New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Are Modern Cities for People or Cars?

The cities of the future might be greener, cleaner and more vibrant if people are put before automobiles. David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The stink of exhaust, the mind-numbing tedium of traffic, parking lots blighting central city real estate. The urban sins of the automobile are numerous indeed. 

As more people move to cities and gain the economic wherewithal to purchase an automobile, will we be increasingly dependent on cars for our transportation and status symbols?

A new thought experiment on display at the Center for Architecture in New York City offers an alternative vision for the cities of 2030. By that time, more than 60 percent of humanity—five billion people—may live in cities.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The architects recommend careful use of express bus rapid transit—the cheapest public transportation option—and increased capacity for bicyclists and pedestrians. That may help alleviate problems like highways blocking access to waterfront in cityscapes from Ahmedabad to Rio de Janeiro.

For example, in China simply expanding the city of Guangzhou's bus rapid transit system, which already carries 800,000 passengers a day, could help re-create what used to be a vibrant shopping district before an elevated highway shrouded it in gloom.

Some form of the automobile will likely be around in 2030, but that doesn't mean we have to build our cities for its comfort instead of ours.

—David Biello

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe