My little dream for Malta

I was particularly struck by the article in the Times of Malta penned by James Cummings, entitled ‘Climate change will hit Malta hard’ (September 7). According to Stefano Moncada, the director of the UoM Islands and Small States Institute, “Malta should look at nature for inspiration”.

Moreover, Prof. Simone Borg was put on record in the same article as having said: “More and more crucial... every tree is precious”.

What these experts appropriately claim is part of a concept which I had referred to as biophilic design in this same newspaper just over one year ago.

Additionally, I have also read articles in Times of Malta how Malta desperately needs a new dream. Dreams very often stem from challenges. The dream of having Maltese as our national language, the dream of Malta being independent, the dream of Malta becoming a republic, the dream of having Malta become a member of the European Union. These were all ambitious political projects stemming from a dream.

I have spent more than half of my life in Malta, so by all means, Malta remains in my heart, my Heimat, as Heidegger would call it. I am using a German term to describe the essence of my meaningful attachment to where I was raised. My other Heimat is Germany, where I meaningfully live. In fact, one may still be attached to one’s homeland, since one may have more than one Heimat.

Indeed, I have been missing from Malta for the past 16 years. Every time I fly back to Malta from Germany the airplane hovers for a few seconds over parts of our islands. While I would never try to compare my two Heimaten for obvious reasons, I must admit that I feel sad with what I see when I fly over Malta: an aggressive urbanisation of nearly every square metre of the island.

Some of the architecture looks respectful and fitting to the rest. Some other architecture appears to be much less so. I cannot imagine how those living in the latter are truly dwelling in harmony with their surroundings. Perhaps their experience on the ground is different to my intuition. The overall impression is that there is very little to nearly no greenery at all.

I know that this aerial impression is confirmed by many, publicly and privately, complaining that this state of affairs is extended to the whole island. The redeeming feature is the sea that surrounds it, otherwise Malta is becoming one urban sprawl, and an aesthetically and existentially painful one.

I would wish to see a different view from the plane- Alan Xuereb

This to my eyes is a very huge challenge that the Maltese are facing daily. The Times of Malta article spells out in what ways the current state of the Maltese dwelling space is challenged and how it will be even more severely challenged in the future. Nevertheless, the same article also explains in concrete terms (all puns intended) what can, and should be, done. We need a tangible dream.

My dream, stemming from this challenge, is quite simple. I would wish to see a different view from the plane. This simple personal dream has enormous existential and political implications for all. Firstly, it would mean that something like an ‘aggressive afforestation’ project from north to south of the Maltese islands, would have to be implemented.

As I had written in another article a few years back this would delight environmentalists and “all the rest including hunters, trappers and birdwatchers for diverse reasons”.

This is of course here being put as an idea but in order for it to become a vision it needs a series of studies which would inspire not only the obvious building, touristic, environmental and infrastructural sectors but all other sectors, including the economy and energy fields. Which would then need a paradigm shift to work around the new reality.

More specifically, the boost of biophilic design would be a business opportunity for developers and would keep the population healthier physically and mentally. A sense of well-being would be politically beneficial.

Furthermore, it would actually put into practice the notion of the common good, understood as the coordination between individual well-being and the well-being of the collective.

This is not to say that this is the only change that would be needed. There is also the actual challenge, and an eventual dream, of gradually eliminating the immoral ugliness of what is being built on a daily basis. It is indeed paradoxical that our ancestors had fewer tools and very little access to technology, and yet they produced beautiful buildings.

This dream requires a few simple principles that need to be elaborated on by technical and planning experts. The first principle is to interact but attempt not to interfere with nature – interfere the least with nature. The second principle – if you need to interfere with nature then interfere by (i) integrating that interference into nature or (ii) integrating nature into that interference.

The third principle – if you really need to interfere with nature and cannot integrate as in (i) or (ii) then build something which is fitting and magnificent. Definitely not a concrete box. Isn’t this in line with Moncada’s “nature-based solutions”?

My humble dream implies a change of heart, a change of mentality, which as the abovementioned experts tell us, should result in “behavioural changes” vis-à-vis how we perceive and plan construction in Malta.

This dream, perhaps, also implies the next political project Malta yearns for. “We need to do this immediately.”

Alan Xuereb is the author of the political philosophy book Riflessjonijiet dwar il-Ġid Komuni (Reflections on the Common Good).