‘New wonders for the world.’ The vague promise emblazoned on the top of the NEOM website is not elaborated upon in the equally nebulous subheading: ‘A revolution in civilization.’ It is not clear from this promotional material what NEOM, a high tech, ‘smart city’ region being built in Saudi Arabia, will ultimately look like.
The sleek design of the website for The Line (NEOM’s main city) says more than the website itself; the Saudi Prince’s project constitutes a very expensive attempt at soft power, allowing the Crown Prince to appear progressive and benevolent, both to his citizens and abroad. Even the name, a portmanteau of neo (the Greek word for ‘new’) and mustaqbal (the Arabic word for ‘future’), suggests something fresh, exciting, and innovative—a transparent display of the regime’s motivations.
This is ideal for a country trying to outgrow its reputation as defenders of conservative social ideals. The endeavours of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to liberalise Saudi Arabia include lifting the ban on women driving, as well as his ‘revolutionary’ Vision 2030. But MBS, as he is often known, has matched these reforms with a human rights crackdown which includes the arrest and torture of several women’s rights activists.
NEOM, too, is consistent in its inconsistencies; an initiative to offer the kingdom positive exposure and present a softer image has come with multiple PR pitfalls. An example of these publicity crises is when, in 2020, the Huwaitat tribe took to social media to draw attention to their forced eviction by Saudi security forces in order to make space for the project.
Adjacent to The Line is The Oxagon, an industrial floating city. As most Middle Eastern nations contain swathes of sparsely-occupied land, this initiative leaves people wondering why Saudi Arabia is constructing an artificial island vulnerable to rising sea levels. Elements of NEOM thus invoke common critiques of a bloated administration, rife with bureaucratic inefficiency.
On a hypothetical level, these projects are an urban planner’s dream: what if you had the space and funding to design the perfect city? Most cities across the globe originated as towns which grew, haphazardly, without sufficient planning. They expanded according to the needs of the time, facilitated by the technology that progressively emerged. This organic development has given rise to a slew of inconveniences, such as poor public transport systems and counterintuitive infrastructure which was built into, rather than in conjunction with, the city.
Lack of foresight has thus resulted in high levels of traffic in overpopulated areas, where the pollution is palpable. In a large metropolis like Cairo, taking the metro can often take as long as walking. The same problem presents itself in neighbourhoods outside central Chicago or Philadelphia. When you venture outside the city centre, public transport becomes sparse, or entirely nonexistent, requiring people to resort to driving instead. In 2017, transportation produced 29% of the United States’ total emissions of carbon dioxide equivalent.
The unique political geography of Middle Eastern countries provides an ideal backdrop for these new cities. Before the region discovered oil in the 20th century, nomadic structures prevailed. As government coffers suddenly filled with oil wealth, cities could—and had to—grow. Many of the cities being built from scratch promise transport-oriented development, meaning they are being built for pedestrians, cyclists, or public transport use. The Line would have no streets for cars to get stuck in traffic.
It is difficult to convert existing cities to such models. In Oxford, and other similar cities in the United Kingdom, residents of smaller cities can spend years getting around exclusively on foot, but only if they live in the centre—something which can be prohibitively expensive. Further from the centre, the distances between your house, your child’s school, and the local Tesco supermarket grow. In a a larger, urban centres like Cairo or Delhi, where there is a notable absence of traffic lights in the midst of the congestion, to even consider straddling a bike is to invite death. These aspects of cities are harder to change after so long, but new cities are theoretically clean slates, wherein all these problems can be preempted.
However, despite the ambitions of city designers, a perfect city still eludes us, as developments touted as a refuge from the chaos and constant din of a megacity come with a hefty price tag. New Cairo, a satellite city intended to alleviate congestion in central Cairo, currently houses a much wealthier and smaller population. Among its inhabitants are those which can afford to remove themselves from a city characterised by incessant honking sounds and near-misses with cars. Stamford, Connecticut similarly acts as a satellite city for New York. In 2013, their local newspaper boasted of having the ‘highest concentration of super-rich in [the] US,’ which is reflected in the local cost of living this year being 37% higher than the national average. Many of these developments are funded through off-plan sales (purchases made in advance of or during construction), a financial decision which is unthinkable for most in countries with high wealth disparities.
This example of urban flight raises another critical question: is it only the affluent who can afford to be environmentally friendly? Past recycling, people are increasingly being encouraged to buy new electric vehicles, purchase solar panels for their houses, or shop for more expensive, ethically-produced groceries. In 2018, the Gilet Jeunes movement in France protested against poorer populations being ignored in attempts to save the environment, as the Macron administration levied an eco-tax which disproportionately hurt rural communities.
As Margaret Atwood’s poem, The City Planner, foreshadows in ‘the smell of spilled oil,’ some of these cities are not funded exclusively through advance sales or external investment, but rather by wealth derived from oil or mass industrial production. This undermines governments’ claims of these cities being panaceas to the climate change threat. NEOM aims to revolutionise food by developing programmes to achieve self-sustainablility in the desert in anticipation of regular future water shortages. Yet, a recent increase in oil production by the Saudi’s might exacerbate the very problem they are trying to solve.
However, these technological developments can prove invaluable for the increasing number of cities expecting to experience severe water shortages or extreme heat, as seen in the dwindling green spaces of London this past summer. These cities could also address a different problem; the housing crises affecting renters vying for space in Toronto, Amsterdam, or Hong Kong, by building habitable centres designed for large populations to live in comfort.
NEOM is not the only new development boasting “harmony” with the environment. Malaysia’s plans for the wittily-named ‘BiodiverCity,’ as part of Panang2030, include ‘urban lilypads’ in which ‘people and nature can coexist.’ Mexico’s less cleverly termed Smart Forest City and India’s Amaravati are also geared towards sustainability and creating or embracing green spaces. These cities still have a long way to go, and the environment steadily deteriorates each year, but these futuristic hubs are promising signs of shifting attitudes by governments and major companies towards the climate, even if at times constituting examples of “greenwashing.”
These cities claim to cater to the planet as a whole, but the only people who can access these urban oases are those who can afford to reside there. It matters little to the rest of the world if a country constructs an eco-haven, unless it is matched by environmental commitments by governments in all areas, even those which might not warrant a glossy website consisting mainly of taglines to match. Otherwise, a handful of people will have the privilege of living in green cities, maintaining some semblance of normalcy, while others are trapped in a global ecosystem that has gone entirely, and irreparably, off-balance.