SHAPINGCITIESLondon School of Economics and Alfred Herrhausen Gesellschaft

IN AN URBAN AGE

INTRODUCTION

THEMES

Editors’ Acknowledgments Ricky Burdett and Philipp Rode 7Foreword Anna Herrhausen 8Dynamics of the Urban Age Ricky Burdett, Philipp Rode and Megan Groth 10Urban Pragmatics Joan Clos 25

Being Interlocal Suketu Mehta 78Congestion, Contagion, Crime Edward Glaeser 86Agency of Informality David Satterthwaite 94Rural Urbanization Joshua Bolchover and John Lin 102Problem of Ethics and Architecture Jo Noero 112Interior City Suzanne Hall 120Rupture, Accretion and Repair Richard Sennett 128

Who Owns the City? Saskia Sassen 148Placemaking in Dissonant Times Edgar Pieterse 156New Localism Bruce Katz and Jeremy Nowak 164The City: Private or Public? Gerald Frug 172Taxing Power Tony Travers 179Tensions of Governance Michael McQuarrie, Nuno Ferreira da Cruz and Philipp Rode 187Underpowered Cities Tim Moonen, Emily Moir and Greg Clark 195 Speed of Change Deyan Sudjic 214Ephemeral Urbanism Rahul Mehrotra and Felipe Vera 222Planning and its Discontents Jose Castillo 230Of Systems and Purposes Adam Greenfield 238Digital Destinations Carlo Ratti and Daniele Belleri 245On Hold AbdouMaliq Simone 251

UNCERTAINTY

EMERGENCE

POWER

CONSTRAINTS

INTERVENTION

Comparing Urban Age Cities 404Urban Footprint 406Infrastructure of Mobility 408How People Move 410Demographic Patterns 412Urban Workforce 414Urban Morphology 416Social Inequalities 418Where People Live 420Linking Dwelling and Working 422Who Governs? 424

CITIES TODAY

INDEX

NotesCreditsContributorsIndexUrban Age Team

426431435439442

36384042444650

CITY CHANGES 1990-2015

Where Cities Are GrowingIntensifying Economic PowerPatterns of EnergyImproving CommunicationsTurning on the LightsDensityUrban Expansion

Locking-in Cities Nicholas Stern and Dimitri Zenghelis 270Observations and Actions Philipp Rode 278The Weight of Cities Maarten Hajer and Mark Swilling 286The Role of the State Susan Parnell 294China’s Spatial Revolution Mee Kam Ng 302Confronting Inequality Eduarda La Rocque and Petras Shelton-Zumpano 308Can Cities be Healthy? Billie Giles-Corti, Hannah Badland and Sarah Foster 316

The Value of What’s Not Built Alejandro Aravena 336Urban Commons Jean-Louis Missika and Marion Waller 343Rebuild by Design Henk Ovink 351Steering Urban India Jagan Shah 361What Makes a Great City Great? Janette Sadik-Khan 369Taming the Automated Vehicle Anthony Townsend 375Understanding the Grand Projet Kees Christiaanse, Anna Gasco and Naomi Hanakata 383Flexible Urbanisms Ricky Burdett 391

Built FormMobilityEnvironmentEconomyQuality Of LifeSocial EquityAge Profiles

52545658606264

POWER

6

NEW URBAN TYPOLOGIESHong Kong Cities globally are faced with choices about how to design their physical environments to accommodate often competing needs. In terms of land-use control and accessibility, Hong Kong’s residents experience the trade-offs of living at extreme high-density in one of the world’s most efficient cities.

8

THE LIMITS OF CONTEXTAlemão, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilA city’s trajectory is defined by its constraints. Perched on the steep hillsides of Rio de Janeiro, the Complexo do Alemão favela was retrofitted with a cable car to improve access and pacify the neighbourhood. With libraries and police stations located at each of the cable-car stations, the system’s success was short-lived; it closed shortly after the Rio Olympics in 2016, just five years its inauguration.

10

With the conclusion of Habitat III, there is now a multinational consensus recognizing the importance of cities in meeting the many challenges that will confront twenty-first-century society. Poverty must be grappled with, but it must done by using sustainable energy. Infrastructure must be (re)built, replaced and transformed, but it shouldn’t conflict with the aspirations of urban residents. People have a right to affordable housing and clean water, but it is unclear where the resources for providing these are to come from.

