Planning for social distancing: How the legacy of historical epidemics shaped COVID-19's spread in Madrid

Abstract

This paper combines historical and contemporary sources to examine ‘epidemic urban planning’ from the first decades of the 20th century through to the present day. It considers how infamous early 20th-century epidemics triggered the development of several urban regulations that profoundly shaped the city’s future. To reduce the risk of contagion in bourgeois space, the city began displacing and spatially segregating the urban poor, leading to deprived neighbourhoods in the city’s suburbs. The social and urban structure of these deprived, ‘vulnerable’ neighbourhoods remains to this day. Madrid was also greatly impacted by the COVID-19 crisis, and the initial distribution of COVID geographies seemed to reflect these historical legacies. Epidemic-influenced segregation kept wealthy neighbourhoods relatively safe during the first waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, concentrating the disease in poorer areas.

Urban public health emergencies and the COVID-19 pandemic. Part 2: Infrastructures, urban governance and civil society

“…Manzano Gómez (2023) validates McFarlane’s critical perspective by suggesting that territorial disadvantage and uneven development – such as concentrated vulnerability in inner suburbs in Madrid, Spain – help explain the spatial distribution of COVID-19 consequences. Manzano Gómez’s analysis makes several novel contributions.…”

“…Secondly, it reveals the continuity and confluence between historical epidemic planning practices and present-day social distancing measures. Historical epidemic planning practices were 'largely conceived to distance populations considered prone to disease and manage the risk of contagion through segregation' (Manzano Go´mez, 2023Go´mez, : 1571 whereas present-day social distancing measures redistributed negative effects to less visible and already marginalised communities (Caduff, 2020). As Manzano Go´mez argues, these invidious inequitable effects may be less visible than the form of spatial segregations characteristic of previous pathologised spatialities, but their impacts are equally long-lasting and systematic.…”

“…Historical research demonstrates that pandemics in particular have often enabled and legitimised the emergence of new planning and governance paradigms (Manzano Go´mez, 2023;Shatkin et al, 2023). Notably, previous pandemic diseases such as cholera and the Spanish flu have had far-reaching impacts on how urban places are designed, managed and governed.…”

Changes in Urban Planning in Response to Pandemics: A Comparative Review from H1N1 to COVID-19 (2009–2022)

“…In terms of the breadth of the research field, the urban theories of "resilience", "sustainability", "smart cities", and "vulnerability" are more comprehensive in their coverage, and they have proposed solutions in aspects of environment, society, and economy in the context of the complexities of COVID-19. The application of "smart cities" in urban governance is particularly prominent [43], while "vulnerability" plays a greater role in the field of socioeconomic factors [65]. While "sustainability" and "resilience" are covered under all themes, they contribute most prominently to the theme of "post-COVID planning", showing theoretical leadership for urban planning in response to future pandemics.…”

“…Inequitable allocation of urban public space, services, and other resources was considered to be an important cause of vulnerability [40,52]. Since unreasonable spatial distribution has a long history [65], it has become a persistent problem that hinders health equity. The city of the future should be shaped by spaces that are sufficiently compact and connected while at the same time guaranteeing affordable housing and easily accessible public services, which can help to remove the socioeconomic barriers reflected in the pandemic and achieve environmental justice.…”