Pandemic, Utopia and Project. Imagined Urban Futures from the Lockdown

Hugo Mondragón López

hmondragon@uc.cl

Escuela de Arquitectura.
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

Elizabeth Wagemann

elizabeth.wagemann@mail.udp.cl

Escuela de Arquitectura.
Universidad Diego Portales, Chile

Received: September 8, 2022 | Accepted: April 10, 2023

In addition to environmental degradation, unequal distribution of wealth, socio-natural disasters, and the crisis of democracy, the COVID-19 pandemic increased the perception of urban discontent. Historically, this perception has contributed to the generation of both apocalyptic and utopian visions, which have been associated with the built space in which they occur. This article reflects on the relationship between urban discontent and urban utopia, presenting a critical examination of urban futures imagined by architecture students in two international workshops that took place in 2020, when all participants were in lockdown.

Keywords: discontent, uncertainty, hope, urban utopia, future.

---

The sense of living in a failed present has encouraged utopian thinking. The COVID-19 pandemic added to the economic, environmental, and political uncertainty that already existed. Imagining a utopia in which the ghosts that haunt us in the present have disappeared is a tactic that has long been used in an attempt to overcome a situation that is perceived as limiting.

While 20th century literature was more attracted to dystopias —pessimistic, bleak, and alienating visions of the future— modern urbanism favored utopias —visions of an ideal world and society. From Howard's Garden City (1899), Garnier's Cité Industrielle (1904), or Sant'Elia's Città Nuova (1914) to Constant Babylon-Nieuwenhuys' New Babylon (1956-1974), Friedman's Ville Spatiale (1956-1962) or Archigram's Cities (1960-1974); 20th century urban culture was prolific in imagining utopias in which the ills of industrialization were corrected.

But between May 1968 and the 1973 oil crisis, utopias became peripheral to debates about the city urban debates. At the beginning of the final decade of the 20th century, the end of the Cold War and the belief that the 'American model' had triumphed stimulated the idea that we were living in the utopia that some 19th century liberals —such as Tocqueville— had imagined. Before this ascent of the duo of capitalism and democracy some were quick to proclaim the end of history (Fukuyama 1992).

During the last decade of 20th century, utopian thinking remained on the periphery of urban debates, but a series of events increased the sense of discontent:¹ the Balkan war, the Rwandan genocide, and the fear of the "Y2K effect" were followed by the attack on the Twin Towers in 2001. At the beginning of the 21st century, capitalism and democracy were perceived to be incapable of fulfilling the emancipatory promise of modernity. Poverty and repression had eclipsed the promised abundance and freedoms.

In the 21st century, environmental conflicts have been the emissaries of the end of industrial capitalism. On the other hand, recent developments in digital technology, such as facial recognition cameras that allow authoritarian governments to permanently monitor their citizens, have brought the most sinister dystopias of the 20th century closer to reality (Žižek 2020). Algorithms are known to predict and condition political, consumer, sexual, and leisure preferences (Woolley and Howard 2019) and some argue that artificial intelligence will exclude large numbers of people from the labor market (Chase 2016), while biotechnology will develop the capacity to design superhumans (Harari 2016).

These paragraphs serve as a reminder that, before the emergence of COVID-19, a profound level of discontent and insecurity already existed, manifested in confrontations such as those involving the gilets jaunes (yellow vests) in France, the outbreak of social activism in Chile, the student protests in Hong Kong, or mass migration. The pandemic and lockdown proved to be the key that permitted utopia to regain its function: of giving hope and the possibility of imagining "good places".

With the environmental crisis and technological development came the idea that the cities of the future would have to be 'smart' to be sustainable: based on technology, networks and the integration of systems, where environmental goals are achieved thanks to data systems (Bach, Wilhelmer, and Palensky 2010). Moreover, new forms of communication have supported the idea that the future can be found in cyberspace or in the "metaverse", a hypothetical parallel world available on a digital platform launched by Meta —formerly Facebook— and which some point to as the evolution of "smart cities" (Allam et al. 2022; Bibri 2022).

Lockdown brought serious urban problems to the fore. Awareness of socio-spatial inequalities, overcrowding, a lack of services and limited access to green spaces increased, in addition to unemployment, loss of income, reduced protection and the uncertainty concerning new outbreaks or diseases (González Pérez and Piñeira Mantiñán 2020; Torres Pérez 2021; Bolea Tolón, Postigo Vidal, and López Escolano 2022; Arana Velarde, Uribe Hinostroza, and Casas Vásquez 2022; Ruvalcaba-Sánchez, Zendejas-Santín, and Gómez-Vera 2022). Alternative urban models were then posited, such as the compact city, superblocks or the fifteen minute car-free, self-sufficient city (Nieuwenhuijsen 2020; Ruvalcaba-Sánchez, Zendejas-Santín, and Gómez-Vera 2022; Moreno et al. 2021)

Faced with the urban problems revealed by the pandemic, some architecture schools have set out to imagine the future of post-pandemic cities. Based on two academic experiences, this article examines the proposals developed by students from different countries, who were asked to imagine the future of their cities during the lockdowns of 2020. The article provides an analytical presentation of the results of these exercises, seeking to identify the role that utopian thinking played in their elaborations of urban futures, and to discuss how the teams, faced with the perception of a bleak present, imagined their visions of the future.

the challenge of imagining the post-pandemic city.

This article analyses the results of two online workshops held between July and August 2020, organized by two Latin American universities and open to countries from other continents: WAUM 2020 and Non-Fictional Cities.

In the workshop "WAUM 2020. Urban artefacts: repairing the city"², six working groups were formed created, involving 91 students and twenty professors from Argentina, Chile, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States. Based on three visions —the city of delights, the distributed city, and the healthy city— the teams developed six projects that, by proposing systems, buildings, or structures functioned as "repairers", according to the hypothesis that cities are obsolete, and that the pandemic had exacerbated existing problems. The workshop "Non-Fictional Cities - Post Covid imaginary"³ was attended by students and professors from Argentina, Australia, Chile, China, Colombia, Russia, the United Kingdom and Venezuela. This article examines the proposals developed by the Chilean team in the second of these workshops, consisting of seven groups consisting of two students each, who, under the theme "Archaeology of the immediate future",⁴ presented their proposals based on their experiences with COVID-19.

In both cases, the proposals were developed collaboratively using online platforms. The form and content of the six projects of the "WAUM 2020" workshop and the seven that emerged from the Chilean "Archaeology of the Immediate Future" team were analyzed, in order to interpret participants' visions of the future. Ten cases were selected from the two workshops to examine the descriptions and analyze the proposals visually (Fig. 1). These were classified into three types of formal expression (megastructures, scaffolding or spatial systems, parasitic or mobile) and two strands of utopian thinking (progressive and regressive).

Figure 1_ Matrix for the visual analysis of proposals. Source: Elizabeth Wagemann.

First, it was clear that the formal vocabulary of the projects was not linked to information technologies (digital cities or metaverse), but to earlier references such as San't Elia, Nieuwenhuys, Friedman, Superstudio, Archigram or Archizoom. Large buildings appeared to house the programs and services, spatial systems that, by means of lightweight structures, were deployed throughout the city, while parasitic or mobile systems were installed on top of the existing infrastructure.

Second, there was a distinction between a progressive current, focused on urban infrastructure, and a regressive current, which posits a return to the past. While the projects included in the first current rely on progress, glorify technology, and use it to configure cities that are supposedly fairer and more just, the projects in the second current idealize the pre-modern past, rejecting industrialization and technology. Between these two extremes there are nuances that will be detailed in the presentations of the proposals, below.

progressive utopias

"Farm city" (Fig. 2) visualizes an organization of society into productive cells made up of groups of approximately a thousand people. There is a collective effort to produce basic products for self-consumption and a return to a barter economy is suggested. In this vision of the future, the utopia involves a return to a pre-industrial logic of production and consumption, using low environmental impact technologies to transform old office buildings —abandoned as a result of the wholesale practice of teleworking— into urban farms.

Figure 2_ Farm City. Section. Professors: Hugo Mondragón and Manola Ogalde. Students: Francisca Amenábar and Josephina Torrubiano.

"Distributed City - Service Stations" (Fig. 3) anticipates the decline of the car and uses the concept of the fifteen minute city as an opportunity to take advantage of the network of service stations. Disused gas stations appear as a homogeneously distributed infrastructure in cities, on top of which a series of structural modules are installed to house programs and services that the city does not currently have. This proposal seeks to create a more equitable city, with services present in all areas, just as cars and service stations are today.

Figure 3_ Distributed city-service stations. Professors: Emilio Marín, María Rodrigues Mori, and Christian Paul Bartlau. Students: Carmen Barra, Nicolás Contreras, Daniela Bascuñán, Ronald Cáceres, Catalina Castillo, Álvaro Darrigrande, Ángela Facuse, Alonso Fernández, Guillermo Galaz, María Inés Correa, Sofía Ivanovic, Emma Maey O'Connell, Celeste Chiari, and Daniela Cabrera.

"Healthy City - Parasites" (Fig. 4) is based on a series of examples drawn from the futuristic imaginary of the 1960s and 1970s and involves placing programs and services on top of existing buildings. The proposal for this post-pandemic city involves the adoption of a lifestyle based on the requirements of healthy living and to create spaces for physical and mental development. In this case, the architectural intervention takes advantage of the existing city, "parasitizing" buildings, roofs, squares and courtyards with programs such as vaccination posts, isolation rooms, urban gardens, meditation spaces and areas for sports.

Figure 4_ Healthy city-parasites. Professors: Ricardo Atanacio, Macarena Cortés, Max Aldunate, and Francisca Evans. Students: Yaritza Pereira, Joaquín Rea, Felipe Hernández, Dayana Horna, Bastián León, Sofía Maulén, Javiera Moya, Catalina Orellana, Javiera Oyarzún, Lilian Quijada, Ignacio Quinteros, Stefano Pesenti, María Paz Eyzaguirre, Carolina Recondo, Verónica Gimenez, and Brian Castro.

In a more extreme form, "Healthy City - Mobile Balloons" (Fig. 5) develops a reproducible device that promotes the concept of wellness with structures that barely touch the existing city. This project proposes the use of mobile balloons that move on mechanical legs and are used to deliver services and programs where they are most needed. This futuristic idea seeks to colonize public spaces and empty areas of the city with the intention of democratizing access to services and programs.

Figure 5_ Healthy city-mobile balloons. Professors: Isabel Matas, Fabrizio Pugliese, and Jan Aranda. Students: Rocío Pareja, Felipe Cortez, José Rivano, Camila Vargas, Yilberto Vásquez, Karime Zarhi, Sebastián Sandoval, Camila Arriagada, Antonella Bacchiega, María Barría, Tamara Cadima, Hernán Carvajal, Teresa Planelles Ferrer, Tatiana Risso, and Laila Alfie.

"Darwin's Parasite" (Fig. 6) predicts the obsolescence of offices, shopping centers, hotels and restaurants because of the constant recurrence of COVID-19. In this utopia, health measures are the basis of life in society. The project consists of a structural framework that can be replicated indefinitely, housing a high-speed transport system that connects "lockdown city" with "free city", which was created by defectors from "pandemic city". This new city of bars, nightclubs and stadiums is envisioned as a deregulated space. It is a city that does not seek to dissociate itself from the lockdown city, but maintains an ambivalent relationship with it, as if it were incapable of developing on its own.

Figure 6_ Darwin's Parasite. Professors: Hugo Mondragón and Manola Ogalde. Students: Luciana Truffa and Luca Garnerone.

The "Hyper-social distancing city" (Fig. 7) exaggerates the socio-spatial distance between two cities, one of which is inhabited by the privileged and the other by the excluded. The privileged live in virus-free bubbles, which float above the existing city. They access their supplies from sites within the city that are fenced off and protected by the police. People who live outside the bubbles are exposed to contagion and therefore aspire to gain access to them. This is a dystopian vision that takes the socio-spatial segregation of the present to its extreme, a critique of the contemporary city made visible by the pandemic: the socio-spatial distance between the city of the rich and the city of the poor.

Figure 7_ Hyper-social distancing city. Professors: Hugo Mondragón and Manola Ogalde. Students: Melinka Bier and Javiera Lorca.

regressive utopias

The "City of Delights" (Fig. 8) proposes restoring the harmonious relationship between nature and the city by creating a new ecosystem installed above the existing city, along major roads, rivers and valleys, as well as other natural landmarks and large-scale buildings. To achieve this "return to nature", "reactivation" and "production" artefacts are used, with scaffolding employed to create platforms for new programs such as public services and urban gardens. This is not a return to an orchard-like "paradise", but to the creation of a "technified" nature intended to produce food and generate new experiences of "delight".

Figure 8_The city of delights. Professors: Verónica Eltit, Sabir Khan, and Luca Montanarella. Students: Isidora Jerez, María Jesús Pradenas, Ornella Alarcón, Melissa Ríos, Claudia Carrasco, Loreto Aguirre, Rodrigo Villegas, Aynoa Mettifogo Guarachi, Victoria Salas, Álvaro Martínez Pérez, Ariel Albornos, Catalina Santero, María Agustina Bramuglia, María Clara Pellegrini, and Kyla Dowlen.

