Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Planning Education and Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (6)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Neuman, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Compact City Fallacy

Michael Neuman

Texas A&M University

The problems of urban sprawl have long been recognized. The classic response to sprawl has been compact settlements of one form or another. Yet the profession’s modern origins stem from responses to overcrowding. Relieving crowding by letting in more light and air led to less compact urban form. This paradox remains unresolved despite recent compact city, smart growth, healthy community, and new urbanist efforts. This article reviews empirical data of whether compact cities are sustainable. Then, after reviewing current debates on sprawl and the compact city, it outlines the intellectual origins of sustainability and analyzes whether its theory supports the compact city hypothesis: compact is more sustainable than sprawl. It concludes that conceiving the city in terms of form is neither necessary nor sufficient to achieve the goals ascribed to the compact city. Instead, conceiving the city in terms of process holds more promise in attaining the elusive goal of a sustainable city.

Key Words: sustainability theory • urban planning • urban form • compact city • urban sprawl

Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 25, No. 1, 11-26 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0739456X04270466
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
S. Ganapati
Critical Appraisal of Three Ideas for Community Development in the United States
Journal of Planning Education and Research, June 1, 2008; 27(4): 382 - 399.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Planning LiteratureHome page
P. Troutman
Book Review: Boone, Christopher G., and Ali Modarres. 2006. City and Environment. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. 221 pp. $74.50 and $25.95. Hardcover and Paperback. ISBN: 1-50213-283-9 and 1-59213-284-7
Journal of Planning Literature, August 1, 2007; 22(1): 17 - 18.
[PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
M. Gunder
Sustainability: Planning's Saving Grace or Road to Perdition?
Journal of Planning Education and Research, December 1, 2006; 26(2): 208 - 221.
[Abstract] [PDF]