Nonetheless, the New Urban Agenda adopted at the Habitat III conference does demonstrate a profound awareness that cities are being transformed in their demographics, their economies, their politics and their institutions. Such radical transformations are inherently uncertain, which presents the opportunity for fundamentally re-imagining what the city is, making both utopian and dystopian outcomes potentially more realizable. The key question is: who gets to decide which of these outcomes will be realized?

In order to answer this question it is necessary to understand how cities are governed, and it is this understanding that we hoped to achieve with the New Urban Governance programme. The first phase of this LSE Cities research and engagement initiative, which ran from mid-2014 to December 2016, was supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation to examine multiple aspects of municipal planning, management and governance. A key objective for this initiative was to experiment with methodologies that could generate new empirical insights. Using a survey of urban managers from 127 cities from all continents and 53 countries; a series of topical seminars with leading thinkers on key governance issues in London, Berlin, New York and Madrid; and a deep-dive investigation of the governance of transport in New York and London, we came away with an awareness of contemporary urban governance that points to several insights and conclusions.

First, and most important, our existing social scientific theories of urban governance are inadequate to the challenges of the moment. Social scientists have been preoccupied with questions of who governs cities, the best principles of urban management and the dynamics of urban growth (notably, not urban decline). But while these questions remain important, and while the insights they have developed continue to be relevant, theoretical research approaches are not well adapted, by themselves, to tackle the core questions about governance today. Devolving powers and strengthening local governments are regarded as necessary conditions for

TENSIONS OF GOVERNANCE Michael McQuarrie, Nuno Ferreira da Cruz and Philipp Rode

HUDSON YARDS, NEW YORK CITY, UNITED STATESThe future of major tracts of urban land, such as New York’s former railway yards, is often the outcome of complex and context-dependent tensions between different levels of government, quasi-public agencies, financial institutions, corporations and community groups.

12

Cities in the United States can no longer be categorized in terms of the distinctions between the state and society, the government and the market, the public and the private. The second term in these dichotomies has increasingly invaded the sphere of the first. By this I am not referring to the practice of contracting out city government services or selling city property to the private sector (important as that phenomenon is). I am referring instead to an increasing privatization of city governments themselves. This privatization has taken many forms – conceptual, structural and financial – and, as a result, it has become harder and harder to articulate what we mean when we use the word ‘public’ to describe city governments. This essay will describe this transformative process in the United States by focusing on the provision of city services and, then, will attempt to reinvigorate what a public conception of city services is and should be.

Private CityMany people consider the principal function of city government to be the provision of services such as education, sanitation, police, fire, infrastructure, parks and the maintenance of safety standards for buildings and restaurants. These services are traditionally paid for by taxes – mostly by property taxes but, in some cities, by sales or income taxes as well. (In the United States, state governments usually allocate state tax revenue to provide additional support for some of these services.) The basic conception underlying this scheme is that everyone contributes, through taxes, to support these important ingredients of city life, which, in turn, are available to everyone free of charge. It doesn’t matter whether one has kids in school, uses the park or has ever called the police or the fire department. Everyone pays, and everyone is benefited by living in a city with an educated population, good infrastructure and safe streets. As we shall see, this description presents what I will call a public conception of city services.

This public conception has a rival. It begins by imagining individuals choosing a city to live in by selecting the one that provides the services they want at the lowest cost in taxes.1 This ‘best bang for the buck’ idea pictures city residents as consumers who treat city services the same way they treat goods in the marketplace. In a market society, people only pay for goods and services that they use, and they seek to pay the lowest possible price for whatever they buy. The key to this conception is its envisioning of taxes as a price that individuals pay for city services. Once that idea is

THE CITY: PRIVATE OR PUBLIC?Gerald Frug

Cities are the public’s agencies for creating

and recreating publics.

