Understanding the spatial dynamics at work in the metropolis through the meticulous study of their infrastructures, this is the theme of “The Future of Metropolises”, by Nathalie Roseau (ed. Metis Presses, February 2022). Architect and urban planner, who began her career within the State, in the equipment management of Ile-de-France working on the regional masterplan before joining Datar, then Aéroports de Paris, has transformed , after ten years, in teaching and research. Today you are professor of urban planning at the Ecole des Ponts, researcher at the Techniques, Territories and Society laboratory, and direct the research program “Inventing Greater Paris. »
Nathalie Roseau looked to three cities to study the infrastructures inherited from large development projects that mobilize the imagination and seem to chase stories that are projected into the future: the story of the New York panoramic road, which arises from a vision that favors development of large parks that we have imagined building for the future; the opening of the Paris ring road and Roissy-Charles-de-Gaulle airport, one year later; the air infrastructure of the city-state of Hong Kong. Many specific and territorial versions that “highlight the values, desires and expectations of a society in relation to the promises of the times to come”, and which have known very different destinies.
This work on infrastructures confirms “the enormous power of structuring the metropolis, both for its intrinsic properties and for its potential for action”, but also questions the controversies that derive from it, the unthinkable of the territories, at the time of our “ecological gifts”.
Why think of the city on a large scale through the infrastructure door?
To embrace the materiality of the flows of big cities. The structures through which they unfold – lanes, docks, terminals, sidewalks – influence the city, shape it. In addition to being technical, infrastructure is social and political. It can be used daily by millions of city dwellers. It is the result of power relations with various representations and strategies at work.
It is therefore also a prism for capturing temporalities and imaginations: How does society project the future and what does it ultimately achieve on a scale that is usually counted over several decades? I consider time as the material of the project, futuristic and obsolete together, slowed down or accelerated, with an alignment of interests that allows projects to emerge or, conversely, dissonances that hinder them.
When we talk about Grand Paris, we often refer to the Grand Paris Express, as if it boiled down to this infrastructure. This shift from the city to its infrastructure is accompanied by an amnesia with respect to the foregoing. The legacy of Greater Paris, as a capital expansion project, dates back at least to the Haussmann period. The intentions of the Grand Paris Express as an urban metro network go back to the Orbital, Arc Express and then Métrophérique projects. These visions are linked to the monumental, to power, to speed, even if the project is not limited to this. They also produce cloaking effects as they play upon millions of fates. And the 5 million inhabitants of the great diffused crown?
Does Emmanuel Macron’s announcement, on November 27, of the RER project in ten metropolises bring into play the very idea of an instrument that undertakes a future?
It is the idea of the infrastructural project as a promise, the hope placed in a miraculous infrastructure. Difficult to say if this announcement is a dream come true, with an idea that comes from above and communities that have already developed their own transport systems… What to think of the concept of “network”, which varies according to urban situations? We can imagine “expressed” or more widespread speeds such as with the tram, soft mobility…
We are also witnessing a strong return of the word “planning”, previously canceled or considered negatively: in the face of climatic, environmental, social, economic emergencies, we plan for the long term. But big projects can take a hit, so you need to make your intentions explicit, not shut out interested parties. There are real challenges for public authorities to reconnect with urban society in a project whose contours remain to be defined.
You demonstrate that a change of opinion is always possible: the press speaks of the “30 kilometers of shame” at the completion of the ring road, which was already congested before it was completed…
This is the risk inherent in infrastructures that try to integrate unpredictability with a certain technological optimism by combining the present and the future, as the solutions adopted can be overtaken by future events. If on the one hand the infrastructure is very important for structuring cities, on the other hand the life of the infrastructure follows its own independent course, it responds to logics. It can disappoint, be stigmatized or rehabilitated, as essential or heritage. It can be widely used or invisible, such as the Paris Metro that blends into the image of Paris. It can arouse criticism, like the airports today, while in the 60s we used to go there on weekends as an attraction to see with the family… It’s the question of the appropriation of the infrastructure, which can take on very different faces.
Does the long duration of infrastructure also reveal the nature of the relationship between local authorities and the State? For the Grand Paris Express it is forty years of gestation and realization of the project…
The state is an essential actor that can address the stakes of scale, funding, long deadlines, arbitration. My three areas of study show that its role is to structure, with cities and regions as well as with technical operators, all entities that are real territorial powers. To this trio that balances the forces, we must add the mobilizations of those who express themselves through polemics, directing them towards the bifurcations. At a time when we are faced with climate change, energy crises and, once again, the urban question, infrastructure can rearticulate powers and responsibilities.
Governances can also reveal unforeseen aspects of the territory, such as the redefinition of what is often unjustly called the “periphery”, or the position of neighboring municipalities in large projects that may seem invisible. However, the wealth of views on Greater Paris would benefit from being put to good use. The questions also concern the future of some infrastructures, which have already been built and which we inherit. When the question of airport privatization arose, local authorities stepped forward, not wanting to leave it to the private sector. So, in addition to new major projects, what about the “already there”: what will happen to ring roads and airports if air traffic is reduced? What future can we imagine for these artifacts?
