Is this article a joke? Shanghai is the opposite of a well-planned city that evolved in a positive direction.
> Shanghai has provided one of the world’s largest and most rapidly growing urban populations with a quality of life and a breadth of infrastructure unmatched by any other megalopolis. It has done so in less than three decades.
Quality of life is absolutely awful in Shanghai, where is the blue sky? where is the clean air? Traffic jams happen all the time.
And apart from the subway system that is indeed extensive, having lived in Shanghai in 2003 and then having come back in 2009, I would argue that Shanghai was a much better place back then in term of quality of life. Less pollution, less cars, more bicycles, more of those lane houses that encouraged a stronger sense of community between residents. It was a lovely city back then.
Of course, with money, things have improved, but I'd argue that Shanghai would have been better off with much better planned development. As it is, I don't think random thoughtless urban development would have created anything much worse than what it is now.
I guess everything should be put in a context and evaluated relatively. How does it compare with other cities quadrupled in 2 or 3 decades? Yes blue sky, yes bycicle, yes sense of community. Those are available for tiny towns elsewhere in comparison. But how does Shanghai's planning work comparing to New Dheli? Mexico city? Other mega-cities?
Well having also lived in Tokyo which is a city that quadrupled in 2 to 3 decades, at least one city managed to retain all of those characteristics. Seoul also worked out rather well.
> Quality of life is absolutely awful in Shanghai, where is the blue sky? where is the clean air? Traffic jams happen all the time
Two of the three points that you've mentioned are in regards to air pollution, as of recently China is actively working on reducing air pollution with definitive timelines [0]. As a side note, during the high growth era of the US (and presumably other currently developed countries), US cities had significantly higher air pollution than what is observed today [1].
Obviously the argument to be made here is not that Shanghai checks off all boxes for a "perfect" city today, but that it is as the author of the article suggests as the capital of the "future", primarily due to the continued high growth at the rate mentioned in the article.
> Shanghai has provided one of the world’s largest and most rapidly growing urban populations with a quality of life and a breadth of infrastructure unmatched by any other megalopolis. It has done so in less than three decades.
Quality of life is absolutely awful in Shanghai, where is the blue sky? where is the clean air? Traffic jams happen all the time.
And apart from the subway system that is indeed extensive, having lived in Shanghai in 2003 and then having come back in 2009, I would argue that Shanghai was a much better place back then in term of quality of life. Less pollution, less cars, more bicycles, more of those lane houses that encouraged a stronger sense of community between residents. It was a lovely city back then.
Of course, with money, things have improved, but I'd argue that Shanghai would have been better off with much better planned development. As it is, I don't think random thoughtless urban development would have created anything much worse than what it is now.