Karachi

Chennai

Delhi

Kolkata

DhakaRiyadh

Sana’aKhartoum

Addis Ababa

Mogadishu

Nairobi

BangkokHo Chi Minh City

Manila

Hong Kong

Guangzhou

Singapore

Kuala Lumpur

Jakarta

Sydney

Ouagadougou

AbujaLagos

Abidjan

Kinshasa

Luanda

Lusaka

Dar es Salaam

Bengaluru

MumbaiHyderabad Yangon

TehranBaghdad

Istanbul

Cairo ChongqingShanghai

Beijing Seoul Tokyo

UlaanbaatarKiev

MoscowBerlinLondonParis

Madrid

Marrakesh

Casablanca

Dakar

Antananarivo

Johannesburg

Los AngelesDallas-Fort Worth

Houston

Mexico City

Miami

Atlanta

New YorkToronto

Chicago

Bogotá

Manaus Fortaleza

Lima

SantiagoBuenos Aires

São Paulo

Rio de Janeiro

Perth

Kuwait City

Cape Town

Caracas

Seattle

Vancouver

14

IMPROVING COMMUNICATIONSIncreased dependence on information tech-nology and global connectivity is graphically represented by an exponential rise in the number of submarine cables laid in recent decades, linking coastal cities across oceans and continents to each other and the rest of the world.

Submarine cables added up to 2015

Submarine Cables 1990

16

SHANGHAI 1990 SHANGHAI 2015Metropolitan Area Population Change 1990–2015: 143%

DENSITYIn the quarter of a century between 1990 and 2015 unprecedented population growth and urbanization was recorded worldwide, with the greatest speed and intensity concentrated in Asian mega cities like Shanghai. Rapid economic development and urban migration have driven China’s centrally orchestrated plan to transform the traditional urban fabric of its biggest city with tightly spaced, high-rise towers. This has resulted in a dramatic increase in density both in the urban core and on the periphery, and a fourfold increase in the living space per person. Sub-Saharan Arican cities like Kampala are also beginning to grow at rapid rates. Here, the population has tripled and density has doubled over the last 25 years,

Peak Density: 77,726 pp/km2

Admin. Area Density: 4,215 pp/km2

Peak Density: 33,518 pp/km2

Admin. Area Density: 1,786 pp/km2

High Density

Low Density

High Density

Low Density

Outside Administrative Area

Within Administrative Area

2015

1990

much of it in low-rise and overcrowded informal settlements, yet the overall levels of density remain low compared to many Asian cities. In the same period, declining birth rates and out-migration have affected a number of European cities. Berlin’s low fertility and growth rate has resulted in little change, with a slight increase in density, but the city has intentionally restricted urban sprawl; the majority of its development occuring in a compact built-up area. In the United States, recent shifts in planning policy have seen an increase in the development of Los Angeles’ central districts, but low density, car-fuelled sprawl still defines the urban character of the wider metropolitan area.

98 EMERGENCE

From Lagos to Los Angeles, the enemies of urbanization stress the downsides of density, including traffic congestion, air pollution and even contagious disease. They have a point. Without proper management, density can diminish quality of life. Yet, the right response to urban ills is not to artificially restrict the growth of cities. The right response is to fight for improvements in the quality of urban government. For when density is managed well, cities can be places of remarkable pleasure and productivity. An effective city government, like that of Stockholm, should be able to make virtually any density level comfortable and safe.

Cities are the absence of physical space between human beings. That closeness enables the flow of goods and ideas, and the use of shared urban joys, including museums, parks and restaurants. Proximity can also reduce the carbon emissions associated with long car drives and large suburban homes.

But just as urban proximity makes it easier to share a laugh or an insight, it also makes it easier to share a virus. Density enables harmful involuntary transactions, like robberies, just as it enables benign voluntary transactions, like going to the opera. The downsides of density can readily spiral out of control unless they are controlled by effective local government. In this essay, I focus on the congestion, contagion and crime: the three Cs of big city management.

Many of the wealthy cities of the West dealt with these natural by-products of urban crowding so long ago that they may have forgotten how difficult it was to make Paris or New York liveable. In the nineteenth century, cities were still often killing fields. Only massive investments in infrastructure and incentives turned London from a place of early death to a city of long life. Even as recently as 1992, murder continued to haunt New York. Yet today that city is remarkably safe. That change didn’t happen easily.

The lessons of the wealthy world’s past are particularly important today, because our age has seen the emergence of vast mega cities in countries that are both poor and often poorly governed. These emergent mega cities face the same demons that come with density, but they do so with very limited resources. The scope of the challenge generates a temptation to just give up on urbanization, but there is little future in rural poverty. Cities can provide a pathway out of poverty into prosperity, and they are the best hope for political improvements as well. Improving the quality of life in developing world cities brings the hope that those cities can enrich their countries and also bring more freedom and political accountability. The quest for better cities in

CONGESTION,CONTAGION, CRIME Edward L. Glaeser

GUANGZHOU, CHINADuis eget sapien ac purus efficitur lacinia vel sit amet turpis. Ut iaculis laoreet lectus a accumsan. Sed facilisis mi et nisi tincidunt mollis. Integer nisl nisi. Ut iaculis laoreet lectus a accumsan. Sed facilisis mi et nisi tincidunt mollis. Integer nisl nisi.

