Urban planner Carlo Ratti: "Milan is a laboratory, but after years of rushing, balance is now needed."
Milan, July 20, 2025 – “Cities are splendid inventions,” according to Carlo Ratti, architect, urban planner, professor at MIT in Boston and the Polytechnic University of Milan, co-founder of the international firm CRA-Carlo Ratti Associati, and curator of the 19th International Architecture Exhibition of the Venice Biennale . “They allow us to do things together that we couldn't do otherwise.”
And Milan, he argues, once a gloomy, industrial city, "over the last decade has been the only one in Italy capable of playing a significant role on the world stage. Its ability to act as a laboratory has been rewarded." And this is the perspective Ratti starts from, regardless of the legal issues. "We can debate whether a new skyscraper is beautiful or ugly, but at the urban level, the change has been positive."
Architect, what do you think about what's happening in Milan?
I've been following the story mainly through newspapers, especially in the United States—I just got back from New York yesterday. It seems to me there are two levels to consider: on the one hand, the judicial aspect , which the judiciary must address. On the other, a deeper, social problem: after years of growth, Milan risks becoming too exclusive for its own residents. But every crisis is also an opportunity. After the rush, it might be time to stop and think: where does Milan want to go tomorrow?
This seems to be the heart of the problem.
"As an architect and urban planner, I clearly see a structural problem: urban planning regulations in Italy are a labyrinth of rules , often opaque and contradictory. Such a complicated system is susceptible to abuse. A major simplification effort is needed, both nationally and locally. It could be a bipartisan program with very positive impacts ."
A concrete example?
New digital tools could help make processes faster and more transparent, as Singapore teaches. Furthermore, the rigid separation between urban functions—housing, offices, commerce—is a twentieth-century relic that makes little sense today, especially after the changes in the way we live and work brought about by Covid . In a study conducted at MIT with economist Ed Glaeser, we saw that removing certain urban planning constraints helps create more livable cities. We need more transparent urban planning, based on a few clear principles. I would start with this: given that in Italy the population is unchanged and neither are standards, zero land consumption, everywhere.
We run the risk of throwing away the model of a finally European Milan...
Milan's success over the last ten years is clear for all to see . It's the only truly global city in Italy, a gateway to Europe, and a magnet for international talent thanks to universities like the Polytechnic University of Milan and Bocconi University.
But does a successful city necessarily have to be a city for the rich?
No, but urban success comes at a price. It's been happening since cities emerged about 10,000 years ago: when an urban area is successful and attracts people, goods become scarce—land first and foremost—and prices rise. It's a problem, sure, but as they say in English: "a good problem to have." The alternative is decline, depopulation. Think of Detroit or Cleveland.
A frightening prospect. What are the corrective measures?
"We must prevent the creation of speculative bubbles, like those on the stock market. And then there are effective tools to ensure the balance of the civitas, the citizen community. Incentives to build more if quotas of housing are allocated at subsidized prices. A way to balance growth and inclusiveness."
And then?
Listening to citizens by leveraging collective intelligence. Implementing corrective measures that consolidate, without denying, the success of the Milan and Lombardy models. Building the future is always a matter of choices.
Il Giorno
