View Full Paper

Conceptual Foundations and Contextual Understanding of Urban Sprawl

The phrase "urban sprawl" is used to characterize the low-density development that commonly surrounds major cities, requiring heavy reliance on personal automobiles for getting about. Most people believe that the absence of city planning is to blame for suburban expansion, but in reality, people choose to move to more rural areas so they may feel closer to nature (). The desire to live in harmony with nature, while admirable, can lead to the loss and fragmentation of natural habitats (). With increasing distance from cities, where jobs are available and the suburban American dream can be funded, comes the relative peacefulness of low-density home complexes among the remnants of once coherent woods. It seems inevitable that urban sprawl will continue to expand until the environmental and social costs of sprawl outweigh the apparent advantages of living on the outskirts of cities. Using Atlanta, Georgia as a case study, this article analyzes the effects of urban development on forest acreage and fragmentation in the United States. Predicting future forest acreage and fragmentation trends, as well as considering the genetic and ecological ramifications of human impacts on future forest patterns, requires an understanding of the effects of urban sprawl on the woods around major cities like Atlanta.

Environmental Consequences of Urban Expansion on Ecosystems and Natural Resources

Many environmentally delicate regions, such as those along the shore or in the mountains, have already seen the effects of urbanization. Particularly vulnerable is the Mediterranean coast, one of the world's biodiversity hotspots, where growing urban water usage is vying with agricultural irrigation needs. The overexploitation of groundwater for golf course irrigation in Spain has contributed to the incursion of saline water into the aquifer, exacerbating the situation. The low-lying populace increasingly use the mountain regions as a natural resource for their own "urban consumption," and this is exacerbated by the growing number of people taking day trips from major cities to the mountains.

European urban sprawl in recent decades has happened largely on redeveloped farmland. Since agricultural grounds next to existing metropolitan areas are also excellent for urban expansion, it is common for urban development and agriculture to compete for the same territory. There are serious consequences for biodiversity when farmland is abandoned because many species, especially birds, lose their habitats. Growing cities also pose a danger to prime farmland, forcing farmers to relocate their operations to less fertile, more inaccessible places that require additional resources such as water and fertilizer, with an increased risk of soil erosion.

When land is used for urbanization rather than agriculture, it undergoes profound changes in structure and composition that impair the soil's ability to carry out its vital activities, such as water retention and nutrient provision. As a result, soil functions are impaired, water permeability is lost due to soil sealing, biodiversity in affected areas declines, and the soil's potential to act as a carbon sink is diminished. It is believed that 52 percent of the soil in Germany's urban regions is impermeable, or the equivalent of 15 m2 per second over a decade. Furthermore, precipitation that falls on sealed areas is highly contaminated due to tire abrasion, dust, and high concentrations of heavy metals that, when discharged into rivers, harm the hydrological system.

Implications of Urban Sprawl on Human Health and Quality of Life

Combining low population density with spatial dispersion, urban sprawl increases the length of commutes while slowing the adoption of more environmentally friendly means of transportation. Greater use of resources like energy, land, and soil is a clear consequence of cities' increasingly expanding layout, making this issue of paramount importance. Both urban and rural areas are under threat from these developments, as they contribute to the production of greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change and to the elevation of air and noise pollution to levels that frequently exceed agreed-upon human safety standards. As a result, urban sprawl has several negative repercussions that lower people's standard of living.

If neighborhoods are not conducive to walking and biking, residents will have to rely on automobile transportation to get to work, the grocery store, the park, a friend's house, a play date, and other destinations. As a result, people become less active. People living in large, spread-out counties were more likely to be overweight and take shorter, more leisurely walks. A sedentary lifestyle is associated with an increased risk of death from all causes, heart disease, and various cancers. Low fitness levels have an impact similar to that of metabolic disorders such as diabetes, high cholesterol, and high blood pressure.

Economic and Social Impacts of Urban Expansion on Communities and Infrastructure

Sociologically speaking, urban sprawl causes higher income-based residential segregation. As a result, it has the potential to deepen existing gaps between city dwellers of different socioeconomic backgrounds. Suburban and peri-urban regions are populated mostly by families of middle class and above, who have the disposable income, education, and other resources to live comfortably in the suburbs and the periphery. However, for certain demographics, such as the elderly and the young, living in the suburbs can be a totally different experience and might decrease opportunities for social connection due to mobility and budget constraints. A sizable portion of urban society is barred from even considering such neighborhoods as a possible place to call home.

The proper functioning of urban settings depends on the growth of public transportation and solutions based on the development of mass transit networks and the supply of alternative mobility options, both of which are hampered by urban expansion. These inferences are supported by data from Munich and Stockholm, where effective management of urban sprawl and the resultant rise in population densities has increased the popularity of public transportation and slowed the expansion of the automobile market.

Social capital, which may be described as the connectedness of a group established via actions like social networking and civic involvement, as well as attitudes like trust and reciprocity, is one indicator of social sustainability. There is evidence that suggests a correlation between higher levels of social capital and positive health outcomes, such as lower rates of heart disease. However, social capital has been dwindling recently. One possible factor is the extended travel time required to get to and from work in today's large, spread-out cities. In 2011, the Chicago area had among the longest commute times in the country, at over two hours longer than it did in 1982. The typical round-trip for them is 34 minutes.

Societal Responses to Urban Sprawl and Its Environmental Implications

The truth about metropolitan Atlanta has always been more intricate. African Americans have benefited greatly from Atlanta's economic and cultural opportunities, but many whites have fled to the city's northern suburbs to escape the high violence and low wages they have experienced in the south. The suburbanization of every U.S. city is heavily influenced by racial dynamics. Perhaps its significance is amplified in Atlanta as a result of the city's rich cultural heritage, unique topography, and long history.

Recent years have seen both positive and negative changes in the city's racial climate. Over the course of the 1980s and 1990s, a sizable portion of the black population migrated to the suburbs, often settling in areas of extreme wealth. Furthermore, there appears to be widespread backing for neighborhood integration among both black and white people in the Atlanta area. Almost all blacks were eager to move into an integrated area, and roughly two-thirds of whites said they would be comfortable, or very comfortable, living in a community where blacks made up at least one-third of the population in 1993. These numbers are better than what other cities' polls have shown.

Political Drivers and Governance Structures Influencing Urban Expansion Patterns

William B. Hartsfield, mayor of Atlanta for most of the 1940s and 1950s, famously said, "The secret of our prosperity is that we stretch a red carpet out for every newcomer that comes in with two strong hands and some money." This spirit of aggressively courting new business is alive and well in modern Atlanta and is likely a major contributor to the city's booming economy. Researchers have shown that the tight relationships between Atlanta's political leaders and the business sector over the past few decades are responsible for the city's pro-growth policies.

The regional political setup has helped the pro-growth policies of Atlanta's leadership. Since the entire area is located inside the same state, there are no conflicting land-use regulations from neighboring states to slow development. Local political conditions are also beneficial to sprawl. Despite the state of Georgia's exceptionally small counties, there is little variation in zoning and property tax regulations within the Atlanta area. Atlanta's elasticity allows for expansion in all directions.

Reference List

No references provided.