Transportation and Land Use

Peter Gordon and Harry W. Richardson

No 8648, Working Paper from USC Lusk Center for Real Estate

Abstract: While several reports (e.g. Lebergott, 1993; Moore and Simon, 1999; Cox and Alm, 1999) document stunning advances in health, longevity and material well being and while it is no longer disreputable to credit the market economy, most current discussions of cities and land use see only market failures. A representative example is a recent magazine article by Katz and Bradley (1999), ominously named "Divided We Sprawl." It blames most U.S. social ills on how cities are growing (especially suburbanization) and supports draconian interventions by politicians and planners to set the world right. Indeed, a flurry of growth management measures either passed by or being presented to voters across the land are unabashedly replacing markets with planning interventions. It is difficult to understand how acknowledged market successes and renascent statism can coexist side-by-side.

Keywords: Transportation; Land Use; Health; Markets (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2000
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://lusk.usc.edu/sites/default/files/working_papers/wp_2000_1005.pdf (application/pdf)

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:luk:wpaper:8648

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Paper from USC Lusk Center for Real Estate Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Steins ().