An indigenous nation just built a better city than California Forever
We should build more cities. But they should benefit residents, not just developers.
This is part of “Let Cities Build Utopia,” an 11-part series on the future of cities. Collect the complete series as a print pamphlet, digital pamphlet, or audiobook. 👇🏻
As I’ve established in this series so far, Hong Kong, Shenzhen, and Prospera aren’t the only case studies we should look to in pursuit of the “city of the future.” We should also look to Eigg, Bournville, Letchworth, Vienna, and Singapore.
All of these cities are autonomous, with the power to raise and keep their own revenue, but the former uses that autonomy for the benefit of investors and national governments, while the latter use that autonomy for the benefit of residents.
If we want to create the city of the future then, the ideal city needs:
Real fiscal power (they can raise/keep revenue).
AND
The benefits of that fiscal power should flow back to residents.
Some cities in the world have 1, like Chinese SARs and SEZs, and they have been studied far and wide as examples of city building. But a few have both 1 and 2, and they haven’t been studied enough.
Thankfully, we have modern case studies there too.
Hong Kong isn’t the world’s only special autonomous region. The SAR structure has also been used for public benefit by the Basque Region of Spain, Greenland and the Faroe Islands in Denmark, and potentially Bhutan’s new Gelephu Mindfulness City. And California Forever isn’t the only investor-built town, an indigenous tribe in Canada as well as the State of Utah are already building much better ones.
