Urban Evolution Beyond the Concrete: How Religion, Politics, and War Sculpt the Genetic Landscape of Cities
Urbanization stands as one of the most transformative forces shaping both human civilization and natural ecosystems over the last four centuries. More than half of the world’s population now inhabits cities—complex habitats engineered by human hands, radically distinct from natural environments. These urban landscapes not only modify the physical terrain but also create novel selective regimes that drive evolutionary changes in the organisms dwelling within them. Traditionally, studies of urban evolutionary biology have concentrated on tangible environmental factors such as habitat fragmentation, chemical pollution, altered resource distributions, and microclimatic changes. Yet, beneath these visible influences lies a subtler, oft-overlooked constellation of social and political dynamics that mold the ecological and evolutionary trajectories of urban wildlife.
A pivotal synthesis published recently in Nature Cities by Carlen et al. (2025) argues convincingly that to fully understand urban evolution, researchers must incorporate the legacy of human beliefs, governance structures, and violent conflicts. Religion, politics, and war, the authors contend, are not peripheral backdrops but fundamental drivers that shape urban ecosystems and impose selective pressures on urban fauna. This emerging interdisciplinary framework calls for a dramatic rethinking of how environmental change is conceptualized in cities, underlining the social-political substrate underlying urban evolutionary processes.
Religious practices influence urban biodiversity in manifold and profound ways. Sacred spaces such as temples, cemeteries, and shrines often act as refugia for particular plant and animal species, preserving pockets of native biodiversity within otherwise hostile urban matrices. Moreover, ritualistic dietary restrictions and symbolic taboos can modulate human-wildlife interactions, thus indirectly steering evolutionary responses in species subject to hunting or commodification. For example, certain bird species may flourish or decline depending on cultural reverence or persecution shaped by religious doctrine, thereby feeding back into the genetic composition of urban populations.
Politics, as a force shaping urban form and function, sculpts the spatial distribution and quality of habitats available to urban wildlife. Urban planning decisions—zoning laws, green belt policies, infrastructure investments—reflect ideological priorities and governance regimes that mediate access to natural resources. Political marginalization or empowerment of particular communities influences local stewardship practices, maintenance of green spaces, and tolerance towards wildlife. Consequently, evolutionary pressures differ significantly across neighborhoods and districts subject to divergent political influences, thus creating a mosaic of selective environments within the same city.
Warfare and armed conflict impose some of the most dramatic forms of environmental upheaval, leaving enduring scars on urban ecosystems. Destruction of infrastructure, abandonment of areas due to displacement, contamination from weaponry, and post-conflict land-use changes shift selective regimes abruptly. Such perturbations can cause population bottlenecks, founder effects, or novel ecological niches that catalyze rapid evolutionary shifts. For instance, cities that have experienced war may harbor urban animal populations with unique genetic signatures reflective of these turbulent histories.
This integrative perspective compels a reassessment of the methodologies used in urban evolutionary research. It challenges researchers to incorporate historical and sociopolitical data, alongside genomic and ecological analyses, to untangle the complex drivers of urban biodiversity change. Longitudinal studies tracing the genetic makeup of urban populations in relation to documented political events or religious transformations can reveal causative links previously obscured by a narrow ecological focus.
Moreover, the article highlights the importance of interdisciplinary collaborations between biologists, urban planners, social scientists, and historians. Such partnerships can enrich data interpretation and foster holistic urban management policies that account for the multifaceted origins of urban evolutionary processes. For example, understanding that political conflict affects not only human communities but also urban wildlife could inform reconstruction efforts aimed at restoring ecological connectivity and resilience.
By synthesizing empirical evidence with theoretical frameworks, Carlen and colleagues offer testable hypotheses to propel the field forward. One proposed avenue is investigating whether urban species in politically stable and religiously diverse cities exhibit different evolutionary trajectories compared to those in conflict-ridden or homogenous socio-religious landscapes. Another is exploring how the cessation or intensification of armed conflicts alters selective pressures on urban organisms over generational timescales.
The implications extend beyond academic curiosity. Recognizing the social and political underpinnings of urban evolution can inform conservation strategies tailored to the unique cultural milieu of each city. It underscores that urban biodiversity conservation cannot be divorced from the human narratives embedded within the city fabric. Furthermore, insights into these dynamics hold promise for public health, as evolutionary adaptations of urban organisms—vectors included—may affect disease transmission and ecosystem services.
This pioneering work invites a paradigm shift. The organic interplay between human societies and urban nature is far more intricate than previously acknowledged. Cities are not mere assemblages of concrete and steel harboring fragmented wild spaces; they are living tapestries where ideology, governance, and conflict interlace with ecological forces to direct evolutionary outcomes. The organisms inhabiting them are thus co-authors in an ongoing evolutionary saga scripted by human sociopolitical legacies.
Yet, challenges remain. Incorporating such complex variables demands novel analytical tools capable of accounting for social history and spatial heterogeneity simultaneously. It necessitates embracing uncertainty inherent in political and religious flux and understanding that urban evolutionary trajectories may be as unpredictable as human societies themselves. Nonetheless, these hurdles are outweighed by the opportunity to achieve a more nuanced, predictive framework of urban biology.
Looking ahead, future research informed by this integrative perspective will likely uncover unanticipated patterns of adaptation and resilience. Insights derived could influence urban design, promoting environments that foster biodiversity and mitigate negative evolutionary consequences of human conflict and division. Equally, recognizing how evolutionary pressures reflect sociopolitical realities may galvanize public engagement, connecting urban residents more deeply to the living organisms sharing their city.
In sum, Carlen et al.’s review challenges the scientific community to transcend traditional ecological boundaries and embrace the profound interplay between human socio-political forces and biological evolution in urban settings. It opens new vistas for understanding how cities—our dominant habitat—shape life itself and underscores the inextricable link between human history and natural history in the Anthropocene epoch.
Subject of Research: The influence of religion, politics, and warfare on the environmental conditions and evolutionary biology of urban wildlife.
Article Title: Legacy effects of religion, politics and war on urban evolutionary biology.
Article References:
Carlen, E.J., Caizergues, A.E., Jagiello, Z. et al. Legacy effects of religion, politics and war on urban evolutionary biology. Nat Cities (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44284-025-00249-3
Image Credits: AI Generated
