 And I'd now like to ask Richard Sennett, my dear colleague Richard Sennett, to really give us some observations that he's going to make on what's gone on in the last day and a half, two days. But particularly, I know he's going to talk about inequality and social isolation, Richard. Thank you very much. Do you mind if I sit? It's been a long conference. I want to just draw together some themes, if I can, of this very, very rich meeting the last couple of days. And I guess I just want to touch very briefly on four topics. One is the question of Hong Kong as it relates to the other cities that are part of the urban age experiment. The second is a little on what's urban about inequality. The third is I want to talk a little about something rather more hopeful, which is what we can do to design, to counter social isolation. And fourth, I'd like to offer a purely personal comment about the fact that medicine, believe it or not, I offered this to the doctors here, is a foundation of modern urban planning. And I'll explain that to you very briefly at the end. Let me say about Hong Kong, that it's been, for those of us who are new to the city, this is, you've been wonderfully explicative about the place you live in. And this is, we've come to you for the first time when the urban age is focused on a theme. We have before, we've done surveys of cities that we've gone to without focusing on a particular theme. So, this is the first time we've tried to use you as a laboratory for thinking about issues in general of public health and the health of cities. And I think one of the issues that came up in my mind about this is really how representative is Hong Kong's approach to questions of public health or, no, I don't want to use the word representative, but how could we relate the ways in which you've dealt with public health here to, for instance, questions of dealing with public health in Africa or again in London. So, there is, and I think that's not a question we can adjudicate, it's something as this urban age process goes on that will get clearer and clearer to us. My own sense is that you are in a rather unique position. The combination of this being a city and rapid, rapid evolution of the wealth combined with the kinds of problems that you're talking about here is a peculiar combination. Even in a city like London, we don't have quite the extremes that have appeared in the last few days. So, I think this may be, I may be wrong about this, but that this may be a very special case to open up this question about the health of cities, but also a very illuminating one. I want to say something second about inequality. It's a great theme that we've used to try and join the city and the domain of public health and just make some comments about what's urban about inequality as we know it today. It's actually a question that Professor Hussain opened up for us yesterday in saying that cities are creating new forms of inequality. It's not simply a transfer of older forms of rural poverty to the city. Sociologists, social theorists have spent centuries trying to define what we mean by an equality relative inequality, inequality of opportunity, inequality of condition and so on. In cities, and particularly in modern cities today, the, I think the accent on inequality is about inequality of access. That is what we're seeing as an urban regime that's coming into being in which access to resources becomes increasingly difficult, the farther down the economic and social ladder you go. If you think about Balzac's Paris in the beginning of the 19th century, poverty and wealth are cheek by jowl. So is in Dickens, London. There's a kind of visibility of poverty and wealth and of inequality, which is disappearing in the modern city and this is an issue that's come up for us in various ways. It's the issue that Sasuke Sasan raised in one way yesterday by talking about eviction that is getting out of sight people who are in need. It's in my bailiwick, which is a bailiwick of urban labor, something that we've begun to study in quite great detail, which is a gradual paralysis of urban fortunes so that processes of upward social mobility are diminishing, something going on for the last 30 years, that access to a career of upward social mobility is less today than it was for working classes a hundred years ago. What strikes me about this, the notion that access is harder, that even the presence of difference is something that is becoming a less tangible phenomenon. What strikes me is that labor process seems to be reproducing itself in the field of public health and that's something we might want to look about at why that should be that the process of exclusion in this peculiar way or expulsion is something that would have spread from the domain of political economy into the domain of the provision of health and I think that's an issue we want to dwell on long enough to this conference is over. One thing that we have done the last few days is to, in order to approach that issue, to stress the infra-urban kinds of comparisons of inequality rather than comparing cities on gross one city to another. This is a theme that came up yesterday morning in both about healthcare and about labor so that part of the kind of methodological way that we would work is not to say is Hong Kong healthier than London but what are the ways in which the parts of each of these cities relate to each other and connected with that, that kind of infracity comparison is the issue that was brought up by Professor Rodwin yesterday which is rather than trying to detail simply a system of inputs, we want to look at ways in which performance actually operates in different parts of the city. This is also an issue for us obviously in London. When we look at resource investment in terms of inequality, we often get a very misleading picture, that is we see that lots of resources, official resources may be invested in a particular problem but given the way in which inequality works, the access to those resources may become very, very scarce so that the outcomes are very disappointing in terms of the resources put towards them. One way that this problem has been formulated classically in urban studies is by the great urbanist friend of mine, Alphie Lefebvre is what he calls the right to the city, the Dois de la Ville and his notion was that inequality is an immemorial phenomenon