The "Post-productivity city" (Fig. 9) assumes that urban areas occupied by office buildings will be abandoned, new housing with teleworking spaces taking their place. Leisure will become the most socially valued activity. A continuous, dense residential building will encircle an inner enclosure of several hectares containing natural features present in the existing city —a hill and a river— that are used for leisure activities. The increased density would allow the entire population currently living on the outskirts of the city to be relocated to the building-ring. The urban sprawl will be abandoned and transformed into farmland. Here the function of utopia is escapist and restorative. There is an escape from the world of work to the world of leisure, and the old pre-industrial agrarian order is restored.

Figure 9_ Post-productivity City. Professors: Hugo Mondragón and Manola Ogalde. Students: Maira Vega and Hernán Sánchez.

"Federal Urbanism" (Fig. 10) proposes a political and socio-spatial division of the city into self-sufficient and self-governing federal districts or communities: "islands of order" that oppose the "chaos" of today's megapolis. The most visible sign is a system of walls which, as in ancient cities, serve to mark the political and spatial boundaries of the social body within. As well as being a physical barrier, the walls are a politically neutral zone where civic programs are located, and the exchanges that occur in urban life take place. Here, utopia seeks to restore the socio-spatial scale of the polis of classical Greece, in an attempt to regain a sense of belonging and governance.

Figure 10_ Federal Urbanism. Professors: Hugo Mondragón and Manola Ogalde. Students: Pilar Lira and Javiera Paúl.

Finally, "Roof-City for Golden Agers" (Fig. 11) transforms the roofs of buildings located in the center of a city into "sanctuaries for living the golden years". It is a kind of high-rise paradise that promotes leisure at a distance from the hyper-productive city below. To achieve interaction between the two cities, the proposal includes health facilities arranged on the intermediate floors of the buildings so that the elderly can be visited by their relatives. The utopia here has to do with social justice and equity: only the "tribal elders" have the right to access this garden of Eden on the upper floors, where they can live sociable life, far from the fear of catching a virus that is particularly deadly for this age group.

Figure 11_ Roof-City for Golden Agers. Professors: Hugo Mondragón and Manola Ogalde. Students: Daniela Manzur and Catalina Quintana.

discontent, hope, subversion and the "good place"

What do the students' proposals tell us about the role of utopia in societies that are in conflict with the current state of affairs? How to situate them in relation to a broader tradition of utopian thought?

In his canonical work The Principle of Hope, Ernst Bloch (1947) argues that every utopia is born of dissatisfaction, of a feeling of discontent with the present. To the extent that this discontent motivates subjects to "demolish" what they identify as the source of their discomfort, Bloch argues that every utopia starts with a protest in the productive sphere (Gálvez Mora 2010).

The mobilization caused by discontent does not have as its sole purpose the demolition of its identified source, because, according to Bloch (1947), a "militant optimism", a confidence in the existence of a "not-yet" that can be achieved, constitutes the true heart of utopia. It is a "not-yet" that has a real potential to be, and that therefore gives rise to a legitimate sense of hope.

Thus, the initial mobilization, that began as a purely destructive impulse, is transformed into a constructive impulse, by setting the subject in motion towards the conquest of a goal: to transform the promise utopia carries with it into reality. For Bloch (1947), the function of utopia is to mobilize humanity towards the future, towards the encounter with "everything" —the total realization of utopia— or with "nothingness", that is: failure.

It is important to insist on the way in which this Freudian "discontent" has fed utopian thought. In the workshops, the students had the opportunity to express their discontent with the current state of their cities, and sought to correct it. Most of the proposals were constructed as a reaction against the malaise that they wanted to demolish, which in most cases appeared as some form of injustice or socio-spatial disarrangement.

But not all thinkers take as optimistic a view as Bloch about the future of utopia in modern societies. Manfredo Tafuri (1976) argues that utopia, along with its anticipatory function and transformative potential, had been exiled from the work of the modern intellectual, including thinkers about the future of the city. Tafuri argues that as utopian thinking faded an ideology emerged which, inscribed in a "politics of things", was functional to the maintenance and reproduction of the status quo.

