Urban Sprawl: Lessons from Urban Economics

strong sentiment against the phenomenon known as “urban sprawl” has emerged in the United States over the past few years. Critics of sprawl argue that urban expansion encroaches excessively on agricultural land, lead-ing to a loss of amenity benefits from open space as well as the depletion of scarce farmland resources. The critics also argue that the long commutes gen-erated by urban expansion create excessive traffic congestion and air pollution. In addition, growth at the urban fringe is thought to depress the incentive for redevelopment of land closer to city centers, leading to decay of downtown areas. Finally, some commentators claim that, by spreading people out, low-density suburban development reduces social interaction, weakening the bonds that underpin a healthy society.1 To make their case, sprawl critics point to a sharp imbalance between urban spatial expansion and underlying population growth in U.S. cities. For example, the critics note that the spatial size of the Chicago metropolitan area grew by 46 percent between 1970 and 1990, while the area’s population grew by only 4 percent. In the Cleveland metropolitan area, spatial growth of 33 percent occurred over this period even though population declined by 8 per-cent.2 Similar comparisons are possible for other cities