Photo: Casper Johansson / unsplash.com

If urban cores are impacted, what does remote work mean for the multiple cores in our cities or the potential to develop in this trajectory? For many years, the idea of polycentricity has been discussed as a sustainable planning model, as well as the 15-minute city. In recent years, urban planning discourse has considered “chrono-urbanism” as a concept that suggests people gain a higher quality of urban life when they enjoy shorter, active forms of mobility (Moreno et al., 2021). Can remote work catalyse these planning ideals while ensuring they are carried out in equitable ways?

Several international studies have considered the links between remote work and dense urban forms. In reference to an earlier study (Circella & Mokhatarian, 2017), Sweet and Scott (2024) note that remote work opportunities may “induce polycentric sub-centres and regionally scaled agglomeration[s]” which would become more important than traditional, downtowns or city centres. Greaves et al. (2024) echo the idea of planning neighbourhoods according to principles of the 15- or 20-minute city, but as a way to encourage healthy lifestyles and active mobility in the same neighbourhoods where people are working from home. The most well-known of these models stems from Moreno et al. (2021) who lay out six key functions that an area should provide within a 15-minute active mobility radius: living, working, healthcare, commerce, education, and entertainment.

Glackin et al. (2022) argue that increased day-time populations in non-central areas might contribute to higher levels of localisation and less car-dependent cities, which has important planning implications. The authors link larger day-time population density to urban amenities, walkability, and liveability. In their study on Melbourne and Sydney, Australia, they find that the potential to regenerate areas based on remote work-related population changes is large in residential areas (but negative in CBDs and other high job-density areas). They argue that remote work patterns could be used as a catalyst in strategic planning and regeneration with the aim of creating higher levels of amenities in suburban areas. To promote such a development, planners could identify areas for increased services and residential infill as well as land which could be reactivated or amended. Land use planning, community engagement, and localised place-making policies are mentioned as critical in the development. The authors suggest that the polycentric, neighbourhood-based cities that planners have been advocating for over decades could find a new form if less focus was made on high job-density areas and instead turned to transforming suburbs into more sustainable localised living areas.

Gurstein (2023) discusses the potential of creating more liveable and sustainable neighbourhoods through the integration of home and work activities. Yet, she stresses that active policy and planning is needed to prevent urban sprawl and negative development pressures in rural areas as well as negative effects related to land use and private and public transport. Čok et al. (2022) also highlight the need for active planning for remote work. Based on their research of mixed developments in predominantly single-family housing areas in Slovenia, Čok and colleagues raise a concern for how planners should respond to business activity taking place in traditionally residentially zoned spaces. They highlight the need for new social agreements to ensure that the changing functionality of planned spaces can provide people with healthy environments for living and working.

Similarly, Budnitz et al. (2020) highlight the importance of land use planning to respond to emerging patterns of work flexibility by providing greater access to amenities for telecommuters in order to facilitate shorter travelling distances for non-work-related trips. In their review of several studies, Budnitz and colleagues (2021) point to the desirability of telework in neighbourhoods where workers have other services and activities accessible by foot or public transport, a claim substantiated to a degree by Li et al. (2024) who find that remote workers prefer to work from places in mixed-used, high-density areas that are in proximity to residential areas. Because telework is both a work practice and an accessibility practice, Budnitz et al. (2021) state:

The main kind of environment to stimulate sustainable remote work is that of mixed-use urban design, which could be in the shape of compact urban cores or polycentric spatial structures. According to Li et al. (2024), “this transformation can create diverse spatial combinations, provide flexible office spaces, and decrease commuting distances by making services easily accessible via public transport, walking, or cycling. This, in turn, helps reduce carbon emissions and energy use, contributing to the development of sustainable cities” (11). As planners consider how to organise the necessary needs and functions for residents in a city, international research has highlighted the importance of green and blue spaces for supporting health and well-being, particularly for residents who are working from home (Astell-Burt & Feng, 2021; Greaves et al., 2024; Zenkteler et al., 2023).

Gurstein (2023) claims that remote workers need to be better recognized in the planning of services, as well as social and recreational facilities, and neighbourhood design needs to facilitate locally based activities. Rather than being prohibitive of home-based work, municipalities should support economic activities in the home, as this could stimulate economic growth. This could be especially relevant in relation to new businesses. However, Gurstein (2023) also recognizes resistance in some neighbourhoods, as home-based work is said to create heavy traffic, noise, and demand for parking, highlighting all the more the need to plan such neighbourhoods in ways that link to sustainable transportation.   

The 15-minute city concept (also sometimes described in terms of 10-minutes or 1-minute, or as nearby towns) is not a wholly new idea in the Nordic countries, but it has gained traction in recent years. Several recent studies have explored the concept in Oslo (e.g., Di Marino et al., 2023; Akrami et al., 2024) and in Swedish cities (e.g., Elldér, 2024). Akrami et al. (2024), highlighting the work of Di Marino et al. (2023), note that, while the inner urban area of Oslo already largely abides by the principles of the 15-minute city, the success of the model beyond the city centre depends, in part, on the distribution of work. “Supporting increased remote working (from home, co-working spaces, etc.) could be a way to strengthen Oslo as a 15-minute city…” (Akrami et al., 2024, 13).