but that the access to the city even to small bits or parts of what it contains, the right to the city in that sense is a peculiarly modern phenomenon, that is that access to the city, to being a participant in the city is diminishing and this is what a long analysis of how that was happening in Europe, I think we've had a much more than European context, had a discussion of that the last few days. I'd like to say something that, secondly about the phenomenon of social isolation and what could be done about it. We've heard today by many of the speakers this afternoon the belief, not belief but data and strong conviction, that the quality of life in cities is very much contingent on remedying issues of social isolation, both in the extreme case of people who are prone to suicide but in the much more compelling and general case of the elderly. And it's an issue I touched on yesterday when I talked about social competence which is a personal skill required to be able to enter into the life of the city and avoid isolation and communities. In the practice of urban design, this is an issue that sorted it out self out in three ways. The first is, and it comes back to the discussion just been having in the previous session, the seeming contradiction of designing informal space. If you've ever been in a British pub and I assume most of you have been, you are looking at a design for an informal social space which deals with the question of social isolation. Not beautifully but effectively. Unal skill required to be able to enter into the life of the city and avoid isolation and communities. In the practice of urban design, this is an issue that sorted it out self out in three ways. The first is, and it comes back to the discussion just been having in the previous session, the seeming contradiction of designing informal space. If you've ever been in a British pub and I assume most of you have been, you are looking at a design for an informal social space which deals with the question of social isolation. Not beautifully but effectively. Most of the, in the design, in the work of urban design now, rather than trying to find designated places for designated activities. The thrust of design is to provide, if you like, the DNA for people to practice a more informal sociability which might shade over into their family lives as it did with pubs. Classic English pub, as the whole family goes down to the pub, mom and dad smoke, they drink beer, the kids run a muck, they make cages, a cigarette themselves. It's a family together out in public and the social spaces is not rule governed and it's not monofunctional. And the holy grail of a lot of urban design today is how to put in the physical rudiments to have that kind of informality that overcomes social isolation. The second issue in designing spaces which are not socially isolated has to do with something Ricky alluded to a little earlier which is the design of fabric. And here I have been very struck by the problem raised from this morning on and of course from our tours of the city about Hong Kong which is a vertical city with spaces between isolated buildings. The kind of social fabric that allows people to be sociable with strangers or to feel that they are not in an isolated condition. It's not a failure of urbanism in Hong Kong. This is a profound problem of all modern urbanism which is how to make the vertical dimension social. We know much more about how to deal with horizontal space in terms of making fabric than it's people as well as buildings together. But we know much less about how to use vertical structures in a sociable way. And I'm just very struck when I walk around Hong Kong as by the discussion this morning that the notion of privileging the vertical over the streetscape may be a profound issue in reinforcing isolation, particularly the isolation of people who are at a different unequal social and economic level. And that gets down to very, very nitty gritty issues for design such as what's the effect of the elevator on social sociability. If you can step off at every single floor directly from an elevator, you know neither who's above you or who's below you. Whereas in a building that you walk up and down in you have a more sociable experience of fabric and connection. The third issue that's come up that we've talked about a lot is the relationship between density and overcrowding. And this has a reflection in urban design about community. In principle, density is a sociable phenomenon and overcrowding is an unsociable phenomenon. And the trick is how to go about promoting the one and avoiding the other. One of the things we've been doing at the London School of Economics for the last decade is looking at different models of density. We did a study for instance, nearly a decade ago, of how to achieve the same densities by three or four different kinds of forms, one mixed use of horizontal and vertical, one purely tower and one the classic row London terrace form. There are lots of ways to achieve density. And there are ways to achieve very high levels of density without overcrowding. And okay, so I won't go into that. I want to make just a final comment then about doctors and city planners, which most doctors who probably don't know. When Harvey discovered the principle of the circulation of blood, this was automatic almost within a generation, became the model for urban design. That is that a living city like a living body should have free flowing circulation. The very notion that streets are one way streets was deduced from the circulation of blood in the arteries and veins. That is to say that the medical knowledge about the health of the body was something that was almost immediately taken into urban design about the way to make a city. And in the last 100 years, that kind of organic thinking about space has disappeared. And what's replaced the organic understanding of cities is something that's much more mechanical. Embodied by the Corbusier plan was on which Ricky showed us at the beginning of the conference. So since I've written a lot about this, I'm very interested in it, but I would say that this is maybe a kind of knowledge thing that we want to recover, which is understanding what makes a healthy body or a body alive might help us, as it did in the 17th century, understand what makes a healthier living city. This is sort of black cloth.