Share this story
Filed under
Each month in our Open Voices blog we share insight from leaders and ideas advancing what it means to have sacred, open green spaces in our cities. This week we share emerging ideas from Kathleen Wolf, PhD on the changing shape and culture of nature in the city.
Dr. Kathleen Wolf serves as a research advisor for the National Open Spaces Sacred Places Award Initiative. Wolf is a Research Social Scientist with the College of the Environment, University of Washington. She is also a primary collaborator in the Green Cities Research Alliance, sponsored by the USDA Forest Service. Her body of work, including a comprehensive review of nature and health response literature, can be accessed at naturewithin.info . We present here an edited section of Wolf's recent presentation given to the TKF Foundation.
Evolution of Cities: Human Habitat in the City From Sanitary to Sustainable to Sacred Cities
INSERT EVOLUTION OF CITIES VENN DIAGRAM
"We all live in the Sanitary City. (In early stages of a city) people quickly moved into settlements and it was a mess, frankly. Now we have developed best practice infrastructure systems that are really efficient. We now understood the source of disease and how to prevent that. The sanitary city is very efficient at the supply and removal of ecosystem services. Water comes in, water goes out. Materials come in, waste goes out. Power supply (is supported), and now more recently digital infrastructure...As part of that (sanitary city design) natural systems were disconnected and that was very intentional. Natural systems were not seen as part of all this.
Instead of those open, very ad hoc, organic ways of dealing with needs of cities we now have more sophisticated and advance infrastructure. Underground, we have intersections of all this grey infrastructure: the pipes, the drains, and the concrete. All at great cost to our cities but for very good purposes, essential purposes.
INSERT BALTIMORE MUSEUM IMAGE
Even in that age of the industrial city and lots of concern about sanitation and hygiene, there were some instances such as in Central Park where people were starting to think about the positive benefit of green. The necessity of having access to parks. Olmsted was very articulate about ‘Why this park’ and, consequently about all the parks he and his colleagues designed across the country; why they are important. He did address air quality, he did address water quality, but he talked at great length about community benefit and the benefit to individuals. Respite from their compact, dense living situations and the type of work they were doing. His ideas were a lot of the precursors to what we talk about today that are wrapped with data. But he intuitively knew about many of these things.
The Sustainable City includes elements of ecological function, green infrastructure, and revealed processes.
I believe that now we/cities (even more so in western Europe, Australia, not all of the U.S.) are moving to this in an intentional way. I live in a band of cities that are privy to this. From Vancouver, B.C. (that is pursuing status as the most sustainable city in the world) to Seattle, Portland, on into Northern California maybe, even into San Francisco. All very aware and incorporating sustainable city policies very actively. What does this mean? It is recognition of the importance of ecological function. What (do) I mean by function? We are not literally pulling in pristine natural systems into the city. But, recognizing those ecological functions (the water cycle, air, carbon cycle, pollinators, food production, productivity), understanding those fundamentals, and how they can be introduced into the city (whether through engineered systems or patch landscapes). One way to label this is ‘green infrastructure’; plant materials. The process of how things work is revealed to people. They begin to understand the consequence of how they use materials. What happens to the water when it comes to the home and goes down the drain? (This system) makes better use of all these materials.
INSERT TANNER SPRINGS PARK IMAGE
One way that we understand how the sustainable city functions is tree canopy. We look at an aggregated view of the city not tree-by-tree but (by) looking across an entire region. The Forest Service has prepared a tool called i-Tree and it’s a set of modules; analytic modules. By using aerial photographs or a technology called LIDAR (or satellite imagery) one interprets the makeup of the tree canopy. (Tree canopy is) the extent or how much of the city is covered. From that, the modules generate functions: air quality, energy savings, stormwater management. I am lobbying for i-Tree health. These tools, once the canopy data is collected, tells us the functions. Functions are determined by the model and the model also generates some monetary values. Communities in the industrialized world have found these to be useful. So, economic value can be brought to a local decision maker, a council member, (or) an urban planner and say, 'Trees are nice, right? We all understand that, but they generate these functions and benefits and they have economic value.' Once you have all these things you understand what the forest is, what its function are, what its value is if managed well. Then one can put together a management plan. And that is the progression that often takes 5 years for communities. They do an i-Tree, they figure out functions and values, and then their community is mobilized to develop a management plan.
Engineers have accomplished amazing things with the sanitary city. Some of them are more reluctant to give up on that era. Some are all in to the sustainable city phase. An example is a huge stormwater management project here in Seattle. A huge pipe ran through the length of a (residential and retail) site and a decision was made to daylight it. This stormwater management facility, one function (is that it) slows water before it gets to the pipes and secondly provides more space for infiltration into the ground and allows emittance into the atmosphere.
