The Compact City Fallacy

The world has been urbanizing for centuries (United Nations 2001; United Nations Centre for Human Settlements [1996] 2000). While some scholars note a decline in the significance of space and distance as the result of telecommunications advancements and globalization (Cairncross 2001), other thinkers point to the continuing, if not increasing, importance of proximity and multiple benefits of urban agglomeration economies (Sassen 2001; Scott 2001; Castells 1996, 2001; Mitchell 1999; Hall 1998). In between these two poles, what occurs is massive migration to metropolitan areas and decentralization within metropolises. Concentrating people and activities in urban areas confers advantages, yet given the choice and resources to exercise it, many locate in the sprawling metropolitan periphery instead of the denser urban core. This paradox between urban desirability and suburban livability is one theme of this essay. Despite many great efforts over the generations, this paradox has yet to be adequately resolved. Recent attempts to halt sprawl and improve urban livability have been made by compact city, smart growth, healthy community, and new urbanist advocates. To the extent that these advocates have been successful, it is because they have tapped into widespread dissatisfaction in American community building in the last several decades and have provided alternatives. However, how effective are these options in attaining a deep-seated shift in community building toward truly sustainable communities? Another promising approach, sustainable urban development, runs counter to the principles of the compact city in one fundamental respect: the primacy of process over form. This article assesses available empirical evidence as to whether compact cities represent a form of sustainable development. It also analyzes the theoretical underpinnings of sustainability. By examining factual evidence and intellectual foundations regarding sustainability, we place ourselves in a better position to accurately judge whether compact cities are more sustainable than noncompact cities. This article is organized into six sections. The first section, titled The Compact City, reviews empirical evidence surrounding the question of whether contemporary compact cities are sustainable. While there is ample literature on compact cities, it is deficient in two ways. First, there is no accepted definition for the compact city, despite its common usage. Second, the little evidence that does exist regarding the sustainability of compact cities is equivocal. This first section remedies the first deficiency with a preliminary characterization of the compact city and goes on to weigh the factual evidence on its sustainability.