Is arch support so important/necessary because of manmade flat surfaces?

[Hampshire]

As soon as toddlers can walk it seems the focus on shoes is to have good arch support. Even going into adulthood with athletic and work shoes the emphasis is to have some sort of arch support. Without it you start to get foot pains like plantar fasciitis.
But doesn’t this seem contrary to the natural state of the foot? Humans evolved without footwear so you’d think the foot would evolve to best support us witout any artificial support.
Or is it a case of humans creating unnaturally flat hard surfaces for us to walk on which we have had to adapt to through the use of arch support? Whereas if you were always walking on uneven sand/grass/dirt/rock you would probably never need arch support?

[mutantmoose]

I think you might be right. The wiki page on flat feet links to this study (pdf) of children in India which says:

We analysed static footprints of 2300 children between the ages of four and 13 years to establish the influence of footwear on the prevalence of flat foot.

The incidence among children who used footwear was 8.6% compared with 2.8% in those who did not (p < 0.001). Significant differences between the predominance in shod and unshed children were noted in all age groups, most marked in those with generalised ligament laxity. Flat foot was most common in children who wore closed-toe shoes, less common in those who wore sandals or slippers, and least in the unshod. Our findings suggest that shoe-wearing in early childhood is detrimental to the development of a normal longitudinal arch.