Depaving, explained properly

The urban strategy that gives space back to soil, water and nature

In Genoa, they’ve started calling it a depaving revolution. The term is English and literally means “removing pavement”: taking away asphalt, concrete and other impermeable surfaces to give space back to natural soil, water and vegetation.

At first glance, it might seem like a marginal, almost symbolic practice. In reality, urban planners, climatologists and public administrators increasingly see it as one of the most effective strategies for adapting cities to climate change. Not because it solves every urban problem, but because it acts on many at once: extreme heat, flooding, biodiversity loss, quality of public space and even human health.

The question depaving raises is simple, almost provocative: what if part of our cities is simply over-paved?

How we ended up covering the ground

For much of the 20th century, asphalt was synonymous with progress. Wider roads, parking lots, industrial yards, paved school courtyards, fully surfaced squares. The goal was to make cities more functional, more hygienic and better suited to car mobility.

Today, however, those same surfaces reveal side effects that were long underestimated.

When soil is covered with impermeable materials, it loses most of its ecological functions: it no longer absorbs rainwater, no longer hosts biodiversity, no longer contributes to urban cooling and no longer acts as a natural filter, as living soil does. Researchers refer to this as soil sealing, one of the main forms of land consumption in Europe.

It’s an issue that becomes increasingly critical as European cities face more extreme weather events.

The first benefit is not greenery: it’s water

When we talk about depaving, we immediately think of trees and green areas. In reality, the first benefit is often invisible.

It’s what happens when it rains.

On asphalt, water cannot infiltrate the ground. It flows rapidly into drains, canals and rivers. During heavy rainfall, this increases flood risk and puts pressure on urban drainage systems.

Permeable soil, on the other hand, acts like a sponge: it retains part of the water, releases it slowly and helps recharge groundwater. This is why depaving is considered one of the most important Nature-Based Solutions for stormwater management.

In other words, it doesn’t just make cities greener. It makes them more capable of living with rain.

A response to urban heat islands

Then there’s the issue we all experience: heat.

Asphalt and concrete absorb large amounts of solar energy during the day and release it slowly at night. This is one of the mechanisms behind urban heat islands, where temperatures can be significantly higher than in surrounding rural areas.

Here, depaving becomes particularly relevant.

Removing impermeable surfaces creates space for living soil, vegetation and trees. And trees are not just decorative: through shading and evapotranspiration, they help lower local temperatures and improve urban comfort.

Depaving suggests a different perspective on urban forestry. Before planting trees, we need to create the conditions for them to live.

A tree surrounded by compacted soil and suffocated by asphalt cannot deliver the benefits we expect from it.

Biodiversity: nature returns where it seemed impossible

There is another, less visible but equally important aspect.

Depaved surfaces can become habitats for pollinators, birds, microorganisms and spontaneous vegetation. This is not necessarily about creating large parks. Often, transforming residual spaces, oversized parking lots or underused areas is enough to create small ecological corridors within the city.

For many urban planners, this is the real value of depaving: it doesn’t simply add greenery, it restores ecological functions to spaces that had completely lost them.

What does it cost?

There are no zero-cost interventions.

Removing asphalt and concrete involves demolition, material disposal, redesign, soil restoration and management of new green areas. In some cases, remediation or infrastructure adjustments are also required.

However, many economic analyses of climate adaptation suggest that the comparison should not be made with “doing nothing”.

The real question is: what does it cost not to act?

According to the European Environment Agency, climate-related damages in the EU exceeded €560 billion between 1980 and 2021. Adaptation strategies are increasingly evaluated by considering avoided damages, environmental benefits and public health impacts.

From this perspective, depaving can be seen as an investment in urban resilience.

Not a magic solution

It’s important to avoid excessive enthusiasm. Not all urban surfaces can be depaved. Cities still need roads, squares, infrastructure and paved public spaces. Depaving can also conflict with parking, accessibility and logistics.

There are maintenance costs and potential social resistance, especially when changes affect established habits. The challenge is not to remove asphalt everywhere.

It’s to understand where asphalt is no longer needed.

A possible path for European cities

It’s no coincidence that depaving is increasingly included in urban planning strategies across Europe.

From the Netherlands and Belgium to recent Italian initiatives, a shared vision is emerging: soil is not just a surface to build on, but a real ecological infrastructure. One that helps manage water, reduce heat, host biodiversity and improve quality of life.

For decades, we designed cities to push nature away. Today, we are discovering that many urban challenges require the opposite.

Perhaps depaving is simply this: recognizing that beneath the asphalt there is still a valuable resource.

Soil.

And that, before planting new trees, we should start making space for their roots.