Some people want to live in a Slow City because they feel their own lives are too fast-paced. Yet a person living in a Slow City still has business deadlines, commute times, family  pressures and work schedules. If our own hectic lives are our creation, then we may not necessarily escape them by living in a Slow City. Living the ’slow’ life means being in charge of our own schedules and making decisions which help us to slow down and breathe a bit easier on a daily basis.

However, not everything about ’slow’ happens on an individual basis. While we must recognize our own responsibility in helping to create our own ’slow’ lives, I am convinced that our context also plays a large role. If the cities in which we live are inherently ’slow’ in their philosophy and policy, then this will permeate our lives as residents of these cities. In fact, the very basis of the Slow Cities philosophy was to help improve the quality of life for the citizens of Slow Cities.

I personally find that I am drawn to the very idea of living in a city that is slow. The shared philosophy draws upon a desire to sustain the local sense of place – the very identity of a city – and also to make changes in ways which will improve the quality of life for its citizens. For example, a Slow City seeks to improve and promote infrastructure for pedestrian and alternative transportation use. If my city is more accessible to me as a pedestrian, I can automatically interact with the local space on a ‘slower’ level.  Of course, this is only one small example, but it is a relevant example which can help to change how slow our lives are on a daily basis.

A Slow City makes it easier for me to live a slow life. Not everything about a Slow City will always be slow, but the city policy enables slow choices. A person’s own lifestyle is still going to be about personal choices. Some of these choices may still result in decisions which encourage stress and hectic times. But if my city helps me to make a few slow decisions each day, my quality of life improves and every moment becomes richer.

The Slow Cities movement works on the basis of a shared philosophy and a list of goals. Cities which are members of the movement agree to work toward these goals, with the expectation that each local city plan will favour these goals as priorities. These goals are referred to as “Excellences” (or “Requirements for Excellence”), and are divided into the following categories: (1) Environmental Policies, (2) Infrastructure Policies, (3) Technology and Facilities for Urban Quality, (4) Safeguarding autochthonous production, (5) Hospitality, and (6) Awareness. These goals help to define the future of each city, with goals being translated into city priorities. 

Now, to start answering the question “What makes a Slow City slow?” …

The Environmental Policies play a huge role in this definition. The movement is committed to creating healthy living environments for its residents, as well as visitors. The environment is viewed as integral to the overall health (and future) of the urban area and its regional context. The Slow Cities movement has recognized that the future of the city (as well as its local region) is inherently linked to its environmental health.  These environmental policies are focused on clean water and air, composting, use of alternative and renewable energy sources, and the reduction of pollution (including visual, noise, air, water, etc.). 

Some of these environmental policies may not seem ground-breaking.  Some may simply appear to be common sense. However, this in turn may be part of what makes Slow Cities a successful and sustainable movement.  Changes towards environmental health are actually quite difficult in an urban setting.  Industrialization, fast-paced growth, dependency on the automobile and other similar factors have made it difficult for cities to make environmentally-conscious policy decisions.

The Environmental Policies can also be seen as a cultural shift in City Planning. Living in a healthier environment translates into a higher quality of life for the residents and visitors alike.  Environmental policy does not only benefit the future. The effects are beneficial immediately. The point is that cities can be better places to live. We do not need to sacrifice health and environmental well-being simply because we live in a place where other people also live and work. Choosing to place the environment as a priority is an example of what makes a Slow City slow.  It is about taking the time to make better decisions, to make changes which will improve quality of life and give us better cities to live in.

Many people have not yet heard of the Slow Cities (Citta Slow) movement. To a large extent, the cities have been kept “under the radar”.  During my original research of the Slow Cities movement, I questioned this reluctance to broadcast the philosophy and this new approach to city planning.  I viewed Slow Cities as a prime example for a Best Practice – one which other cities could study and hopefully learn from. I soon learned, however, that the Slow Cities were not so intent on attracting attention in the form of tourist development.  Instead, they were focused on establishing the best possible city for their residents.  This was an attempt at planning a city in which people would want to live, where long-time residents would want to stay. 

Slow Urbanism is about trying to create the right kind of cities – cities which are great places to live, cities which are healthy, cities which offer a good quality of life.  Many urban environments seem fixated in trying to lure people to see a few sites.  These tourists will spend some money in the city, but then they will leave.  Tourism can certainly be a viable industry – but should it be the primary focus?  A city is not only a tourist attraction.  It is a place to live.  A place to call home.  Creating a city which works must start with creating a city which is a good place to live.

When I visited one of the first Slow Cities (Greve-in-Chianti, in Tuscany), some of the residents didn’t even know they lived in a Slow City.  When some acquaintances of mine were visiting Italy, I recommended Greve-in-Chianti as a place to see.  But they weren’t so enamoured as I thought they should be.  They were expecting Rome or Florence – but on a smaller scale.  Instead they were in a typical, hardworking Italian town.  It wasn’t really touristy.  Many people didn’t speak English.  But it was a town that had retained much of its traditional industry, and connections to the local landscape. When I was in Greve-in-Chianti, it felt like I was in a real Italian town, not a city that was trying to put on a face for tourists. For me, this was part of the appeal of being a visitor there.  I was able to see, taste and touch the sense of place.  They were not tempted to give up this sense of place for tourists or trade it in for an imported urban style.

More importantly, the small, simple changes already brought by the Slow Cities movement had improved the quality of life for its residents.  A few examples: Older residents now had more benches to rest on while they were out doing their shopping. The small shops and outdoor markets revealed a strong connection to the local region – in terms of food, wine, handicrafts, etc.  There are stricter pollution controls and more alternative transportation options. There are more greenspaces and outdoor communal areas for residents to enjoy.

If the Slow Cities were trying to advertise their cities, to “sell” them to tourists, there could potentially be many more people visiting the city.  There also would be many more people moving to the city.  While this is not necessarily a negative, it is also not the focus of the Slow Cities movement. A fast-growth city which seeks name recognition based on tourist amenities – or even membership in a popular movement – has not realized the “slow” philosophy.

Slow Cities have made the choice to make their cities great places to live. Or perhaps I should say they are choosing to maintain their great places to live.  The cities don’t necessarily need to make huge changes.  Some places clearly have room for improvement. Other places may need to focus more on sustaining that sense of place which defines “home” for the people who live there.

Next: What makes a Slow City slow?