Narrative

Introduction / Theoretical Lenses

Marxian theory, grounded in the works of Karl Marx, focuses on the economic and social relations under capitalism, particularly the conflicts between different classes, capital accumulation, alienation, and surplus value (Austin). When applied to urban planning, it examines how capitalist economic structures shape the spatial organization of cities, distribution of resources, and social inequalities. Previous scholars have made observations and come up with theories on the practical implications of Marxist theory in modern urban planning, critiquing the capitalist-driven commodification of urban spaces that often neglects the needs of lower-income populations (Ahn and Juraev). Similarly, Katznelson argues that cities, as focal points of economic activity, reflect and reinforce class struggles, leading to spatial inequalities and the marginalization of the working class (Amorós). ​​Importantly, inclusive urban planning requires accessible facilities to ensure that all citizens, regardless of physical ability, can navigate the city safely and independently (Stafford). These sources underscore the need for a paradigm shift towards more equitable urban policies prioritizing public good over private gain. Our project aims to examine the relationship between wealth inequality and potential economic segregation in San Francisco over the past years. The results of our analysis can offer insights into current city planning practices and advocate for more equitable urban policies. 

(Torsten Karlsson) argues that as society develops technologically, Marxism will gradually favor capitalism in urban and spatial planning, leading to more unequal distribution of urban planning resources, to stop this shift, our project analyzes and specifies the need for improved community services and education, healthcare, parks facilities, accessible facilities, etc., in areas of urban planning and labor and economic inequality. Rossi explains the concept of urban-rural integration and sustainable development in his work "Ideology and City Planning: Marx and Engels's Reconciliation of Town and Country." Therefore, our project will also optimize the distribution of resources and public facilities through data visualization and analysis to ensure that farmers, workers, income-inequality and disability groups, and others can enjoy the success of urban development equitably. 

Historical contextualization

The city of San Francisco, known for its iconic skyline and vibrant cultural scene, has a long and complex history of urban development and city planning. Over the past few decades, data collected in San Francisco has observed an increasing size of the civilian labor force and income inequality, which will be discussed below. The increasing wealth disparity among the residents indicates risks of the emergence of more marginalized communities whose life qualities may be compromised by limited access to urban resources such as public infrastructures, education, and medical care. By studying economic inequality and the visualizable class divisions within the city, city planners can develop future strategies that promote equity and sustainability, ultimately creating a city that benefits all its residents.

Methods, results and analysis

Growing civilian labor force and income inequality

To research the topic of the economic disparity and population distribution of residents with differing income levels, we first visualized the civilian labor force and income inequality data as line graphs through Python. A regression analysis was then performed to further examine the relationship between civilian labor forces, in an effort to solidify our understanding of the evolution of wealth disparity in the working class over time in San Francisco.

In general, the labor force is in a steadily increasing trend over the long term. Specifically, the surge in the labor force during the dot-com boom vividly illustrates capitalism's push, drawing both capital and labor to the tech-centric city, reshaping it significantly to meet the needs of burgeoning technologies and their creators. This growth, however, wasn't without repercussions. The 2008 financial crisis highlighted the fragility of such rapid expansion, revealing deep vulnerabilities within the capitalist framework that caused significant disruptions in the labor market and underscored the need for urban resilience. Following the crisis, the city experienced a period of recovery and growth, yet this too was marked by challenges such as gentrification and the displacement of long-standing communities, propelled again by capital's influence over urban spaces. Most recently, the downturn of the labor force around 2020 triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic has further exemplified the instability of employment within capitalist economies, stressing the critical need for urban planning that prioritizes flexibility and public welfare over mere economic growth. Moreover, for what we can refer from Katznelson’s paper, “the nature of work and the labor process altered radically, characterized by the decline of artisanship, a reorganization of skills, and the development of modern, wage-labor working class” (Katznelson, Chapter 1), it greatly sheds light on the rise and down of the labor force fluctuations in that era before. Even though it doesn't address the civilian labor force as depicted in the graph, it still provides a suitable example to help us understand the changes of the civilian labor force over time. 

In this diagram, The Y-axis shows the income levels of San Francisco residents, reflecting the specifics of income disparity. It also implies that extreme income inequality creates significant economic stratification and systemic injustice in the city.

