16•Article
Baghdad: A People or a Vehicle City?
Fatima SuhailOctober 3, 202515 min read
Article Summary
From Fordism to the “American school,” Baghdad inherited car-first design. How can the city become easier to move through—can daily commutes be less of a hassle? With Jane Jacobs, Jeff Speck, and 15-minute-city ideas, this piece shows why wider roads fail—and how walkability and transit win.
Baghdad: A People or a Vehicle City?
Fatima Suhail
Research Analyst, KAPITA Research
Every day in Baghdad, most people face the same struggle, getting through packed streets, where minutes feel like hours and the daily trip to work or school turns into a frustrating challenge. It is not just about being late; it affects quality of life, adds stress, and drains energy and resources that could be used in better ways.
This traffic problem did not just happen overnight. It is a result of years of unplanned growth, too much reliance on private cars, and a lack of proper city planning. Now, with more people and more cars on the roads, finding actual solutions can not be delayed any longer. So, how can Baghdad become a city where getting around is easier? Can daily commutes become less of a hassle?
How History Shaped Modern Traffic?
The way our cities are designed today is heavily influenced by history, especially Fordism. In the early 1900s, Henry Ford revolutionized car production by introducing the “assembly line”, making cars affordable for the average person. Before this, cities were built for walking and public transport, with narrow streets and everything built within a close distance.
However, as cars became more common, cities changed to accommodate them. Roads were widened, highways were built, and urban spaces became more spread out. Governments also played a role by planning infrastructure around automobiles instead of pedestrians or public transportation.
Even today, many cities still prioritize cars over walkability and efficient public transport. Understanding this history helps explain why traffic is a major issue, and why cities like Baghdad need better urban planning focused on public transport, walkable spaces, and mixed-use neighborhoods (areas that combine housing, shops, and services in close proximity) to reduce car dependency and encourage vibrant, pedestrian-friendly communities.
The American School Approach
The American School of urban planning was supposed to create better cities by making them more organized and efficient. However, as Jane Jacobs explains in her book, “The Death and Life of Great American Cities,” this approach often ignores how real people live and interact in cities.
Instead of building walkable streets and mixed-use neighborhoods, planners focused on cars, highways, and large-scale projects. They believed cities should be divided into different zones, some for homes, some for businesses, and others for industry. While this may sound logical, Jacobs argues that it took the life out of cities and made them harder to live in.
The Key Features of This Model:
- Separation of Neighborhoods (Zoning)
- Planners divided cities into separate areas for living, working, and shopping.
- This forced people to travel long distances for everyday needs instead of having everything nearby and easily accessible.
- Car Centered Development
- Roads and highways were prioritized over sidewalks and public transport.
- Instead of making travel easier, this led to more cars and heavier traffic.
- Large-Scale Housing Projects
- Old neighborhoods were demolished to build big apartment blocks and green spaces.
- These areas often felt empty and disconnected rather than lively and welcoming.
- Urban Renewal and Slum Clearance
- The government destroyed many older, diverse neighborhoods, calling them "slums."
- Instead of improving these areas, people were forced to leave their communities.
Did The American School Approach Succeed or Fail?
Jane Jacobs argues that the American School of urban planning failed because it created more problems than solutions. Planners believed that building more roads would ease traffic, but instead, it encouraged more car use, leading to constant congestion. Streets were designed for cars, not pedestrians, making cities less walkable and less vibrant, which hurts small businesses and community interactions. Public transportation was neglected, leaving people with no choice but to drive, further worsening traffic. Additionally, zoning laws separated homes, workplaces, and shops, forcing long commutes and reducing neighborhood connections. Instead of strengthening communities, this model isolated people, disrupted social interactions, and made cities harder to navigate. Rather than improving urban life, it resulted in traffic problems, lifeless streets, and inefficient city planning.
How Does Baghdad Follow the Same Model?
Baghdad’s city planning seems to have similar disadvantages to the American cities model, leading to heavy traffic, poor public transport, and disconnected neighborhoods. Wide roads and highways were meant to reduce congestion, but have only made people more dependent on cars. With limited public transport options, most people have no choice but to drive, making traffic even worse.
