Do economists have anything to contribute to the debate on urban sprawl? (and would anbody listen to them if they did?)

Paul Gottlieb

Forum for Social Economics, 1999, vol. 28, issue 2, 51-64

Abstract: This essay explores reasons for the relative shortage of work by economists on the subject of urban sprawl. I argue that a correct economic understanding of the sprawl issue is difficult to communicate. Meanwhile, a simplified caricature of economic thinking on sprawl has emerged. It argues that decentralized, low-density development has been chosen by the “free market”, therefore the problem signified by the word sprawl does not exist. This argument, made in the name of economics but not always by economists, has served to polarize the detabe as much as to enlighten it. I propose an alternative understanding of the economics of sprawl that provides common ground for debate among economists, planners, and politicians.

Date: 1999
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF02833983 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:fosoec:v:28:y:1999:i:2:p:51-64

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RFSE20

DOI: 10.1007/BF02833983

Access Statistics for this article

Forum for Social Economics is currently edited by William Milberg, Dr Wolfram Elsner, Philip O'Hara, Cecilia Winters and Paolo Ramazzotti

More articles in Forum for Social Economics from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().