Understanding the 20-Minute City

The 20-minute city aligns with the principles of spatial justice and sustainable urbanism, offering a framework to decentralize urban functions and promote walkability (Allam & Moreno, 2020). It is rooted in human geography’s longstanding concern with the distribution of resources and the production of space (Lefebvre, 1991). Scholars argue that proximity to services not only improves quality of life but also enhances socio-economic inclusion by reducing travel time and cost burdens, especially for marginalized populations (Gehl, 2010; Mehta, 2014).

In regions with rapid urbanization, like Southeast Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, the demand for skilled construction labor is particularly high. Here, efficient manpower becomes critical for building resilient infrastructure to meet the needs of growing urban populations.

Dhaka’s Urban Landscape: A Mismatch?

Dhaka’s urban form is characterized by extreme population density, unregulated land use, and a pronounced center-periphery divide. According to UN-Habitat (2020), Dhaka is one of the least livable megacities globally, with an estimated 20 million residents navigating a fragmented transport network and overburdened infrastructure. The city’s mono-centric development model has led to the concentration of services in central zones like Motijheel, Dhanmondi, and Gulshan, while peripheral areas such as Mirpur, Uttara, and Keraniganj lack adequate healthcare, education, or employment facilities.

Moreover, an estimated 30% of Dhaka’s population resides in informal settlements with limited or no access to piped water, sanitation, or reliable transport (World Bank, 2015). This spatial inequality fundamentally contradicts the inclusive vision embedded in the 20-minute city framework.

Structural Barriers to Implementation

The translation of the 20-minute city into the context of Dhaka encounters multiple obstacles. Firstly, the absence of integrated land use and transport planning impedes efforts to foster walkable neighborhoods (Mahmud et al., 2022). Secondly, the city’s dominant transport infrastructure—centered on congested roads and informal modes like rickshaws—offers limited scope for safe pedestrian or cycling mobility. Thirdly, socioeconomic stratification has reinforced spatial segregation, where gated communities and commercial hubs remain inaccessible to low-income groups (Ahsan, 2021).

Furthermore, policy documents such as the Dhaka Structure Plan (2016–2035) articulate decentralization goals, yet their execution remains weak due to governance fragmentation and limited community engagement (RAJUK, 2015).

Emerging Initiatives and Partial Alignments

Despite the structural constraints, some interventions exhibit partial alignment with 20-minute city principles. The Dhaka Metro Rail Project (MRT Line 6) aims to reduce commute time and spatial disparity in access to central services. Likewise, recent efforts to develop satellite towns such as Purbachal and Jhilmil include mixed-use zoning and improved connectivity. However, these areas often cater to upper-income groups, raising concerns about spatial justice (Hossain, 2020).

Interestingly, older neighborhoods such as Old Dhaka and Mohammadpur reveal organic forms of mixed-use development, where residential, commercial, and religious facilities co-exist within walkable distances. These examples, though informal, illustrate the possibilities of locally adapted spatial models that prioritize access and proximity.

Rethinking Urban Futures: A Localized Perspective

From a human geography standpoint, the 20-minute city should not be seen as a universal solution but rather as a flexible planning ethos. For Dhaka, even achieving a “40-minute city” would represent meaningful progress. The focus must shift from replicating Global North models to reimagining contextually grounded strategies that reflect local realities and practices.

This approach entails investing in neighborhood-level infrastructure, protecting informal economies, and ensuring equitable distribution of urban services. Participatory planning, supported by disaggregated spatial data, can also facilitate the co-production of urban futures that are both inclusive and resilient.