Kalli-Benetos
Cities can save our planet: The case for large urban centres
July 6, 2005
Moving to large urban centres and adopting a city lifestyle and all the its advantages and may be the only way to save our planet from the ecological disasters the ever-increasing population is inflicting on it. The world's increasing population and its demand for land means we are quickly running out of wilderness and farmable land. Providing housing solutions for an increasing population while minimizing damage to the environment is a formidable challenge. Concentrating populations in large urban centers may offer the some solutions and with a rethinking of the way our cities are built, perhaps not too much of a compromise.
Most cities and its outskirts are founded on arable land that drew settlers initially to the site. Development of farmland that often surrounds cities for housing and industry often uses up a region's best farmland, making local regions dependent on costly imports and often destroying local agricultural economies. Much of our existing farmland surrounds our cities and is the first to go as cities expand in territory.
However, many see development of land as a cause and effect of economic growth and something that indicates and adds to a better quality of life. Land development may lead to short term economic gains, but continuing to develop land without considering the long term impacts of losing local agricultural customs and economies and being increasingly dependant on imports will inevitably lead to a diminished quality of life.
Farmers watching the encroachment of developments upon arable land, are often forced to expand into wilderness spaces, critically dimishing the space and diversity of habitats available to wildlife, and devastating forests that are obliterated to make room for livestock and farming.The destruction of natural habitats reduces enviroments' natural capacities to filter water from runoffs, prevent soil erosion and other natural or human-induced ecological damage.
The idealized "cottage with a large yard driveway and multi car garage" -style housing developments, use large amounts of land inefficiently. It has been noted that there is no difference in land use (the amount no longer available for farming or wildlife) between a population density of 1500 people per square kilometre and 6000 people per square kilometre.
Many argue that cities are crowded, congested and dirty and they prefer to live outside the city and travel to work each day. Cities allow for a greater concentration of people and the services they require. This is often what brings people living outside city centers to them everyday, requiring more roads, more car-related space consuming facilities and resulting in the same congestion and pollution people complain of. If people lived centrally they would travel less on a daily basis and be more inclined to use public transport or walk. This would diminish car traffic and its consequences greatly.
One reason for living outside of large urban centers often cited is that cities are dangerous — the large populations offer an anonymity that increases crime. In fact, it would appear that areas where there are great spaces between dwellings and other "privacy-ensuring" barriers, foster a greater anonimity than the proximity offered by a densely populated neighbourhood where people walk and meet in neighbourhood grocery stores and other shared amenities. And knowing your neighbours makes a neighbourhood safer.
The possibility for a greater population density is an option to slow down the deterioration of our environment and eradication of farmland that is vital to our survival, while retaining the cultural and community-building opportunities offered by living in proximity with one another. Greater concentrations of people means less developed land area, not less development. It is the shape of our development that needs to be rethought. With proper urban planning that focuses on accessible public transport and diverse neighbourhoods that combine dwellings and services, urban centers can offer the ecological, security and social benefits that many perceive only available in small towns.
Allowed to continue, increased housing and industrial development will use up arable land at an alarming rate, forcing farmers out of business or to expand into wilderness spaces, critically dimishing the space and diversity of habitats available to wildlife, and devastating forests. The problems that keep people from living in city centers will be exacerbated by the commutes to city centers that will get longer, demands for roads and car facilities greater until every piece of land that can be 'developed' will be paved over.