The income inequality data in San Francisco is also plotted as a line graph above. From a Marxist perspective, the stark income disparities in San Francisco highlight the deep-seated inequalities intrinsic to capitalist systems. Marx's theories suggest that capitalism allows the wealthy, or the bourgeoisie, to amass and control production means, thereby widening the economic divide as the working class, or proletariat, remains undercompensated and marginalized (Austin). In cities like San Francisco, urban planning often exacerbates this divide by prioritizing the development of high- income residential and commercial properties. It also means that the cost of living in San Francisco is rising, forcing low-incoming families to relocate and exacerbating class conflict — a direct manifestation of the class struggle described by Marx.

Addressing these issues calls for a shift towards a Marxist approach in urban planning— active participation of residents in decision making on land use, public space and infrastructure projects(Amorós). This may include mixed-use development combining residential commercial and recreational spaces to create diverse and inclusive communities. This helps to reduce the spatial segregation that often occurs in urban environments influenced by capitalist priorities. 

The pronounced income inequality in San Francisco serves as a real-world illustration of the systemic inequities Marx critiqued in capitalist societies. By weaving Marxist principles into our urban and economic policies, we can work towards a more equitable urban fabric that supports and sustains its most vulnerable residents. This approach not only seeks to remedy inequality but also to restructure our urban environments to foster genuine inclusivity and accessibility. 

The analysis on labor force dynamics and income inequality in San Francisco specifies a moderate positive correlation, indicating that as the labor force increases, so does income inequality. Applying Marxism to formula and the relationship, specifies that capitalist urban planning intensifies class struggle, with primitive capital accumulation by the capitalists leading to a greater economic inequality. This trend highlights how cities are builded to benefit and servicing the wealthy, often at the expense of the working class, leading to alienation and marginalization in urban spaces. Marxism methodologies such as dialectical and historical materialism, critical urban theory, and political economy can further elucidate these problems and relationships, advocating for policies that redistribute wealth and promote equitable development to mitigate the adverse effects of primitive capital accumulation. In “Ideology and City Planning: Marx and Engels's Reconciliation of Town and Country”, Marco Rosaire Rossi describes in detail the theoretical and perspectival contributions of Marx and Engels to the field of urban planning, the article suggests that modern urban planning should draw on the critical perspective of Marxism and focus on accessibility and sustainability of resources and facilities for all in order to achieve a more equitable and balanced social development. Which is exactly the same as our analysis and idea, and it is what we are looking forward to achieving.

Unemployment rate by zip code and time: 

With the context of exacerbating wealth inequality among San Francisco residents in mind, we then plotted the unemployment rate by zoning districts in San Francisco from 2019 to 2022 as heat maps to examine patterns of potential economic segregation. 

Previous Marxist scholars have examined the cause of uneven economic and resources distribution. For example, Katznelson analyzed historical and contemporary examples of city planning to argue that urban development under capitalism leads to spatial inequalities, segregation, and the marginalization of lower-income populations. Such phenomena can be visualized across all four charts of SF unemployment data. Tracing the changes of unemployment rate over years can reveal important facts about economic inequality within San Francisco and help scholars propose actions to prevent exacerbation of such divisions. 

In 2019, San Francisco's relatively low unemployment rate suggests a period of economic stability. This apparent steadiness might imply that urban planning faces no immediate pressing challenges. However, this apparent stability may mask deep-seated inequalities and the long-term effects of zoning policies that may become apparent as economic pressures mount. A Marxist perspective may remind us that even in times of good economic performance, the inherent contradictions of capitalist society remain, such as the gap between the rich and the poor and the unequal distribution of resources.

In 2020, the DOVID-19 outbreak led to a sharp rise in unemployment, which was particularly severe in certain areas. This sudden economic shock revealed the different levels of vulnerabilities of urban communities within San Francisco. It can be clearly visualized that areas with higher initial unemployment rate, such as Lakeshore, Bayview, and Hayes Valley, are more severely affected by the epidemic. These changes echo Karlsson’s comments that the capitalist character of planning may exacerbate economic, ecological, and social crises and intensify existing inequalities, and that "it will be catastrophic for both the working class and the environment if we continue to handle the current crises with the class character that currently dominates planning."