At the same time, homes, shops, and offices are too far apart, forcing long commutes and making daily life harder.
What Walkable City Can Teach Us
Jeff Speck, in his book Walkable City: How Downtown Can Save America, One Step at a Time, provides a practical roadmap that Baghdad can learn from. He explains that fixing traffic is not just about building more roads, it is about designing cities that make people want to walk. When a city is walkable, traffic declines, public health improves, businesses flourish, and daily life errands become easier to navigate.
Speck also states that there are four functions that make a walk “work”:
- It has to be useful: People need to be able to walk to the places they actually go to: shops, schools, offices, cafes. If everything is too far apart, people will just drive.
- It has to be safe: Streets should be designed so that cars drive slower and pedestrians feel protected. Narrower roads, visible crosswalks, and sidewalks separated from traffic all help.
- It has to be comfortable: People shy away from empty and unpleasant places. Buildings should face the street, trees should give shade, and sidewalks should feel welcoming.
- It has to be interesting: Nobody wants to walk past a blank wall or a parking lot. Streets should have life: windows, doors, people, shops, cafes, things to look at and enjoy.
This does not mean banning cars—it means giving people other choices. The more a city encourages walking and transit, the fewer people rely on private cars, easing traffic, improving quality of life, and reducing pollution and emissions.
Baghdad can learn from this. Instead of building more roads that only invite more cars, we need to focus on the spaces between buildings, our sidewalks, bus stops, trees, and public spaces. This is the way to make a city more livable and easier to navigate.
Why Typical "Traffic Fixes" Do Not Work?
The formula for solving traffic in cities like Baghdad is not complicated, but we often fail to implement the correct solutions to the problem. Raising fuel prices, widening roads, and building more overpasses might seem like solutions, but they fail to address the real issue: people simply do not have better options.
Let us start with cycling. Cycling can be a great alternative to driving, but only if the city provides safe, shaded, and protected bike lanes. And while bikes work well for short distances, a few people would be willing to cycle across an entire city. That is where smart planning comes in. If we mix land uses, putting homes, shops, schools, and services close together, then people would not need to travel far in the first place. This is the idea behind the “15-minute city.” The phrase was coined by Pantheon Sorbonne professor Carlos Moreno in 2016, who describes the vision as, “within the distance of a 15-minute walk or bike ride, people should be able to access work, housing, food, health, education, culture and leisure,” where everything needed is just a short walk or bike ride away.
In countries like the Netherlands, even suburban areas are well-connected to the city through fast, reliable public transportation. This keeps the whole city connected and reduces the need for car travel, even for people living further out.
Baghdad, like many other cities, has seen a surge in car imports, far beyond what the roads can handle. However, since most people lack other transportation alternatives, they are forced to drive. And here is the kicker: building wider roads does not solve the issue; in fact, it makes it even worse. More road space just attracts more cars. It is a classic case of supply and demand.
Overpasses do not help either. Aside from making the city look less inviting and cutting through neighborhoods, overpasses often create new traffic problems, especially in Baghdad. For example, when minibuses stop under bridges to pick up or drop off passengers, they block entire lanes, causing gridlock.
All of these issues are connected, yet the solution is surprisingly straightforward:
- Focus on safe, walkable streets and bike-friendly design.
- Stop expanding roads and building overpasses that only invite more cars.
- Invest in a real public transport system that links neighborhoods and suburbs to the heart of the city, and make it safe, easy, and accessible.
- Encourage mixed-use neighborhoods, where residential buildings include shops, cafes, and services to encourage people to drive less and build awareness around walking.
If cars remain the only option to move around, then traffic will definitely remain a big challenge. Real change means giving people a choice and designing the city around people, instead of vehicles.
Article Information
Details
- Author:Fatima Suhail
- Published:October 3, 2025
- Issue:16
- Read Time:15 min
Need Custom Analysis?
Contact our research team to discuss your specific business landscape analysis needs.
Contact UsMore from 16