There is definite opportunity to convince urban planners and designers that Open Spaces Sacred Places (OSSPs) can be tucked in to these stormwater sites, particularly the larger ones. I have kept an eye out as I’ve traveled the country for examples of these sites with small areas of respite (within those). Tanner Springs is one example in the Pearl district of Portland, Oregon. It serves a wide watershed area. These sorts of water retentions tend to be large holes with fencing around them. But people, who are recognizing these as potential resources for the community (places of respite) are being a little more creative. They have done some really nice things with access. People can get right down here into the water. People can cross the parcel to the other side.
Tucked around Tanner Park, there are these places with a few benches, a child’s play lot, looks out into the water, scruffy but natural grass, opportunities for environmental education. I noticed these two women who were reading the educational interpretive board. Then they bent down and looked into to the water. ‘What is in the water there?’ They read a little bit and they wanted to see first hand.
Working with officials in cities (has led me to see that) everyone is so cash strapped. People will only get into the idea of an OSSP if it can get funded. If we can introduce this idea of OSSPs as an add-on to those spaces that are getting traction either because of regulatory policy (or) established needs in cities (we may be successful).
The Sacred City is much more formative. I am still trying to figure out how to frame it. It is not really a part of these urban natural resource discussions and planning. I am trying out this idea. It (civic sacred) includes reflection, mindfulness, contemplation, and spirituality. It includes ‘small s’ sacred. Maybe there are faith or denominational associations, I am not talking about it in that way. With that, I am talking more and more about gratitude. Now that we understand, particularly with the sustainable city movement, how much nature does for us, people are starting to see where their food comes from. People are starting to see the power of solar energy. (People have began to see) the value of water in some cities in drought or short on drinking water. We introduce this idea of gratitude and stewardship. The Cornell and NYC group have done work on stewardship and resilience as a consequence of that.
INSERT KATHY IN TREE IMAGE
With urban forestry groups, I talk about encounters with sacred in our everyday lives. Many people think about these kinds of things but they think about them in bold landscapes or national parks, seashores or the mountains. But, these opportunities are available to us, can be, can be constructed maybe, in an everyday way.
Here is a culmination of this idea. A little over two years ago I did a presentation in Portland, Oregon with an urban forestry group. These two rather handsome young men said, 'Hey we have this group called Ascending the Giants.' It’s a non-profit group that does recreational tree climbs. They line up scientists to assist the guests that go up the trees. They had an ornithologist who backed out on them and they said 'Hey we have never had a social scientist do this. Do you want to do this?' They set up climbing rigging and I went up with 45 people (such as) executive directors and leaders of National Audubon. They had a national meeting in Portland and this is one of their field trip options. So over 3 days I went up with 45 people, 180 feet. Talk about a sacred experience for me as well as the many guests that went up and down with me! It was an astounding experience. The base of the tree, solid. You think of this as this incredibly sturdy thing. Then you get up to the mid part of the canopy where the tree is growing and spreading, much different character. Then at the very top this tree is moving like a sapling in the wind. The people’s intensity of experience with that tree for many seemed to be a sacred encounter.
I continue to wrap different ideas about what a sacred city is. Nature in the city, whatever its size. People’s encounters and experiences: contemplation, restoration, stress reduction and mindfulness. As many sense, there is a sentiment that life is out of balance. We are too busy and do not have time to think through what is important. There is a constant busyness and attempted multi-tasking. Studies in cognitive psychology suggest we don’t do very well when we multitask. I try to bring people to see how nature in the city is important for mindfulness.
I did my graduate work with Rachel and Stephen Kaplan. Their foundational idea of Attention Restoration Theory is that in our busy lives we have to concentrate and focus and pay attention to so many things that our ability to concentrate is fatigued. They have found that certain nature settings are helpful in restoring that attention capacity. What seems to be important in the elements of nature is ‘soft fascination’. I am watching Marc Berman’s work very closely because what he is doing is wrapping details, or the technical aspects, around what is soft fascination. Is it contrast, is it line, is it pattern within? That is what he is helping us understand. What is it in design that promotes or brings soft fascination in a setting?
There are studies that show that mindfulness and meditation does indeed improve various aspects of life and our health1. Those are reduced negative emotion, improved vitality and coping, reduced medical symptoms and sensory pain. Davidson et al did a study where employees had meditation training over 8 weeks. There was reduced stress response, an increase in positive affect, and more antibodies after influenza vaccine (better immune function)2.
In that the Sanitary City is about hygiene for health, and the Sustainable City is about socio-ecological systems, the Civic Sacred City is about engagement and experience with the natural world. In practice, this means we as a city commit and support healthy trees and nature in our environment. "
--