In urban planning, this "ideology" manifested itself as the "ideology of the plan", an instrument that, according to Tafuri (1976), froze the emergence of new utopias. Planning was a tool designed by economists to anticipate the future and minimize its risks. In urban planning, the future of cities began to be anticipated by the urban plan which, transformed into an instrument to facilitate the production-distribution-consumption cycle, expelled utopia from its domain.

The urban futures imagined by the students are far from complying with the rules of planning. This is where their subversive power lies. Utopian thinking is non-linear and, therefore, logical leaps and analogies are both permitted and desirable. Nevertheless, most of the urban futures imagined by the students display the mixture of realism and utopianism that Tafuri (1976) identified as characteristic of 19th century utopian thinking.

Moreover, in his History of Utopias, Lewis Mumford (2017 [1922]) reminds his readers that the word utopia is marked by a tension between two possible meanings: non-place and the good place. Understood as a non-place, utopia achieves the purpose of its existence in the world of ideas and images. This type of utopia does not seek to transit to the world of lived reality, but is pure representation. On the other hand, utopia understood as a good place implies a transit between the world of ideas/images and the world of lived reality. In this case, utopia operates as a device that seeks to anticipate a distant reality with the will to exist in the future or in a remote place. The tactical displacement of the authors of utopias in time or space allows them to project their present into a future in which the disorders and disarrangements they experience have been corrected.

In view of the distinction proposed by Mumford (1922), most of the proposals elaborated by the students are good places. Far from being an end in themselves, the proposals act as a means of transporting ideas and images to a known urban reality that they aim to transform.

epilogue

If, as Bloch argues (1947), there is discontent at the beginning of every utopia, what do the urban futures imagined by the students tell us about this malaise? Criticism is directed towards a city that reproduces socio-spatial segregation and is organized around a productivism that leads to fatigue (Han 2015). This discontent —which is shared by different groups— generates criticism of extractive production practices that degrade the environment, of the exclusion of unproductive social groups such as children and the elderly and of the lack of leisure facilities. There is also discontent about the expulsion of agriculture from the urban environment. From the point of view of the lived city, there is criticism of the loss of the organic relationship between citizenship and the city, both of which are perceived to be meaningless abstractions.

Do the proposals show a preference for imagining the future in optimistic or pessimistic terms? There are no proposals that imagine a totally bleak future, but neither are any full of hope. In this sense, what can be observed is a critical attitude that avoids the reductionism of extremes.

What might the "contents" of the imagined utopias be like? Perhaps because of the short duration of the exercises, this dimension seems to be little developed. One of the proposals suggests reversing the position of a group (the elderly) that, historically, has been excluded from societies that are focused on productivity, but little is said about other age groups. Something similar occurs with another proposal that imagines a hedonistic city oriented fundamentally towards young people. In short, utopias are imagined for specific groups in society, but not for society as a whole.

What "forms" do the imagined utopias take? Curiously, the formal vocabulary of most of the projects is drawn from Archigram, Super Studio or Archizoom. The monumentalization of infrastructure, parasitic devices, pneumatic structures, megastructures, high-tech, robots and science fiction appeared as elements that may be used appropriately to imagine the future.

It is paradoxical that the future is imagined by using images that are drawn from the past. No project was associated with contemporary futuristic visions such as smart cities, artificial intelligence technologies, big data, augmented reality or the "metaverse". Perhaps this is due to digital overexposure during the pandemic, or because virtual environments, such as smart cities, have raised alarms about hypervigilance and proximity to a society of control (Allam et al. 2022; Krivý 2018).

Finally, it is difficult to find explicit notions of what is meant by the common good in the proposals. It is possible to infer fragmentary and by-negation definitions. The common good is neither capitalist, individualist, nor productivist. The common good can emerge if historically marginalized social groups are included. The common good implies respect for the environment. The common good implies recovering an organic relationship with the lived city.

Western societies have long had a fascination with imagining bleak futures, but when reality becomes highly dystopian, as it did in 2020, imagining hopeful futures becomes a necessary form of care against an anguish forged in the heat of the evils of the present.

