The State of Architecture in South Asia series welcomes Professor Adnan Morshed for its next March 27 installment on “Good Density as Urban Justice.” Prof. Morshed, Professor at the School of Architecture and Planning at the Catholic University of America and Executive Director of the Centre for Inclusive Architecture and Urbanism at BRAC University, is a practicing architect and architectural historian with an academic focus on the history and theory of modern architecture and urbanism. We spoke with Prof. Morshed in advance of his talk, which will explore urbanization in Bangladesh with a focus on population density.
Prof. Adnan Morshed
Mittal Institute: Thank you, Adnan, for speaking with us. What are the main characteristics of “good density” in the context of Bangladesh, and how does it differ from overcrowding?
Adnan Morshed: The main characteristic of Bangladeshi cities, particularly the capital city of Dhaka, is their high population density. People from rural areas have been migrating to the city for economic opportunities and better lives. This is the trend, as it was for western industrial cities in the 19th century. If you go around in Bangladeshi cities, you can’t miss seeing that there are people everywhere and a lot of them. Just to give you a bit of context, there are 129 wards (urban administrative units) in Dhaka and the densest ward has over 1,50,000 people per square km. Now compare this to 40,000 people per square km in Hong Kong’s Kowloon, considered one of the densest places on earth. Dhaka surely feels claustrophobic, and it is the result of a policy failure. The problem in Dhaka and other cities in Bangladesh is that urban policy makers, planning communities, and local governments have generally considered population density as a burden, a problem to be solved, not as an opportunity to create a new type of urban lifestyle marked by compact living, economic dynamism, low carbon footprint, and walkable neighborhoods. Thus, population density becomes an urban pathology of “overcrowding” with attendant social, economic, and mobility challenges. The Bengali word that captures the effect of overcrowding is gadagadi—a phenomenon of people living in extreme congestion without necessary urban services. “Good density” is a form of tactical urbanism to address the problem of overcrowding. In other words, good density presents a mixed-use urban lifestyle, one that ensures that people live in compact and affordable housing units with easy access to the basic services they need, such as school, healthcare, work, market, outdoor public space, and park, all within a comfortable walking distance.
“The problem in Dhaka and other cities in Bangladesh is that urban policy makers, planning communities, and local governments have generally considered population density as a burden, a problem to be solved, not as an opportunity to create a new type of urban lifestyle marked by compact living, economic dynamism, low carbon footprint, and walkable neighborhoods.”
Mittal Institute: Your talk will explore how Bangladesh, which began to experience urbanization in the late 1980s onward, experienced policy failures that neglected to understand the benefits of density. Can you share some of these key missteps in Bangladesh’s urban planning policies?
Adnan Morshed: Planning tools and paradigms traditionally used in Bangladeshi cities, as in those of the Global South, have roots in the experience of 19th-century western industrial cities. Think of London in the wake of the Industrial Revolution. Its urban population increased manifold very rapidly, creating urban slums, environmental pollution, infrastructure deficiency, abject poverty, social decay, and fertile breeding grounds for epidemics like cholera. By the end of the 19th century, 40 percent of Britain’s population lived in cities, compared to a mere four percent in Russia and seven percent in China. High population density and urban poverty became two intertwined expressions of urban growth in cities like London, Manchester, and Liverpool. How to address urban poverty became an animated political and philosophical conversation in the British parliament and social circles, one that intrigued even Hegel and Tocqueville. Mitigating the problem of the industrial city through urban planning began with a modern fear of population density, a synonym for poverty, pollution, disease, poor public health, depletion of resources, and moral deterioration. We, in Bangladesh, inherited this fear a hundred years or so later without much scrutiny. When urbanization began to accelerate in the 1980s, one of the gravest mistakes was to view density as a disease to be cured, ignoring the anthropology of inevitable population growth in the city. In Dhaka, for example, anti-density approach became entrenched through plot-based urban development, inequity in resource distribution across the city, and a false vision of gentrification as progress. Good population management was not a policy priority.
Dhaka New Market Area | By Adnan Morshed.
Mittal Institute: How can density serve as an economic driver in cities like Dhaka?
Adnan Morshed: Despite its high population density, Dhaka’s economic geography is rather unremarkable. Crowding—predominantly in poor areas—doesn’t necessarily mean automatic dynamic economic productivity. A good-density approach reduces the city’s overall carbon footprint by lowering unnecessary and time-consuming movements across the city. This means less environmental pollution, better public health, and, importantly, more time for productive endeavors. Ward-based urban development ensures that each ward has all the resources it needs for its inhabitants. This is an effective way of democratizing economic opportunities. This is how cities like Tokyo thrive economically, socially, and culturally.
Mittal Institute: Can you expand on this a little more, in terms of your corresponding density research in Tokyo and Hong Kong? What are some of the most surprising insights from your research into these cities that could also be applied to Dhaka?
Adnan Morshed: If you are in Tokyo, the first thing you are going to notice is that public transportation is everywhere and extremely popular. The public transportation system crisscrosses the city in a way that owning a car becomes unnecessary. This culture of de-valorizing car ownership serves to make dense cities like Tokyo and Hong Kong sustainable and livable. Some of Tokyo’s 23 wards, Shinjuku and Toshima for example, have a population density of over 20,000 people per square km. Despite their high population density, these wards offer a vibrant mix of housing, shopping, restaurants, business, parks, and culture. Tokyo streets and underground metros are always full of people. But it never feels claustrophobic. The possible reasons for this are planned population management, efficient mobility options, equitable distribution of amenities, and the public’s self-discipline as a philosophy of life. The key question here is what kind of adaptable and contextual urban policies and planning interventions would help institute the values of co-existing with your neighbors and co-commuters in a crowded city like Dhaka. To begin to do that, robust qualitative and quantitative research on the everyday life of the city is urgently needed.
Mittal Institute: Your talk will also link density to the concept of “urban justice.” Can you share more about this connection, and what might be some of the biggest cultural or political barriers to urban justice?
Adnan Morshed: Good density is about equitable distribution of urban resources like public transportation, healthcare, market, school, park, etc. An asymmetric distribution of these resources means that some wards and their people are neglected and deprived. There are many wards in Dhaka that don’t have a public park, an essential breathing space for the people. This is an example of urban injustice. Ironically, most lopsided urban investments occur in affluent low-density areas, perpetuating an enforced culture of economic apartheid. Not investing in footpaths is an urban injustice because 70% of daily commuters in Dhaka use them.
“Good density is about equitable distribution of urban resources like public transportation, healthcare, market, school, park, etc.”
Street in Dhaka | By Adnan Morshed.
Mittal Institute: Lastly, how might public perception about “good density” be shifted to see it as a national asset?
Adnan Morshed: There is a peculiar cultural predilection to see social mobility as being able to move to a low-density area. Low density (hence, more space per capita) is typically seen as an element of wealth and social status. If you have money, you don’t want to live in a high-density area in Dhaka. In fact, some of the densest wards in Dhaka show some of the lowest economic output. Public perception of good density will shift once the public see and experience the quality of services available within walking distance in their neighborhoods. They need to feel and be excited about the economic, sociocultural, and public-health benefits of living in compact neighborhoods. To achieve such goals, policymakers, planning and design communities, and local governments must begin to first believe in the “density dividend” themselves. In Bangladesh, a country with an extremely high population density, seeing density as a national asset is an existential necessity.
☆ The views represented herein are those of the interview subject and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Mittal Institute, its staff, or its Steering Committee.