92 EMERGENCE

SOCIAL EFFECTS OFAGGLOMERATIONHong KongThe compactness and demand on Hong Kong’s built form is reflected in the reduced size of living spaces, which shapes the quality of life of its residents. Ut iaculis laoreet lectus a accumsan. Sed facilisis mi et nisi tincidunt mollis. Integer nisl nisi. Ut iaculis laoreet lectus a accumsan. Sed facilisis mi et nisi tincidunt mollis. Integer nisl nisi.

352 INTERVENTION

ADDRESSING THE NEED FOR HOUSINGAddis Ababa, EthiopiaBuilding ‘ghost cities’ outside of Addis to address the housing shortage. Duis eget sapien ac purus efficitur lacinia vel sit amet turpis. Ut iaculis laoreet lectus a accumsan. Sed facilisis mi et nisi tincidunt mollis. Integer nisl nisi.

288 CONSTRAINTS

SPACE FOR LIVINGHong KongIn high density living environments, contradictions emerge between compact living close to urban amenities and having enough space for health and wellbeing. Good urban policy is necessary to make all of this possible.

160 POWER

Most buildings in a city tend to be privately owned. It has been so in modern times in most, though not all, countries. It continues to be so today, but with a difference: the sharp rise in corporate buying of properties in most major cities of the world after the 2008 crisis, with many of those buildings underused and functioning mostly as a storage space for capital. That stands in sharp contrast with another accelerating trend in these same cities: the escalating price of modest housing, which is now also excluding more and more of the middle classes. This has become a major issue in these cities due to a variety of reasons, notably the threat it poses to the working and middle classes and their ability to buy property and the urban impacts brought on by the proliferation of mega projects where before there were once streets, little parks and public offices that served resident’s needs.

I want to argue that these trends suggest that, at the current scale of acquisitions, we are actually seeing a systemic transformation in the pattern of land ownership and the spatial distribution of people (e.g., less mixity, more segregation of the rich, and so on). This could alter the historic meaning of the city. Such a transformation has deep and significant implications for equity, democracy and rights.1 One issue, pertinent to this essay, is that there can be no full equality in a setting as complex and diverse as a city. Many of the beautiful texts on morality and justice cannot be implemented in a city. The question becomes: at what point does the sharp rise in inequality become unacceptable? One of the issues with the current wave of acquisitions and developments, and their inevitable expulsions of modest working and middle classes, is how they trespass on acceptable levels of inequality as seen by the larger population of a city. This level may vary enormously across cities. Thus my concern here is not with some romantic notion of equality for all. It is with the challenge of understanding when that inequality becomes unacceptable to many and destructive of the complex system of differences that is a city.

What Makes Today’s Corporate Buying of Urban Properties so Problematic for a City?It is easy to explain the post-2008 acquisitions surge as more of the same. After all, the late 1980s saw rapid growth in national and foreign buying of office buildings and hotels, especially in New York and London, including a large share of buildings in the City of London.2 Financial firms from countries as diverse as Japan and the Netherlands found that a strong foothold in London’s financial centre facilitated

WHO OWNS THE CITY? Saskia Sassen

of the world’s population

of the world’s GDP

of property acquisitions

10% 30% 76%

100 cities account for:

64 DATA

NAIROBI

Just as cities developed at different speeds and in various shapes and sizes between 1990 and 2015, the age profile of urban dwellers was equally dynamic. This was the result of a number of factors, including access to health services, nutrition, education and economic opportunity, exposure to risk, as well as gender equity bias. Generally, fertility rates have dropped in cities and are lower than for rural populations. Retirement ages have increased to compensate for people living longer, though there are significant differences in the age structures in cities around the world. In Tokyo, average life expectancy has increased beyond 80 years, amongst the highest in the world, with both urban and rural areas in Japan experiencing a ‘super-aging’ society. Such a change in demographic puts a strain on public services as healthcare costs increase and fewer working age adults contribute to the economy. Comparatively, London’s age profile has remained largely unchanged over the 25-year period, with a younger population than Tokyo, which has seen a decline in those under 30. While Mumbai has experienced an increase in life expectancy and declining fertility rates compared to the rest of India, it remains a young city with limited access to healthcare, high levels of poverty and poor environmental quality. In line with other African cities, more than 50 per cent of Nairobi’s population is under the age of 25, indicating a high number of dependents to working age adults. Life expectancy dropped for both men and women over the period, but so too did the unemployment rate, and the number of children per family decreased from more than six to less than four.

