Comment on Karen A. Danielsen, Robert E. Lang, and William Fulton's “Retracting suburbia: Smart growth and the future of housing”

Gregg Easterbrook

Housing Policy Debate, 1999, vol. 10, issue 3, 541-547

Abstract: Hypocrisy abounds in the smart growth movement. Many of its biggest advocates maintain the sprawling suburban lifestyle that the movement seeks to curtail. Smart growth is just the latest label for an exclusionary impulse that divides those Americans who already are enjoying the good life from those seeking to obtain it. Furthermore, smart growth threatens to derail one of the key engines of the national economy: suburban sprawl. Despite its negative image, sprawl is efficient and reflects consumer preference. In a nation where so much developable land remains, sprawl is hardly the environmental threat it is made out to be. The real threat is that the nation might adopt policies that halt development and frustrate the millions of people who seek their share of the suburban dream.

Date: 1999
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10511482.1999.9521342 (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:houspd:v:10:y:1999:i:3:p:541-547

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RHPD20

DOI: 10.1080/10511482.1999.9521342

Access Statistics for this article

Housing Policy Debate is currently edited by Tom Sanchez, Susanne Viscarra and Derek Hyra

More articles in Housing Policy Debate from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().