In Barton's work Urban Form and Locality he raises an interesting topic of debate regarding dispersal versus concentration. This subject I find particularly interesting as both sides of the equation have varying pros and cons. Barton (2000) highlights that at one end of the scale you have dispersal of people moving into hamlets and villages, while others a continue to increase the concentration of individuals in dominant cities.
The Dispersal solution to urbanisation is one which on face value may seem like the most effective and sustainable way to ensure the longevity of the planet, however this type of living often eventuates in people travelling long distances to work and has an increasing effect on urban sprawl. This in turn place higher needs on infrastructure and also places higher pressure on natural ecosystems due to its effect on green field site. The positives to this type of model often comes back to the individuals that reside in such places, they are often more environmentally aware and make a conceded effort to live in a more sustainable way.
Concentration on the other hand is less damaging to the environment, in respect to its overall footprint. However with the densification and urbanisation of areas large amounts of pressure are placed on all of the infrastructure and resources in a localised area which can lead to the deification of an entire ecosystem.
Barton, H., 2000. Urban form and locality. In H. Barton, ed. Sustainable communities: the potential for eco-neighbourhoods. London: Earthscan, pp. 105-122.
No comments:
Post a Comment