Smart Growth, Stupid Punditry

Chevron Scenic West guide, 1958 back cover
Originally uploaded by mark_potter_2000

There are many reasons why the economy is trashed right now. Mostly, in my opinion anyway, it has to do with 'destructive creation' (the phrase was in a headline in an article in the Financial Times, as opposed to Schumpeter's term "creative destruction" about the forces of innovation within capitalism).

There was a massive misuse of the nation's wealth in developing a land use and transportation paradigm around sprawl--outmigration from the center cities, deconcentration of land use, separation of uses, replacement of more optimal mobility paradigms (i.e., transit) with privately owned automobiles, all fueled by "cheap" gasoline.

As long as incomes and asset values go up, this can be maintained. But with a globally connected economy, somebody has to make goods at some point. Value has to reside outside of paper assets.

While people like the Heritage Foundation's Stuart Butler opine that Smart Growth policies of linking land use and transportation, density decisionmaking, etc., 'cost society' the reality is the opposite. See the op-ed "Dumping 'smart growth' is wise" from the Washington Times. The research of Newman and Kenworthy demonstrates conclusively that metropolitan regions with strong center cities and strong transit systems have greater overall income and wealth than metropolitan regions typical of the sprawl land use and transportation paradigm.

The problem with anti-"Smart Growth" people looking at the impact of smart growth policies on land use and housing pricing is that typically, SG policies are likely to be instituted in high-demand high-amenity possessing communities. And whether or not you have SG policies, land use prices will continue to rise in strong market regions.

(Flickr Image: Chevron Scenic West guide, 1958 back cover, by mark_potter_2000.)