale. What if networks of roads were prioritized for cyclists and pedestrians, reducing congestion and enhancing mobility around the city? If parking lots and garages were repurposed, they could transform into vibrant community spaces—featuring seating areas, gardens, playgrounds, or hubs for creativity and social interaction.

How might this look guided by the principles of Doughnut Economics? 

Cities are not just built; they are continuously shaped by the choices we make. Initiatives like Ciclovía and PARK(ing) Day show how streets can be reclaimed for people, but what if these temporary experiments laid the foundation for a more sustainable, inclusive urban future? By embedding Doughnut Economics principles into city planning, we can create spaces that not only reduce car dependency but also enhance social well-being and environmental resilience. Whether you’re a city planner, designer, activist, or simply someone who cares about your neighbourhood, you have a role to play in this transformation. Advocate for policies that prioritize pedestrians and cyclists, support projects that integrate nature into urban spaces, or help turn short-term interventions into lasting change. The future of our cities depends on bold ideas and collective action—how will you contribute?

References
Agile City., 2015. Park(ing) Day.  Accessed (2024) From  (https://agile-city.com/blog/parking-day/)

Douglas, J., 2016. Cranes over the city: the centre of leeds, 1980–2008. In Sport, leisure and culture in the postmodern city (pp. 33-62). Routledge.

Fine, B. and Saad-Filho, A., 2017. Thirteen things you need to know about neoliberalism. Critical sociology, 43(4-5), pp.685-706.

Hellen, N., 2024 Cities can't grow because of bad public transport. What's the answer ? .The Times Accessed (2024) From: (https://www.thetimes.com/uk/article/cities-bad-public-transport-answer-solution-vtf2rl3kd)

Kruse, K., 2019. What does a traffic jam in Atlanta have to do with segregation? Quite a lot. New York Times
 
Montgomery, C., 2013. Happy city: Transforming our lives through urban design. Penguin UK.

Park(ing) Day. 2024.  Accessed (2024) From: (https://www.myparkingday.org/)

Raworth, K., 2018. Doughnut economics: Seven ways to think like a 21st century economist. Chelsea Green Publishing.

Vives Miró, S., 2011. Producing a “successful city”: Neoliberal urbanism and gentrification in the tourist city—The case of Palma (Majorca). Urban studies research, 2011(1), p.989676.

Mekonnen, A,A and Ogunkumbi, G,A. (2022). Transforming Streets into Public Spaces using Menged Le Sew as a Driver: From Traditional to Sustainable Urban Planning. Journal of Public Space 7(1) 111-130. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Ciclovia-celebrating-its-40-years-December-15-2014-Bogota-Colombia-Photo-by_fig4_379840462