bibliography

1. Allam, Zaheer, Ayyoob Sharifi, Simon Elias Bibri, David Sydney Jones, and John Krogstie. 2022. "The Metaverse as a Virtual Form of Smart Cities: Opportunities and Challenges for Environmental, Economic, and Social Sustainability in Urban Futures". Smart Cities 5 (3): 771-801. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities5030040.
2. Arana Velarde, Freddy, Marilú Uribe Hinostroza, and María Cristina Casas Vásquez. 2022. "Resiliencia urbana en pandemia por COVID-19 and lecciones aprendidas post pandemia: Caso: ciudad metropolitana del centro de Perú". HUMAN REVIEW. International Humanities Review / Revista Internacional de Humanidades 15 (4): 1-22. https://doi.org/10.37467/revhuman.v11.4278.
3. Bach, Brigitte, Doris Wilhelmer, and Peter Palensky. 2010. "Smart Buildings, Smart Cities and Governing Innovation in the New Millennium". En 2010 8th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics, 8-14. Osaka: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/INDIN.2010.5549478.
4. Bibri, Simon Elias. 2022. "The Social Shaping of the Metaverse as an Alternative to the Imaginaries of Data-Driven Smart Cities: A Study in Science, Technology, and Society". Smart Cities 5 (3): 832-874. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities5030043.
5. Bloch, Ernst. 1947. The Principle of Hope, 1995a ed. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
6. Bolea Tolón, Natalia, Raúl Postigo Vidal, and Carlos López Escolano. 2022. "Valoración de la proximidad a las Zonas Verdes Urbanas de la ciudad de Zaragoza como estrategia de adaptación a situaciones pandémicas". Ciudades 25: 79-106. https://doi.org/10.24197/ciudades.25.2022.79-106.
7. Chase, Calum. 2016. The Economic Singularity: Artificial Intelligence and the Death of Capitalism. London: Three Cs.
8. Freud, Sigmund. 1979. "El malestar en la cultura". In Obras completas de Sigmund Freud, 57-144. Buenos Aires: Editorial Amorrortu.
9. Fukuyama, Francis. 1992. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Basic Books.
10. Gálvez Mora, Isidro M. J. 2010. "Reflexiones en torno a la función utópica en Ernst Bloch and su actualidad". PhD thesis, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México. http://132.248.9.195/ptd2010/marzo/0655645/Index.html.
11. González Pérez, Jesús M., and María José Piñeira Mantiñán. 2020. "La ciudad desigual en Palma (Mallorca): geografía del confinamiento durante la pandemia de la COVID-19". Boletín de la Asociación de Geógrafos Españoles 87. https://doi.org/10.21138/bage.2998.
12. Han, Byung-Chul. 2015. The Burnout Society. Indiana: Stanford University Press.
13. Harari, Yuval Noah. 2016. Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. New York: Harper.
14. Krivý, Maroš. 2018. "Towards a Critique of Cybernetic Urbanism: The Smart City and the Society of Control". Planning Theory 17 (1): 8-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095216645631.
15. Moreno, Carlos, Zaheer Allam, Didier Chabaud, Catherine Gall, and Florent Pratlong. 2021. "Introducing the '15-Minute City': Sustainability, Resilience and Place Identity in Future Post-Pandemic Cities". Smart Cities 4 (1): 93-111. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities4010006.
16. Mumford, Lewis. 2017 [1922]. The Story of Utopias, translated by Diego Luis Sanromán Peña. London: FB &c Ltd.
17. Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J. 2020. "Ciudades post-COVID-19: nuevos modelos urbanos para que las ciudades sean más saludables". Instituto de Salud Global Barcelona (IS Global). 2020. https://www.isglobal.org/healthisglobal/-/custom-blog-portlet/post-covid-19-cities-new-urban-models-to-make-cities-healthier/4735173/0,.
18. Ruvalcaba-Sánchez, Victoria, Verónica Zendejas-Santín, and Laura Teresa Gómez-Vera. 2022. "Estrategias para el diseño de un modelo urbano en una ciudad pospandemia". Legado de Arquitectura y Diseño 17 (31): 61-68. https://legadodearquitecturaydiseno.uaemex.mx/article/view/19116
19. Tafuri, Manfredo. 1976. Architecture and Utopia: Design and Capitalist Development. Cambridge: MIT Press. https://modernistarchitecture.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/manfredo-tafuri-architecture-and-utopia-design-and-capitalist-development.pdf.
20. Torres Pérez, María Elena. 2021. "Habitabilidad de la vivienda mínima and las ciudades en pandemia mundial: COVID-19 en Mérida, México". Revista INVI 36 (102): 352-383. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-83582021000200352.
21. Woolley, Samuel C., and Philip N. Howard, eds. 2019. Computational Propaganda: Political Parties, Politicians, and Political Manipulation on Social Media. New York: Oxford University Press.
22. Žižek, Slavoj. 2020. Pandemic! COVID-19 Shakes the World. New Yorl: Polity.

---