LONDON

POPULATION STRUCTURE

MUMBAI

TOKYORETIREMENT AGE(average)

UNEMPLOYMENT(per cent of working age population)

LIFE EXPECTANCY

FERTILITY(average number of children per family)

2020

20

2020

200

0

0

0%

%

%

%

80+

70–79

60–69

50–59

40–49

30–39

20–29

10–19

0–9

80+

70–79

60–69

50–59

40–49

30–39

20–29

10–19

0–9

80+

70–79

60–69

50–59

40–49

30–39

20–29

10–19

0–9

80+

70–79

60–69

50–59

40–49

30–39

20–29

10–19

0–9

Female

FemaleFemale

Female Male

MaleMale

Male

AGE PROFILES

UK

London

London

Mumbai

Nairobi

Tokyo

London

Mumbai

Nairobi

Tokyo

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

London

Mumbai

Nairobi

Tokyo

0

0

0

0%

5

50

6

60

60

9%

7

70

8

80

80 100

12% 15%

1

10

3

30

2

20

20

3%

4

40

40

6%

1990 19902015 2015

India

Mumbai

Kenya

Nairobi

Japan

Tokyo

20 2010 10

10 10

10 10

10 10

230 UNCERTAINTY

EMERGENT TECHNOLOGIESXiamen, Fujian Province, ChinaDuis eget sapien ac purus efficitur lacinia vel sit amet turpis. Ut iaculis laoreet lectus a accumsan. Sed facilisis mi et nisi tincidunt mollis. Integer nisl nisi. Ut iaculis laoreet lectus a accumsan. Sed facilisis mi et nisi tincidunt mollis. Integer nisl nisi.

Higher Education (% of population with University Degree or higher)

Contribution of metro region to country GDP (%)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Foreign Born Population (percent of popualtion)

Tokyo

London

New York

Rio de Janeiro

Tokyo

London

New York

Rio de Janeiro

58 DATA

ECONOMIC OUTPUT(GDP per capita, USD$)

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

1990 20021998 20141994 20102006

$40,000

$20,000

$10,000

$0

$50,000

$30,000

NEW YORK

LONDON

RIO DE JANEIRO

TOKYO

Cities are the driving force of economic growth – generating more than 70 per cent of the world’s GDP – but their performance within a national context varies in relation to regional location and their position in the global development cycle. In the 25-year period since 1990, New York City and London have competed as economic powerhouses, with New York’s GDP increasing 26 per cent faster than the entire country between 1993 and 2010 and London’s increasing 27 per cent faster than the rest of the United Kingdom. Specialization in financial, insurance and technology services has contributed to London’s economic growth, while in both cities a greater dependence on the service sector has attracted significant increases (now close to 40 per cent) in the number of foreign-born residents over the period. In Tokyo, a highly developed and market-oriented economy is showing a modest increase in foreign migration, reflecting a response to the threats of Japan’s shrinking population. Tokyo, London and New York all punch above their weight in terms of their contribution to the national economy, while Rio de Janeiro’s GDP contribution to Brazil’s economy has declined since 1990, outpaced by country’s largest city of São Paulo. Globalization has nevertheless contributed to the development of new economic activities in Rio, especially within the service, transport and communication technology sectors. All four cities have seen improvements in higher educations levels, with London soaring to over 50 per cent between 1990 and 2015.

