G4.2 St2

Socioeconomic DiSparity anD planning policy During the inDuStrial revolution ElEna ZEkirias | a1740082 arCH 7042 | DEsigning rEsEarCH | samEr akkaCH Https://issuu.Com/ElEnaZEkirias12/DoCs/g4.2_st2

“Design is the very basis of social life... but design also engineers inequalities and new forms of neglect”

- Beatriz Colomina & Mark Wigley

Summary

An analysis of how health policies as well as urban planning policies in the industrial revolution, allows us to examine the interconnection between socioeconomic inequality and how planning reforms were enacted to address the sanitation challanges of the era.The Industrial Revolution brought rapid urbanization, exacerbating overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions in cities like Paris and London.In both cities, socioeconomic disparities shaped urban planning and health policies, with initiatives often prioritizing the interests of the elite over marginalized

communities.Socioeconomic inequalities profoundly impacted the extent and efficacy of planning and health policies in Paris and London during the Industrial Revolution, highlighting the need for more equitable approach to urban development and public health.

Figure 2: Street depicting filthy living conditions of the underprivileged workers

Industrialisation

The industrial revolution was a time of unprecedented and massive levels of advancements in both technology and manufacturing around the world. Peter Stearns recognised that the urbanisation that was triggered by the industrial revolution created unfounded opportunities for employment in factories all over the world. As massive amounts of people flocked to cities and industrial centres, overcrowded cities and unsanitary living conditions were rampant and became the norm. These dense urban areas were lacking in sufficient infrastructure for both waste disposal as well as clean water supplies, which led to widespread disease outbreaks that triggered a major shift in hygiene and health practices. Some of the notable consequences of this mass urbanisation caused by the Industrial Revolution that Charles-Edward Amaroy Winslow reflects on was the spread of infectious diseases such as cholera, typhoid fever, and tuberculosis. The poor sanitation as well as the contaminated water supplies, due to the factories and human waste, facilitated the greater spread of these infectious diseases which in turn resulted in high mortality rates, which were predominant amongst the working class population withing areas of over crowded living in slums near the factories.

Rich Vs Poor

Marie was a factory worker that resided in the overcrowded tenements and slums of paris, that were filled with dirt and were in disrepair. Her experiences can be a poignant example of the stark differences in how health outcomes differed between the wealthy individuals and the underprivileged and poor workers. For Marie, falling ill was not just an individual misfortune, but a greater symptom of the widespread neglect that was evident in the system. Her story allows us to encapsulate the broader social inequalities of the era, where the living conditions of the poor were so starkly different from those of the rich, who had the privilege and could afford both better healthcare and housing.

The historical context of urbanisation that is outlined by Paul M. Hohenberg and Lynn Hollen Lees in “The Making

of Urban Europe,” Marie’s struggles are seen through the view of a city that is experiencing massive growth during the Industrial Revolution, that has not only outpaced public health and infrastructural advancements that have then allowed for a deepening divide between the affluent residents and the impoverished ones. Hohenberg and Lees highlight how the city’s fast expansion was significantly more advanced than the infrastructure that was needed to be able to support healthy living conditions. Those lead to overcrowding and poor sanitation in the neighbourhoods that the working class resided in. The rapid urbanisation was exacerbating social inequalities that already existed and creating further new public health challenges for the cities.

R.J. Morris’ examination in “Cholera,

1832: The Social Response to an Epidemic” delves into how cholera outbreaks in London spurred actions towards implementing public health reforms. The poor and underprivileged were disproportionately affected by the mass outbreaks of cholera, and were a wakeup call for public health authorities. The disease’s impact was so significant and devastating which highlighted the new and urgent need for greatly improved sanitation within the city as well as clean water supply. This created massive public health interventions, most notably the modern sewage system development and the introduction of government health legislation that aimed to control the spread of infectious diseases and to stop such epidemics.

Research on the urban rejuvenation effort in Paris and London by Dorothy Porter allows for an examination of how the epidemic prompted health policy interventions that were created with the aim to improve living conditions for people living in the urban city scape. Porter examined how the relevant public authorities responded to the health crises in both cities and how they responded by the implementation of policies that were hoping to improve sanitation, access to healthcare as well as to improve housing. These government driven interventions were often introduced by the understanding that an essential way to prevent future epidemics is driven by improving the health of the overall city pop-

ulation and that poverty and inadequate housing were root causes that needed addressing.

“The Great Transformation ‘’ by Karl Polanyi emphasises how the laissez faire policies of the time not only failed to address the perpetuation of the cycle of illness and poverty but also the repercussions that industrialisation had for society. Polanyi argued that the focus on the free market at the time not only prioritised economic growth but underplayed the significance of social welfare which created massive social and economic disparities. There was a great lack of government intervention for addressing the needs of the underprivileged and poor, which meant that many people did not have access to basic necessities such as adequate housing, clean water and healthcare. This

lack of core human necessities led to these individuals being more vulnerable and susceptible to diseases and to other health issues.

Charles-Edward Amory Winslow’s assertions from “The Conquest of Epidemic Disease” further underscore the critical role public health interventions have in lessening the impact of epidemics on the vulnerable underprivileged communities. Winslow highlighted how advances in public health, such as vaccination programs, improved sanitation, and public health education, played a crucial role in controlling the spread of infectious diseases. These efforts were particularly important in protecting vulnerable populations, such as the poor, who were more likely to be affected by epidemics due to their living conditions.

Struggle Against Filth and Germs

Paris and London faced significant socioeconomic disparities that had a profound impact on their urban planning strategies and health policies, notably observed in the proposed sanitation initiatives. “Paris Reborn” by Stephane Kirkland showcased the extensive urban transformation that was orchestrated by Napoleon III and Baron Haussmann in Paris, which was driven by a vision to modernise and improve the city’s sanitation. On the other hand, Steven Johnson’s work “The Ghost Map” delves into London’s struggle against epidemics, particularly highlighting the effects of the Great Stink and how that epidemic affected the city.

Both cities were experiencing rapid industrialisation which created

worsening conditions that resulted in unsanitary living conditions, overcrowding and the massive spread of diseases. Hohenberg and Lees emphasise the severe repercussions that the rapid urban growth had on public health outcomes during the era. They also provided a historical analysis of the impact that urbanisation had on European cities, but they also underscored the challenges that Paris and London faced were far more significant due to the larger urban growth and the pressures of the rapid industrialisation.

In London, the cholera epidemic of 1854 served as a catalyst for the implementation of sanitation measures. Charles-Edward Amory Winslow’s “The Conquest of Epi-

Figure 3: Illustration showing how factories potentially looked like during the 19th century

demic Disease” emphasised the pivotal role played by the scientific advancements in promoting knowledge about infectious diseases and the development of effective countermeasures. Winslow’s work provided insightful understanding of how epidemiological breakthroughs helped shape public health reforms and responses, by highlighting the significant and instrumental identification of contaminated water sources being the main transmission of the diseases by John Snow.

David S. Barnes’s “The Great Stink of Paris and the Nineteenth-Century Struggle

Against Filth and Germs” provided a detailed account of the sanitation challenges that were faced by paris, as well as the strategies that were introduced as a way to combat them. Barnes’ analysis underscored how the improvement of scientific understanding of germ theory and public health were pivotal to the city’s approach in which they “dealt with filth and disease”. His work complements the narrative that is delved into Kirkland’s “Paris Reborn,” on how the urban transformation illustrated the efforts of the government to modernise the city of Paris during the public health cri-

sis.

Georges Weisz’s study, “The Development of Medical Specialization in Nineteenth-Century Paris,” delved into the evolution of medical practices and their connection with urban health policies. Weisz’s research highlighted the emergence of medical specialisation as a response to the complex health challenges posed by rapidly growing urban populations. This specialisation was crucial in devising effective public health strategies that addressed the specific needs of densely populated areas.

Figure 4: Illustration showing an imagination of how the tenements and slums were

Economy, Politics and Science

The rapid growth of cities, the expanding industries, and the political turmoil emphasised the need for critical and thorough planning and efficient health strategies and policies. However, the implementation and effectiveness of these measures varied significantly due to the economic, political, and scientific factors during their development. In cities like Paris and London, these challenges were particularly pronounced.

In Paris, Napoleon III’s forward-thinking leadership and Baron Haussmann’s innovative urban development aimed to modernise the city. Kirkland’s “Paris Reborn” details this ambitious project, highlighting the

economic motives driving Haussmann’s creation of grand boulevards and architectural changes. Haussmann’s projects were not merely about beautifying the city; they were fundamentally tied to economic and social reforms intended to elevate Paris to the status of a modern capital. Nonetheless, these endeavours primarily favoured the wealthy, causing for a widening of socioeconomic gaps and leaving marginalised groups susceptible to health emergencies. The transformation of Paris into a city of wide avenues and monumental structures often meant the displacement of the poor, who were forced into even more crowded and unsanitary living conditions. This urban overhaul

is also discussed in Hohenberg and Lees’ “The Making of Urban Europe,” which provides a broader context of urban transformations across Europe and their socio-economic impacts.

Meanwhile, London faced its own difficulties as portrayed in Johnson’s “The Ghost Map” and Barnes’s “The Great Stink of Paris.” The severe impact of the cholera outbreak underscored the urgent need for sanitation reforms. Johnson’s narrative vividly describes how the cholera epidemic revealed the dire state of London’s sanitation and the urgent need for comprehensive urban planning. However, the entrenched political interests and laissez-faire economic beliefs impeded any unified actions. Morris’s “Sanitary Reform in Victorian Britain” delves into the political obstacles surrounding public health

initiatives, exposing authorities’ hesitance to intervene in private matters. This reluctance is further analysed in Polanyi’s “The Great Transformation,” which discusses the broader economic ideologies that shaped government responses to public health crises during the 19th century.

Furthermore, advancements in understanding disease transmission significantly influenced health policies. Winslow’s “The Conquest of Epidemic Disease” and Weisz’s “Urbanization and the Epidemiologic Transition” illuminate the evolving scientific discussions during this era. The development of germ theory, pioneered by figures like Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch, began to shift the approach to public health from a focus on miasma (bad air) to an understanding of micro-

organisms as disease agents. Despite progress in germ theory, disparities in healthcare access and sanitation persisted, deepening the health gap between affluent individuals and those living in poverty.

The scientific advancements in this period were monumental. As detailed in Weisz’s work on medical specialisation in 19th-century Paris, the professionalisation and specialisation of medicine played a crucial role in the implementation of new health strategies. However, the benefits of these advancements were not evenly distributed. While the upper classes had access to improved medical care and sanitary living conditions, the poor often continued to live in squalid environments, with little access to the medical innovations of the time.

Lessons from History

The socioeconomic disparities that emerged during the Industrial Revolution had profound effects on health and urban planning policies, shaping the landscape of modern cities and public health approaches. The rapid industrialization led to overcrowded and unsanitary living conditions for the working class, which resulted in widespread health problems and highlighted the need for urban reform. These historical lessons underscore the critical importance of equitable urban planning and public health policies.

A notable parallel can be drawn between the exploitation of factory workers during the Industrial Revolution and the contemporary exploitation of labor in modern factories, particularly in develop-

ing countries. The harsh working conditions, low wages, and inadequate health provisions that characterized the 19th-century factories are alarmingly similar to those faced by many workers today. This continuity of exploitation reflects a persistent double standard, where the West often benefits from cheap labor while failing to address or adequately respond to the poor conditions that sustain their consumer markets.

The exploitation of workers in modern factories, much like during the Industrial Revolution, is driven by the pursuit of profit at the expense of human welfare. Western countries, while enjoying the economic benefits of inexpensive goods, often overlook the ethical implications of such practices. This per-

petuates a cycle of inequality and neglects the need for comprehensive labor reforms that ensure fair wages, safe working conditions, and access to healthcare for all workers.

The historical context of the Industrial Revolution serves as a crucial reminder of the need for vigilance and advocacy in addressing labor exploitation. It highlights the importance of implementing and enforcing policies that protect workers’ rights and promote sustainable, equitable development. As we reflect on the lessons of the past, it is imperative to hold corporations and governments accountable for ensuring that progress does not come at the cost of human dignity and health.

Figure 5: Child labour in modern factories today

Bibliography

Winslow, C.E.A. 1944. The conquest of epidemic disease. Princeton: N.J.

Barnes, D.S. 2018. The Great Stink of Paris and the nineteenthcentury struggle against filth and germs. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hohenberg, P.M. and Lees, L.H. 1995. The making of urban Europe, 1000-1994. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Johnson, S. 2006. The ghost map: The story of London’s most terrifying epidemic--and how it changed science, Cities, and the modern world. New York: Riverhead Books. Polanyi, K. 1957. The Great Transformation. Boston. Massachusetts: Beacon Press.