Taking Oslo (and Lisbon) as case studies, Di Marino et al. (2023) explore whether new working spaces, such as co-working spaces and libraries, play a role in promoting sustainable urban development models like the 15-minute city concept. The researchers found that new working spaces in cities were not evenly distributed, indicating that residents are limited in their options to work remotely (but not from home) in the same neighbourhood in which they live. However, the researchers suggest that planners and decision-makers can incorporate co-working and other remote working spaces (libraries, cafés, etc.) into urban strategies as a way to revitalise both central and peripheral neighbourhoods into attractive towns that abide by the 10 or 15-minute city principles (Di Marino et al., 2023).

Elldér (2024) has also explored the evolution of the 15-minute city in Sweden. In a longitudinal study of 200 Swedish cities, he finds that regardless of scale, cities seeking to develop according to the 15-minute city ideal require reducing urban sprawl and increasing density and mixed land use, specifically by establishing housing developments where jobs are currently located. However, given the nature of remote working practices, it is also possible that the 15-minute city can be achieved through adding working spaces and other social functions into predominantly residential areas. A 2022 report from Helsinki looked at remote workable jobs at the district level. At the time of study, workplaces suitable for remote work were concentrated in the inner city and in a few major Southern and Western districts (Lönnqvist & Salorinne, 2022). This spatial imbalance suggests some potential unequal distribution at a more granular scale and could indicate where polycentricity is already pronounced. A Danish study has also pointed to the importance of services and meeting points as well as green space in disadvantaged areas (Haunstrup Christensen et al., 2024).

Other remote work research touches upon potential inequalities that can be exacerbated by remote work. Planners need to be aware of how, for example, creative-city inspired urban development approaches can widen gaps between white collar remote workers and service-industry workers (Lusoli, 2022) or how developing attractive residential areas for remote work can lead to socioeconomic class segregation in cities (Thulin et al., 2023). Gurstein (2023) and Greaves et al. (2024) also warn against the potential for cities to become further spatially segregated—with those who can work from home living in “amenity-rich neighbourhoods” while those who cannot are subjected to poorer neighbourhoods (for example, areas where walking and cycling are more possible and are able to provide greater opportunities for physical activity and health lifestyles). This concern is further emphasised by Axhausen (2022), who warns that, if people pursue less dense living environments with larger, affordable housing, policymakers will need to consider how this affects spatial equity: “movers might sort themselves by income and taste into problematic patterns” (86), and Akrami et al. (2024) warn that “planning based on accessibility studies should take into consideration the socio-economic inequalities within urban areas” (15). Florida et al. (2023) echo these concerns and ask whether such developments will be inclusive and public-oriented. Zenkteler et al. (2022-a) also argue that, while remote work could facilitate walkable neighbourhoods in urban village formats, remote work is not evenly distributed spatially, but concentrated in attractive, high-amenity areas, which has implications for urban inequalities. Based on their research in the city of Gold Coast (described as a lifestyle destination) the authors argue that spatial proximity is not enough to foster the transfer of knowledge and ideas that many remote workers seek, but that third spaces must be available. In a linked publication, researchers find that remote workers prefer built environment and design features that make collaboration and knowledge exchange possible. This has implications for local neighbourhood centres which may involve collaboration between owners and tenants (Zenkteler et al., 2022-b).

There is also a discussion of the potential of remote work to assist in revitalising existing communities and supporting new communities in distressed areas (Gurstein, 2023). Florida et al. (2023) foresee a limited remote work effect at the inter-metro scale. However, they warn that regional inequality will not be addressed through remote work but needs continued policy attention. Denham et al. (2023) investigate the potential to revitalise suburbs in Melbourne, Australia, based on remote work opportunities of populations. They find correlations between concentrations of people that are able to work remotely and suburban liveability and socioeconomic advantage. The authors conclude that, whereas remote work has the potential to revitalise suburbs, it also could add to differences between advantaged and disadvantaged neighbourhoods, and policy should address spatial disadvantage. According to the authors planning in disadvantaged areas should include public transport that supports links between housing and employment at the suburban level, and improved amenities such as access to green spaces and high-quality mixes of shopping and services that can be reached by walking.

While many of these studies discuss the potential of remote work on compact urban forms from various international contexts, the research provides relevant insights for Nordic cities and regions who also stand to benefit from steering development in these directions while taking into account the potential inequalities if these models are not applied in balanced ways. Within Nordregio’s Remote work and multilocality post-pandemic project, spatial models like polycentricity or the 15-minute city have not emerged as key topics. In part, this is because such plans or strategies for compact urban forms have pre-dated the pandemic, and the topics of previous reports have not covered the spatial component in depth or lacked data to do so at the time of study. However, the lack of discussion around these spatial models in the case studies for smaller towns or rural areas could also suggest that planners have not yet linked remote working practices to these kinds of spatial implications.