Urban Sprawl Analysis

Consumer preference for low-density urban development has taken a toll on the quintessential American city. In a “Decomposing urban sprawl,” Peiser identifies “…that consumer preference and technological innovations help explain suburbanization and decentralization.” By the same report, these factors are further augmented by …”market failures caused by all manners of subsidies…and that public goods such as open space tend to be under-supplied by the private market” (Peiser, 2001). This information makes it clear that “suburbanization and decentralization”—sprawl—is being propagated by the consumer; the very individuals who, as a result of their market preference, struggle with decreasing social cohesion are sustaining the problem. However, …show more content…
However, a disconnect in the way that individuals are viewing how cities facilitate community is nourishing this negative feedback loop. In “A Multilevel Systemic Model of Community Attachment: Assessing the Relative Importance of the Community and Individual Levels,” Flaherty and Brown test their theory that “…individuals become socialized over time within a community as they develop close personal relationships with and experience life alongside other community members, thus becoming more attached to the community.” It was further found that “individual-level social ties of any sort are positively associated with community attachment” (Flaherty and Brown, 2010). This showcases a problem blossoming in low-density development where, by the very nature of the development, it’s more difficult to construct social ties because of geographic distance and the dependence on personal automotive for transit. Without the individual-level social ties, people in low-density developments aren’t experiencing community attachment, and feel no remorse when abandoning the urban city …show more content…
al.,