Journal of Housing and the Built Environment (2005) 20:453–456 DOI 10.1007/s10901-005-9027-0

Ó Springer 2005

Book review Urban Sprawl in Western Europe and the United States, Harry W. Richardson and Chang-Hee Christine Bae (Eds.), Ashgate, 2004, 326 pp. Urban planning and environment Urban sprawl is a worldwide concern nowadays, as is ‘sustainable urban development.’ It is a pervasive issue in the United States, today translated into public policy on ‘smart growth.’ Likewise, the issue is important in Great Britain, as illustrated by the publication of the Rogers report on ‘Urban Renaissance.’ And it is also a re-emerging focus of public policy in France, where the recent legislation ‘Solidarite´ et Renouvellement Urbain’ favours urban renewal and recycling as opposed to peripheral expansion. It is thus stimulating to read a comparison of three countries, with some excursions to Switzerland, Austria and Korea. This book is interesting in many respects. First, it elaborates on the perception of urban sprawl. This phenomenon has had positive interpretations as well as negative ones. The very terms that are being used to describe it illustrate this divergence clearly and differentiate the standpoints prevailing in different parts of the world. The interpretation of sprawl in a given place obviously influences the policy that will be implemented there. The implications of the perception can be clearly identified in France or in Great Britain, for instance. ‘Anti-sprawl’ policy is rather recent on both sides of the Channel. The 18 chapters of the book fall into three parts. The first is about Great Britain, with which Korea has been paired. The second part is about France – the paired country is Switzerland. And the third part is about the United States. The first part, about Great Britain, leads directly into the main theme of the book: the contradiction between the political will – or at least its declaration – to fight sprawl, on the one hand, and the behaviour of households and developers/builders, on the other. According to Katie Williams, commenting on the literature on the topic, ‘the findings paint an overwhelmingly gloomy picture of the demand for the Urban Renaissance’ intended to favour urban recycling.

454

BOOK REVIEW

Several authors emphasise that the fight against urban sprawl impacts house prices. They point out that sprawl makes it necessary to subsidise housing for public-service workers, and more generally for low- and middle-income households, if some social mix is to be maintained. A chapter by Pennington introduces a controversial – and not completely convincing – point: the argument about market failures and internalisation cannot lead to an optimal city. Pennington prefers the ‘Hayekian’ line and the spontaneous order of individual decisions. Another interesting point is the potential contradiction that can arise between the will of the planners, on the one side, and financial and fiscal incentives, on the other. Such incentives are often designed to help the building industry, mainly by encouraging peripheral development, as opposed to urban recycling and renovation. Such a contradiction may be observed in several countries in Western Europe. In terms of theoretical analysis as well as of recommendations for public policy, we should take special note of one conclusion drawn by Mark Pennington. He asserts that ‘we need to move away from a static framework that assumes objective knowledge of urban land interactions towards a focus on the dynamic open-ended processes that are compatible with the underlying nature of urban systems.’ The second part, treating continental Europe, is focused on France. The central observation of this part is shared by most of the authors of the five constituent chapters. They agree that urban sprawl, whatever its precise definition, has been the main feature of urban development in France for about 20 years, albeit with a large time lag as compared with North America. This evolution may be observed in the whole country, obviously including the Paris region. In terms of public policy, after a long period of ‘urban containment’ policy during ‘les trente glorieuses,’ i.e., 1950–1980, the coincidence of deregulation, decentralisation and the changing tastes of households had boosted urban sprawl. Recent legislation, including the 2000 law about ‘solidarity and urban renewal,’ is well analysed by Denise Pumain. In terms of content, the law parallels the Rogers report in the UK, ‘Towards an Urban Renaissance.’ These policies also run parallel in terms of the limited effects they have had so far. In a comparative chapter, Jeffery Sellers rightly points out the key role played by ‘coalition building’ in the control of the urban forms that are being produced. He underlines the diversity of national institutions that continue to produce diverging patterns of urban development into the early 21st-century.

BOOK REVIEW

455

To some extent, Switzerland may be considered an exception in as much as urban sprawl remains very limited there. This is a result of a strong local land policy combined with physical constraints; there is a real scarcity of land that can be developed in this mountainous country. One of the most significant ‘models’ of urban sprawl may be found in the United States, which is the focus of the third part of the book. Urban sprawl and the importance of ‘suburbia’ are long-established features there. As opposed to several European countries, the antisprawl policy is rather recent. Trends towards more ‘command and control’ in development have appeared only recently, as analysed by Richardson and Gordon. A stimulating contribution by Chang-Hee Christine Bae brings in some substantial evidence to contradict the perception that immigration, by increasing population, reinforces urban sprawl. The statistical evidence provided in this chapter is quite helpful in undermining such an interpretation. Some anti-sprawl policies are being worked out in several areas, where they are known as ‘growth management’ or ‘smart growth policy.’ Positive outcomes have been booked in the State of Washington, for instance. Innovative policies of land use control in place there are analysed in a chapter by Donald Miller. However, the general consensus, represented for instance by Bertaud and Richardson, is rather sceptical about the efficiency of such policies. The sceptics stress the relationship between transit and density, and more precisely between low-density settlement patterns and a high reliance on the automobile. They conclude by stating that there is now some convergence between the United States and Western Europe. In the latter, the share of the automobile is rising despite Europe’s higher densities and very strong pro-transit policies. Meanwhile, ‘almost all US cities are caught in a low-density trap from which there is no escape via pipedreams, fantasies or even forceful policies.’ This scepticism about the efficiency of anti-sprawl policies is shared by most of the authors in this book, but the explanations vary from one country to another. The attitude of households, who rarely like density, is clearly one of the main explanations shared by most countries. The other major factor, well analysed in several parts of the book, relies on the location choice of enterprises, which are becoming more and more flexible. They have increased to some extent their

456

BOOK REVIEW

bargaining power with planning authorities, especially in countries where unemployment stays at a high level, and have gained influence in the decision-making process. Such a broad comparison – referring to different legal, economic and social frameworks – is difficult to draw. This might explain why the editors have foregone writing a concluding chapter. Yet we can add a comment based on an overview of the book as well as on the introduction. Our comment concerns some misunderstandings of the way in which urban sprawl, whatever its definition, is perceived in one part of the world as compared to the other part, and the resulting discrepancies in the interpretation of the related policies that are implemented. As the editors sum it up (p. 7), ‘United States planners have misunderstood what is happening in Europe, basing their judgment more on the compactness of the old European cities and the excellent intercity public ground transit service rather than on the statistical trends or on what is happening away from the large influence of public policies.’ This statement can obviously be reversed, with symmetrical arguments. Vincent Renard Directeur de recherches CNRS (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique) laboratoire d’ e´conome´trie de l’ Ecole, Polytechnique 1 rue Descartes 75005 Paris France E-mail: [email protected]