ECONOMY

ECONOMIC POWER (metropolitan GDP as per cent of national)

0% 20% 25%10% 15%5% 30% 35%

FOREIGN-BORN RESIDENTS(per cent of total population)

0% 10% 20% 40%

Trade & Transport

Financial & Business Services

Other Services

Primary & Utilities

Manufacturing & Industry

Construction

1990

2014

1996

2013

1990

2014

1991

2014

HIGHER EDUCATION(per cent of total population)

WORKFORCE COMPOSITION(per cent of jobs by sector)

Tokyo

London

New York

Rio de Janeiro

0% 20% 60%40%

19902015

London

New York

Tokyo

Rio de Janeiro

1%1%

1%

1% 1%

1%8%

4%

31%

22%

35%18%

7%

22%

5%

47%

4%5%

33%

23%

35%

12%5%

23%

47%

12%

30%

12%

29%

37%

15%

6%

10%

10%

28%

22%

2% 5%

7% 5%

20%

31%

35%24%

31%

38%

SHAPING CITIES IN AN URBAN AGELondon School of Economics and Alfred Herrhausen Gesellschaft

By 2050, around three quarters of the world’s population will live in cities, and this ongoing shift in how we live poses fundamental challenges to human life across the globe. Based on the Urban Age project, a series of conferences held by the London School of Economics and Political Science and Deutsche Bank’s Alfred Herrhausen Gesellschaft, Shaping Cities in an Urban Age is a close look at the issues that affect cities, and thus people around the world, in the twenty-first century. This companion to Phaidon’s The Endless City and Living in the Endless City contains the very best writing from the mayors, architects, urban planners, professors and policy makers who participated in these influential conferences. Unlike its predecessors, which focused their analysis on specific cities around the world, Shaping Cities is organised into five themes drawn from the heart of the project’s research: Emergence, Power, Uncertainty, Constraints and Intervention. Together, these themes will aim to explain – and visually show – how good architecture and urban planning are fundamental to securing the future of our cities. Authoritatively edited by Ricky Burdett and Philipp Rode, illustrated with stunning photography and full of up-to-date data, this unique volume will give the reader access to a wealth of ideas and information about the difficulties and the opportunities of living in the urban age.

Binding: HardbackFormat: 245 x 210 mm (9 5/8 x 8 1/4 inches)Extent: 448 pagesNumber of images: c. 275ISBN: 978 0 7148 7728 0

Phaidon Press LimitedRegent’s WharfAll Saints StreetLondon N1 9PA

Phaidon Press Inc. 65 Bleecker Street, 8th FLNew York, NY 10012

© 2018 Phaidon Press Limited

phaidon.com

Editors: Ricky Burdett is professor of Urban Studies at the London School of Economics (LSE), and director of LSE Cities and the Urban Age project. He is a member of the Mayor of London’s Cultural Leadership Board, was chief adviser on Architecture and Urbanism for the London 2012 Olympics, and architectural adviser to the Mayor of London from 2001 to 2006. Burdett was director of the International Architecture Exhibition at the Venice Biennale in 2006. With Deyan Sudjic he is co-editor of The Endless City (2007) and Living in the Endless City (2011), the two preceding volumes to Shaping Cities in an Urban Age, all published by Phaidon. Philipp Rode is executive director of LSE Cities and associate professorial research fellow at the London School of Economics, where he also runs the Urban Age project with Ricky Burdett. As researcher and consultant he has been directing interdisciplinary projects comprising urban governance, transport, city planning and urban design since 2003. The focus of his current work is on the institutional capacities of cities, and has included co-leading the Habitat III Policy Unit on ‘Urban Governance, Capacity and Institutional Development’. He is author of Governing Compact Cities: How to Connect Planning, Design and Transport (2018).

LSE Cities, London School of Economics LSE Cities is an international centre at the London School of Economics that carries out research, conferences, graduate and executive education, and outreach activities in London and abroad. Its mission is to study how people and cities interact in a rapidly urbanizing world, focusing on how the physical form and design of cities impacts on society, culture and the environment.

Urban Age The Urban Age project is an international investigation of the spatial and social dynamics of cities, jointly organized by the London School of Economics and the Alfred Herrhausen Gesellschaft. Its activities centre on an annual conference, research initiative and publication. Since 2005, conferences have been held at the Venice Biennale of Architecture, and in Delhi, Rio de Janeiro, London, Hong Kong, Chicago, Istanbul, São Paulo, Mumbai, Berlin, Johannesburg, Mexico City, Shanghai and New York.

Alfred Herrhausen GesellschaftThe Alfred Herrhausen Gesellschaft (AHG) promotes a free and open society and its cohesion, founded on democracy, the social market economy and sustainability. The work of AHG is based on the values of Alfred Herrhausen: those of freedom and responsibility, of competition and compassion. Herrhausen thought and acted with the aim of crossing and overcoming boundaries. In his memory, through selected events, publications and other media, AHG creates platforms for discussion in order to enrich relevant discourses and defines project-specific goals that deliver visible results.