The Myanmar Times, November 10, 2014
In Yangon, the root of our urban problems lies in a lack of physical and ethical distinctions in people’s minds between public space and private space. As the city develops, the consequences of the shortfall of public knowledge on this subject will increasingly be brought to the fore.
Yangon is a city shaped on the private scale. The basic element of the city is the optimizing individual and his or her immediate private space. As the urban population continues to rise, a typical “optimizing” person, who is by definition opportunistic, wants as much space as they can acquire. Domestic lives manifest themselves beyond the boundaries of private space, and the occupation of public space for private use has become the norm.
But when the spatial needs of one individual are juxtaposed with those of many others, the city becomes a congested ground of constant spatial contestations. Consider a typical downtown urban block as a microcosm of Yangon: Most streets contain multiple programs of commerce and living, and people’s acts in areas like these create complex, unthought-of implications for all.
Physical acts
Spitting and littering in public space are very common. For example, in urban blocks, residents use what should be public space behind their properties as if it were private. Residents from upper floors typically throw trash down into the alleys, treating it as their own open-air trash bin. This not only makes these areas unusable for other purposes, but attracts stray dogs and pests, who live off the abundance of sustenance in the alley. It’s not uncommon to hear the screams of stray dogs which have been hit on the head by falling trash bags. And spitting is a similar act to littering: Waste is expelled – but straight into everyone else’s shared environment.
Ethical beliefs
Sometimes altruism has unintended consequences. Many religions encourage kindness to animals, and for Buddhists the desire to provide and donate encourages the feeding of pigeons and stray dogs. But the resulting overpopulation of stray dogs and the noise pollution also impacts the quality of urban life.
While animals are cared for, buildings generally are not. To say there is a correlation between belief systems and the shape of a city may be debatable, but it is true to say that residents often accept things as they are, without striving to change them. That also extends to the urban environment. People take care of their own sections of a building’s façade only occasionally, so the result looks like a patchwork. Only recently have we seen a surge of interest in the look of the skyline, mostly through the commercials of new developments. Maintaining buildings and urban spaces is a Western concept, and Yangon is a city made with a provisional outlook.
Without attention, nature thrives in Yangon’s urban environment – but not in a way we might enjoy. A city left alone to natural growth over time becomes a complex ecosystem. Nature loves overlooked spaces and thrives in them. Mosses and large plants prosper behind the building blocks; so do varieties of ants, other insects and rats.
Economic pressures
Traditional ways of doing business are perpetuated by grueling economic conditions, but not always to the benefit of the urban environment. Mobile street hawkers are familiar sights in the city. Whether the noisiness and traffic they cause is beneficial or not makes for a spirited debated between those who appreciate street food and those who want to pass a quiet time. They are, however, examples of a significant problem in Yangon: Ownership of the streets is ambiguous.
Driven by lack of private space, some people take permanent proprietorship of part of the street by growing plants, using space for commerce or putting other private possessions there. In downtown blocks with dense activities, human activities fill every available corner. Parking is reduced, leading to clogged streets and constant traffic jams. Private lives spill out into the public environment and make things slower, noisier and more crowded for everyone.
A matter of philosophy
In ancient Greece, some philosophers went to one extreme, defining public space as a place where individuals should not draw attention to themselves, intentionally or otherwise. (To give a radical example, conjoined twins appearing in an ancient Athenian marketplace would have been considered offensive to the public, despite the fact that being born conjoined is a natural happening, not a social statement.)
Others, such as the Cynics, favored the opposite view. They considered public space to be a place where people could do anything they prefer, without needing to consider – or be considered by – others.
Residents seem to lean toward the latter view. But philosophers like Raymond Geuss (born 1946) would say Cynics are people who detach themselves from politics. The essence of politics is mutual dependence. In a city like Yangon, where some people litter on the streets, people must not be feeling they will have to suffer inconveniences from the polluted streets that result from their actions, or they would not do so.
If we do not unravel urban issues related to and caused by people’s behaviors, the city will become increasingly difficult to manage in the years ahead. Just as animals decline when forests cannot sustain them, so too do humans wither when our environment fails to support us. But the city by itself does not degenerate. It does so when individuals do not do what is right and is of most benefit to all.
It is essential that we ask ethical questions about what it means to live with others. This, as much as better buildings or traffic flows, is what could create a better city and a friendlier urban environment.