Porter, D. 2005. Health, civilization and the State. doi:10.4324/9780203980576.

Morris, R.J. .1976. Cholera, 1832: The Social Response to an Epidemic. Holmes & Meier Pub.

Weisz, G. 1994. The development of medical specialization in Nineteenth-Century Paris, French Medical Culture in the Nineteenth Century, pp. 149–188. doi:10.1163/9789004418356_009.

Image Credits

Figure 1: History.com. Child Labor, HISTORY. Available at: https:// www.history.com/topics/industrial-revolution/child-labor.

Figure 2: Life in 19th-century slums: Victorian London’s homes from hell. History Extra. Available at: https://www.historyextra. com/period/victorian/life-in-19th-century-slums-victorian-londonshomes-from-hell/.

Figure 3: Factory System. Britannica. Available at: https://www. britannica.com/topic/factory-system.

Figure 4: How the Industrial Revolution transformed urban Britain’s public health (no date) History Skills. Available at: https:// www.historyskills.com/classroom/year-9/urbanisation-reading/.

Figure 5: Are the clothes you are wearing free from child labout? European Commission. Available at: https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/news-and-events/stories/are-clothes-you-arewearing-free-child-labour_en

Notes

1 Stearns, P. Stearns, P.N. 2020. The Industrial Revolution in World History. Milton: Taylor & Francis Group.

2 Winslow, C.E.A. 1944, The conquest of epidemic disease, (Princeton: N.J)

3 Hohenberg, P.M. and Lees, L.H. 1995, The Making of urban Europe, 1000-1994. Cambridge, (MA: Harvard University Press)

4 Hohenberg, P.M. and Lees, L.H. 1995

5 Morris, R.J. 1976, Cholera, 1832: The Social Response to an Epidemic, (Holmes & Meier Pub)

6 Porter, D. 2005, Health, civilization and the State, doi:10.4324/9780203980576.

7 Porter, D. 2005

8 Polanyi, K. 1957, The Great Transformation, (MA: Beacon Press)

9 Polanyi, K. 1957

10 Winslow, C.E.A. 1944

11 Winslow, C.E.A. 1944

12 Kirkland, S. 2014, Paris Reborn (Picador Paper)

13 Johnson, S. 2006, The ghost map: The story of London’s most terrifying epidemic--and how it changed science, Cities, and the modern world, (New York: Riverhead Books)

14 Hohenberg, P.M. and Lees, L.H. 1995

15 Hohenberg, P.M. and Lees, L.H. 1995

16 Winslow, C.E.A. 1944

17 Winslow, C.E.A. 1944

18 Barnes, D.S, 2018, The Great Stink of Paris and the nineteenth-century struggle against filth and germs, (BA: Johns Hopkins University Press)

19 Barnes, D.S, 2018

20 Barnes, D.S, 2018; Kirkland, S. 2014

21 Weisz, G. 1994, ‘The development of medical specialization in Nineteenth-Century Paris’, French Medical Culture in the Nineteenth Century, doi:10.1163/9789004418356_009

22 Weisz, G. 1994

23 Kirkland, S. 2014

24 Hohenberg, P.M. and Lees, L.H. 1995

25 Johnson, S. 2006; Barnes, D.S, 2018

26 Johnson, S. 2006

27 Morris, R.J, 1976

28 Polanyi, K. 1957

29 Winslow, C.E.A. 1944; Weisz, G. 1994

30 Weisz, G. 1994

Summary word count: 118

Article word count: 2497

Checklist

⃝ Adhered to the word limit in the summary and the article.

⃝ Inserted the main quote by C+W on the inside of the front cover.

⃝ Followed the 5-sentence template in writing of the summary.

⃝ Inserted word count of the summary.

⃝ Inserted word count of the article.

⃝ Adhered to the prescribed number of spreads.

⃝ Adhered to the prescribed number of images.

⃝ Researched and cited the required number of sources.

⃝ Uploaded PDF file on issuu.com and provided active link on the from cover.

⃝ Inserted the checklist on the back cover.

⃝ Uploaded final PDF file on MyUni and Box.

⃝ Uploaded final Black+Blue word file on MyUni and Box.