Urban space, technology, the settlement of people, and the future. All for of these things — and their interaction — are the topic for discussion in a Metropolis forum, The Best and Worst Case Scenarios for the Future. Folks like Kurt Andersen, Andres Duany, Martha Schwartz and Morley Safer weigh in.
I am certainly not worried about the cities of the future if they are the kind that the New Urbanists are working on. The traditional city is a better platform to absorb change than any of the urban proposals of modernism. Bear in mind that Manhattan is a 19th century city, and look how resilient it is. The oldest sections of Boston, Paris, London, and Barcelona have been able to absorb all manner of technological innovation, and today they routinely out-perform all the other sectors any way you care to measure. Those modernist sections are turning to crap, of course. The modernist urban proposals have proven to be as passing as fashion, as in needy of constant bolster as any monocultureIt is so evident that modernist urbanism is undermined by nothing more exotic than the passage of time.