In 2021, the unemployment rate begins to gradually fall as the economy partially reopens, indicating how markets and policies are adapting to the new normal. In 2022, with the gradual decline in unemployment, the effects of market and government policies adapting to economic challenges begin to emerge. Through a Marxist lens, this period of recovery not only shows the resilience of the capitalist system, but also new relations of production and possible social class conflicts. 

The period of economic recovery after COVID can be seen as an opportunity for city planners to come up with new visions to ameliorate class struggle and conflicts. Bridge has argued that planners may incorporate pragmatism into the Marxist theoretical framework, encouraging planners to consider different perspectives and prioritize practical implications in their methodologies. One pragmatic solution that may contribute to more equity in San Francisco is inspired by Shen’s study on employment accessibility of low-wage workers. His work examining low-wage workers in Boston's inner-city neighborhoods has revealed that auto ownership is a more critical determinant of employment accessibility than location advantages within the city. From the data presented above, it can be observed that the Lakeshore region had the sharpest rise in unemployment rate after the pandemic. At the same time, this district is also characterized by the presence of Lake Merced which geographically isolated part of its community from the rest of the city. Following Shen’s conclusions, city planners in San Francisco may consider investing in public transportation in the Lakeshore area to increase work accessibility for local residents, which may increase its economic resilience in the face of crisis. 

Disability Studies of San Francisco through the lens of curb ramps

Considering disabled people in city planning is essential for creating inclusive, accessible, and equitable urban environments. As Stafford and their colleagues mentioned in their paper, “disabled people are constantly reminded that ‘you don’t belong - the world is not built for you.’” (Stafford) Accessibility features, such as curb ramps, tactile paving, and accessible public transportation, ensure that all citizens, regardless of physical ability, can navigate the city safely and independently. As Williams highlights, universal design principles not only improve accessibility for disabled individuals but also enhance usability and convenience for all users, thereby creating more equitable and functional urban environments​. (Williams)​ Inclusive city planning not only enhances the quality of life for disabled individuals but also benefits the broader community by fostering a more inclusive society. By prioritizing the needs of disabled people, city planners can help eliminate barriers, promote social integration, and comply with legal standards, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 

In this project, we gathered information about the distribution of curb ramps in San Francisco to investigate how it connects with the unemployment rate of different zip codes. We created a heatmap plotting the distribution of curb ramps in San Francisco, shown below, and found that, surprisingly, there is no clear inequality in the distribution of curb ramps. This indicates that the city's efforts to ensure accessibility are relatively uniform across different areas. 

Our discovery that curb ramps are evenly distributed across San Francisco contradicts our expectations rooted in Marxist theory, which often posits that infrastructural developments and public resources are distributed unequally, favoring wealthier areas and reinforcing socioeconomic disparities. According to Marxist theory, one might expect areas with higher unemployment rates to have fewer curb ramps due to a lack of investment and resources. However, our findings indicate that the city's efforts to ensure accessibility are relatively uniform across different zip codes, regardless of their unemployment rates. This suggests that, at least in the case of curb ramp distribution, public policy and urban planning in San Francisco may be driven more by considerations of equality and accessibility than by economic disparities, challenging the notion that infrastructural benefits are solely determined by economic status.

While the curb ramps are distributed evenly in San Francisco, income inequality and unemployment remain severe problems in the city. This persistent inequality may be attributed to several factors, including invisible discrimination in employment, limited accessibility in workplaces, and prohibitive healthcare costs. Addressing these issues requires a comprehensive approach that includes enforcing anti-discrimination laws, improving accessibility in all areas of life, providing adequate healthcare and social support, and ensuring equitable access to education and employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities. Moreover, it's essential to recognize that while infrastructural elements like curb ramps are crucial for accessibility, they alone cannot resolve deeper systemic issues related to economic disparity and social inequality. Effective solutions must involve a multifaceted strategy that addresses the root causes of inequality and seeks to create a more inclusive and equitable society for all residents of San Francisco. This holistic approach will not only improve the quality of life for those with disabilities but also contribute to the overall health and fairness of the urban environment.