• Jeffrey K. H. Chan


One defining attributes of the city is propinquity. Propinquity, defined as the state of physical proximity to another individual, can also develop into relational propinquity by design. Through environmental design, individuals who are brought close together in propinquity can be regarded as neighbors, while those outside this circle are usually marked as strangers. In turn, and at least by the ethics of proximity, how neighbors and strangers are treated is likely to be different. This difference is morally significant and impinges on any city with cosmopolitan aspirations. What then is an ethic of proximity that can commensurate with the cosmopolitan aspirations in cities today? This chapter then relies on the story of the Good Samaritan as an intuition pump to initiate thinking on this question.


Propinquity Functional distance Moral distance Ethics of proximity Strangers 


  1. Abelson, R. (2005). Moral distance: What do we owe to unknown strangers? The Philosophical Forum, 36(1), 31–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Appiah, K. A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a world of strangers. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  3. Baum, A., & Valins, S. (1977). Architecture and social behavior: Psychological studies of social density. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Bauman, Z. (2016). Strangers at our door. Malden: Polity.Google Scholar
  5. Berry, M. (2014). Neoliberalism and the city: Or the failure of market fundamentalism. Housing, Theory and Society, 31(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bresnihan, P. (2016). The more-than-human commons: From commons to commoning. In S. Kirwan, L. Dawney, & J. Brigstocke (Eds.), Space, power and the commons: The struggle for alternative futures (pp. 93–111). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Chatterjee, D. K. (2003). Moral distance: Introduction. The Monist, 86(3), 327–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ellin, N. (1997). Shelter from the storm or form follows fear and vice versa. In N. Ellin (Ed.), Architecture of fear (pp. 11–45). Princeton: Princeton Architectural Press.Google Scholar
  9. Foster, S. R., & Iaione, C. (2016). The city as a commons. Yale Law & Policy Review, 34, 281–349.Google Scholar
  10. Gillette, H. (2010). Civitas by design: Building better communities, from the Garden City to the New Urbanism. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Glaeser, E. (2011). Triumph of the city: How our greatest invention makes us richer, smarter, greener, healthier, and happier. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  12. Glover, J. (2012). Humanity: A moral history of the twentieth century. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Goodfriend, W. (2009). Proximity and attraction. In H. T. Reis & S. Sprecher (Eds.), Encyclopedia of human relationships (pp. 1298–1299). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Greene, J. D. (2014). Moral tribes: Emotion, reason, and the gap between us and them. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  15. Halpern, D. (2005). Social capital. Malden: Polity.Google Scholar
  16. Ignatieff, M. (2014, January 31). The moral operating system of a global city: Los Angeles. Retrieved from
  17. Ignatieff, M. (2017). The ordinary virtues: Moral order in a divided world. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Imamichi, T. (2009). Introduction to eco-ethica. Lanham: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  19. Johansson, F. (2006). The medici effect: What elephants and epidemics can teach us about innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kant, I. (2006). Toward perpetual peace: A philosophical sketch. In P. Kleingeld (Ed.), Toward perpetual peace and other writings on politics, peace, and history (pp. 67–109). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Kleinfield, N. R. (2015, October 17). The lonely death of George Bell. The New York Times. Retrieved from
  22. Levinas, E. (2006). Ethics and infinity: Conversations with Philippe Nemo. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Løgstrup, K. E. (2007). Beyond the ethical demand. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  24. MacFarquhar, L. (2016). Strangers drowning: Impossible idealism, drastic choices, and the urge to help. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  25. McKinney, K. R., Gong, Y. Y., & Lewis, T. G. (2006). Environmental transmission of SARS at Amoy Gardens. Journal of Environmental Health, 68(9), 26–30.Google Scholar
  26. Nortvedt, P., & Nordhaug, M. (2008). The principle and problem of proximity in ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics, 34(3), 156–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. OECD. (2015). The metropolitan century: Understanding urbanization and its consequences. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  28. Painter, J. (2012). The politics of the neighbor. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 30, 515–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Purdy, J. (2015). After nature: A politics for the Anthropocene. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Reader, S. (2003). Distance, relationship and moral obligation. The Monist, 86(3), 367–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Reis, H. T. (2007). Propinquity. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Encyclopedia of social psychology (p. 709). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Sandercock, L. (2000). Negotiating fear and desire: The future of planning in multicultural societies. Urban Forum, 11(2), 201–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sandercock, L. (2003). Cosmopolis II: Mongrel cities of the 21st century. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  34. Scheffler, S. (2002). Boundaries and allegiances: Problems of justice and responsibility in liberal thought. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schrijver, L. (2015). Design for values in architecture. In J. van den Hoven, P. E. Vermaas, & I. van de Poel (Eds.), Handbook of ethics, values, and technological design: Sources, theory, values and application domains (pp. 589–611). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Scruton, R. (2017). On human nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Singer, P. (1972). Famine, affluence, and morality. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 1(3), 229–243.Google Scholar
  38. Singer, P. (2004). One world: The ethics of globalization (2nd ed.). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Tonkiss, F. (2003). The ethics of indifference: Community and solitude in the city. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 6(3), 297–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tonkiss, F. (2005). Space, the city and social theory: Social relations and urban forms. Malden: Polity.Google Scholar
  41. UN-Habitat. (2016). Urbanization and development: Emerging futures. World Cities Report 2016. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme.Google Scholar
  42. Wagner, J., & Watch, D. (2017). Innovation spaces: The new design of work. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  43. Wolf, M. (2016). Rethinking urban epidemiology: Natures, networks and materialities. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. Scholar
  44. Yeo, S. J., Ho, K. C., & Heng, C. K. (2016). Rethinking spatial planning for urban conviviality and social diversity: A study of nightlife in a Singapore public housing estate neighborhood. The Town Planning Review, 87(4), 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zheng, Y. P. (2017, September 5). Beijing’s well-to-do angry as housing law forces them to mingle with poorer neighbors. The South China Morning Post. Retrieved from

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey K. H. Chan
    • 1
  1. 1.Singapore University of Technology and DesignSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations