tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/urban-consolidation-27065/articlesUrban consolidation – The Conversation2018-03-08T19:26:25Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/920342018-03-08T19:26:25Z2018-03-08T19:26:25ZThere’s more to the compact city than getting dense<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/209470/original/file-20180308-146700-t8cgbp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Ruth and Maurie Crow with a plan of their linear city.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Image courtesy of SEARCH Foundation</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Melbourne’s strategic planning history has largely overlooked the contribution of <a href="https://www.vu.edu.au/library/about-the-library/special-collections-archives/ruth-maurie-crow-collection">Ruth and Maurie Crow</a>. The Crows were early champions of functional mix and compact urban development. They didn’t eulogise lower-density suburban form, but equally didn’t advocate higher densities as necessarily humanising in themselves. </p>
<p>In their three-volume <a href="https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/10498626?q&versionId=22767541">Plan for Melbourne</a>, published from 1969-72, the Crows argued for compact urban development driven by spatial justice ambitions. Revisiting their work provides a counterbalance to evaluate the motivations for the transformations of our cities today. Their Plan for Melbourne shows a prescient awareness of the need to design cities to maximise access and interaction: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>…the debate around the plan for the future of a city is not essentially a debate about things … buildings, cars, trains, roads and so on, and their placement; although it often expresses itself in these terms. It is essentially a debate about human relationships. </p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208788/original/file-20180304-65541-15kpf7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208788/original/file-20180304-65541-15kpf7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208788/original/file-20180304-65541-15kpf7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=245&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208788/original/file-20180304-65541-15kpf7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=245&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208788/original/file-20180304-65541-15kpf7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=245&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208788/original/file-20180304-65541-15kpf7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=308&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208788/original/file-20180304-65541-15kpf7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=308&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208788/original/file-20180304-65541-15kpf7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=308&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Crows’ pioneering work, Plan for Melbourne, was published as three volumes in 1969, 1970 and 1972.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ruth & Maurie Crow Collection/Victoria University Library</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/an-environmentally-just-city-works-best-for-all-in-the-end-53803">An environmentally just city works best for all in the end</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The compact city has been a steadfast trope in Australia’s strategic planning rhetoric since the 1980s. Consolidation of urban areas, containment of outward growth, and a multi-nuclear metropolitan structure are deemed necessary to support increasing populations in uncertain socio-ecological futures. </p>
<p>Despite this naturalised policy ambition, metropolitan planning has delivered what Clive Forster termed a “<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-5871.2006.00374.x/full">parallel universe phenomenon</a>”. The vast gaps between planning intent and urban reality have everyday justice implications, resulting in a parallel justice phenomenon. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-cities-and-their-metropolitan-plans-still-seem-to-be-parallel-universes-87603">Australian cities and their metropolitan plans still seem to be parallel universes</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The justice ambitions have often been subsumed into transformations of our cities driven by economic rationality. For the Crows, the goal of social justice was paramount.</p>
<h2>What has driven urban transformations?</h2>
<p>Melbourne’s strategic planning history is marked by an alternating desire for containment and decentralisation. Various propositions have come to the fore, including “the dispersed city”, “satellite cities”, “growth corridors”, and “the redirected city”. </p>
<p>The late 1960s and early 1970s were a transitional moment in Melbourne’s development. Unfettered expansion had typified the city since the 1930s. Now the growth trajectories of both the metropolitan area and the central city were being publicly questioned. </p>
<p>The Crows’ Plan for Melbourne was rejected on the grounds of its seemingly unachievable restructuring propositions. Instead, in 1971, the Melbourne Metropolitan Board of Works advanced the elusive “<a href="https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/policy-and-strategy/planning-for-melbourne">growth corridors and green wedges</a>” policy. The radical implications of the Crows’ proposed “clustering”, “concourses” and “collectives” to create an <a href="https://theconversation.com/putting-the-pieces-together-to-create-safe-public-spaces-for-all-89961">inclusive, accessible and convivial city</a> weren’t considered. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-quest-for-the-convivial-city-how-do-ours-fare-90004">The quest for the convivial city: how do ours fare?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The compact city ideal was not validated in official planning rhetoric until the <a href="https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/policy-and-strategy/planning-for-melbourne/metropolitan-strategy-implementation-1981">1981 strategic plan</a>. Spatial consolidation then became de facto policy. The aim was to promote inner-city population and employment growth, as well as greater use of existing infrastructure and services.</p>
<p>However, <a href="https://theconversation.com/market-driven-compaction-is-no-way-to-build-an-ecocity-80199">market-driven compaction</a> contributes to uneven distribution of, and precarious access to, social infrastructure, affordable housing, public transport and hospitable urban life across the city. The result is a shortfall of social justice. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/market-driven-compaction-is-no-way-to-build-an-ecocity-80199">Market-driven compaction is no way to build an ecocity</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Revisiting a vision of a different city</h2>
<p>Heavily involved in citizen activism, The Crows dedicated themselves to the “urban action movement”. They were amateur planners, heterodox communists, and avid community members. They proposed radical alternatives to what they understood as the injustices of urbanisation and capitalism. </p>
<p>They wanted a city that was more rewarding, both socially and ecologically. This was their rallying cry: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>You have to project the future: a more workable, more humane, more ecological future, and then battle towards it. Maybe the goals will change as you battle towards them: but without goals there is no battle, only unending class scrimmage within the system. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>For the Crows, urban consolidation had two interlocking objectives. The first was to concentrate social activity and so minimise transport energy. The second was to heighten participatory enjoyment. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208787/original/file-20180304-65522-1pwkbw1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208787/original/file-20180304-65522-1pwkbw1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=449&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208787/original/file-20180304-65522-1pwkbw1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=449&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208787/original/file-20180304-65522-1pwkbw1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=449&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208787/original/file-20180304-65522-1pwkbw1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=564&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208787/original/file-20180304-65522-1pwkbw1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=564&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208787/original/file-20180304-65522-1pwkbw1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=564&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Image of the linear city from Plan for Melbourne Volume 3.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Courtesy of the Ruth & Maurie Crow Collection, Victoria University Library</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Clustering, concourse, collectives</h2>
<p>The Crows proposed a compact city with explicit structural elements. In their future Melbourne, towns were to be clustered along a linear spine towards the southeast. A rapid transit network would connect a string of “mini-metro hearts” and “city-metro hearts” to allow for easy commuting. </p>
<p>Multi-functional zoning and high-density cores distinguished their towns from existing suburbs. The Crows proposed dedicated first-level concourses in their “metro hearts” to promote commerce-free encounters. These high-density core areas were to be entirely vehicle-free and were intended to overcome <a href="https://theconversation.com/lonely-over-christmas-a-snapshot-of-social-isolation-in-the-suburbs-34810">social isolation</a>. </p>
<p>Concourses were designed as a “therapeutic measure”, counteracting the “community scattering trend” of the car. These areas would allow for “deliberate voluntary contact”, encouraging interaction beyond the fleeting yet pervasive contact of commercial transaction. The Crows’ intention was to catalyse spaces for voluntary collectives to form and flourish as a means to enhance the “tone” or “ethos” of the community. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208620/original/file-20180302-65541-1nmza5x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208620/original/file-20180302-65541-1nmza5x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=820&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208620/original/file-20180302-65541-1nmza5x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=820&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208620/original/file-20180302-65541-1nmza5x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=820&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208620/original/file-20180302-65541-1nmza5x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1031&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208620/original/file-20180302-65541-1nmza5x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1031&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208620/original/file-20180302-65541-1nmza5x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1031&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Proposed restructuring of Melbourne’s future growth, from Plan for Melbourne Volume 3.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Courtesy of the Ruth & Maurie Crow Collection, Victoria University Library</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Compaction for conviviality</h2>
<p>The Crows’ Plan for Melbourne presented a radical alternative to what mainstream planners were proposing at the time. </p>
<p>Their calls for compaction were informed by spatial justice ambitions to minimise alienation, increase accessibility and support the need for social interaction. They proposed clustering, concourses and collectives to ensure access and inclusion; this was compaction for <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-quest-for-the-convivial-city-how-do-ours-fare-90004">conviviality</a> rather than capital accumulation. </p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/how-a-three-decade-remaking-of-the-city-revived-the-buzz-of-marvellous-melbourne-91481">Melbourne has certainly transformed into a vibrant centre</a> since the Crows’ Plan for Melbourne. Whether it is being planned as a just city is questionable. Hyper-density and visible homelessness are now emblematic of the city. </p>
<p>The Crows warned 50 years ago that, without a clear justice intent driving metropolitan development, we risked looking back with regret that the struggle to shape our cities for their citizens rather than vested interests began too late.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92034/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Claire Collie does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Ruth and Maurie Crow were early advocates of the compact city. They also warned 50 years ago that a clear justice intent was needed to shape cities for their citizens rather than vested interests.Claire Collie, PhD candidate in Urban Planning, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/673612016-10-26T03:23:47Z2016-10-26T03:23:47ZHere’s why our next president should block AT&T’s Time Warner tie-up<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/23/business/dealbook/att-agrees-to-buy-time-warner-for-more-than-80-billion.html?action=click&contentCollection=DealBook&module=RelatedCoverage&region=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article&_r=0">AT&T’s plan to buy Time Warner</a> for US$85.4 billion is only the latest of a string of mega corporate mergers that have been announced in recent years. </p>
<p>That deal would combine the second-largest U.S. cellphone carrier with one of the biggest content producers in the world, with cable networks including HBO, TBS and CNN, as well as Warner Bros. film and TV studio.</p>
<p>But it’s hardly the only tie-up in the offing. <a href="http://www.investors.com/research/ibd-industry-themes/qualcomm-seals-deal-to-buy-nxp-semiconductors/">Qualcomm</a> wants to merge with NXP Semiconductors and create the world’s second-largest chipmaker. Bayer’s bid for Monsanto would <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-monsanto-m-a-bayer-deal-idUSKCN11K128">result in a company</a> that produces more than a quarter of the world’s seeds and pesticides. </p>
<p>After years of consolidation, the top four airlines control two-thirds of the U.S. <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/250577/domestic-market-share-of-leading-us-airlines/">market</a>. <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/we-need-real-competition-not-a-cable-internet-monopoly">In most cities</a> there is one or at most two cable companies. Internet service <a href="http://www.newamerica.org/oti/policy-papers/the-cost-of-connectivity-2014/">is far more expensive</a> and slower than in most countries in Europe or East Asia. <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/199359/market-share-of-wireless-carriers-in-the-us-by-subscriptions/">Four cellphone companies dominate</a> 98 percent of all subscriptions.</p>
<p>While recent articles about the AT&T-Time Warner merger have reminded readers about the negative consequences of industry consolidation in terms of the impact on <a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/10/25/499185907/the-at-t-time-warner-merger-what-are-the-pros-and-cons-for-consumers?ft=nprml&f=499299869">consumers</a> and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/05/upshot/liberal-economists-think-big-companies-are-too-powerful-hillary-clinton-agrees.html?action=click&contentCollection=The%20Upshot&module=RelatedCoverage&region=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article">income inequality</a>, there is another reason to block this and similar mega mergers – and try to roll back ones already completed such as drug company <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123293456420414421">Pfizer’s purchase of Wyeth</a> in 2009: Such behemoths manipulate Congress and regulators, undermining our democracy.</p>
<p>As <a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/S0198-8719%282014%290000026007">my research shows</a>, nearly a half-century of corporate consolidation has transformed American politics in ways that have undermined the ability of government agencies to respond to voters’ desires and to implement policies that challenge corporate power.</p>
<h2>Checks and balances</h2>
<p>The U.S. political system tends to be seen as one of checks and balances, with tensions and competing power centers among various branches of government as well as between federal, state and local officials. And for most of the 20th century, there has also been the same sort of balance in the business world as well, with political power and influence split between national and regional companies.</p>
<p>In other words, in many industries government policies such as <a href="http://www.federalreservehistory.org/Events/DetailView/25">Glass-Steagall Act of 1933</a> and the <a href="https://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/1934new.pdf">Communications Act of 1934</a> helped ensure a balance between large national companies and smaller ones that operated at a regional or state level. </p>
<p>For example, Glass-Steagall reformed the <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/managed-by-the-markets-9780199216611?cc=us&lang=en&">financial industry</a> to limit the number of nationally chartered investment and commercial banks that could sell their products anywhere, and forbade them from lines of business reserved for savings and loans. State-chartered savings and loan institutions, meanwhile, <a href="http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-soc-073014-112402">were restricted</a> in where they could do business. </p>
<p>Similarly, the <a href="http://web.asc.upenn.edu/gerbner/Asset.aspx?assetID=2575">government licensed</a> television and radio stations to operate in specific localities. National networks could own only a limited number of stations and broadcast only at certain hours, leaving most of the day for locally produced shows. </p>
<p>As a consequence of this national-regional split, local <a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/S0198-8719%282014%290000026007">companies had more influence</a> over their state senators and representatives, both through the financial largess of their owners and the electoral power of their employees. Thus the influence of America’s elite on U.S. politics was more spread out, and regionally focused businesses were able to limit the reach of large national companies. <a href="https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/43654">This prevented</a> a few giant corporations from controlling government policy and markets. </p>
<p>But that balance depended on vigorous antitrust enforcement. </p>
<p>Part of the problem is that regulators tend to judge mergers on whether they raise prices and reduce choice for consumers. This vague standard leaves a lot of wiggle room for the Justice Department’s antitrust division and the political appointees who supervise the career of government lawyers. </p>
<p>Enforcement from <a href="http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1117&context=law_econ_current">Franklin Delano Roosevelt through Lyndon B. Johnson</a> was strict enough to prevent the emergence of oligopolies or single industry-dominating firms. The policy changed abruptly in 1969, <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_statements/modern-evolution-u.s.competition-policy-enforcement-norms/0304modernevolution.pdf">when the Nixon administration</a> became more tolerant of within-industry mergers, even when they significantly reduced competition. </p>
<p>Newly formed <a href="http://www.nber.org/chapters/c8650.pdf">mega companies and massive banks</a> used their enhanced political power and influence over policy to lobby for more deregulation in the financial, telecommunications and other industries, which in turn <a href="http://www.people.hbs.edu/estafford/papers/newevidence_perspectivesonmergers.pdf">made more mergers possible</a>. By the 1990s, <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/2096400">few restrictions</a> were left. </p>
<p>This is why <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ddr.430300411/abstract">Americans tend to pay more for pharmaceuticals</a>, cell and <a href="http://www.newamerica.org/oti/policy-papers/the-cost-of-connectivity-2014/">internet services</a> and <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/we-need-real-competition-not-a-cable-internet-monopoly">other products</a> than people in many other countries, and why a <a href="https://www.amazon.com/State-Innovation-Governments-Technology-Development/dp/1594518246">growing share</a> of government spending goes to <a href="https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/PA703.pdf">corporate subsidies</a>. One noteworthy example of that is Medicare D, which is forbidden by law from negotiating prices with pharmaceutical companies for drugs, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/08/upshot/the-drugs-that-companies-promote-to-doctors-are-rarely-breakthroughs.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&abt=0002&abg=1">many of which were developed</a> in government labs or with federal grants to university labs. </p>
<h2>Challenging corporate interests</h2>
<p>So before all these mergers, regional companies served as an effective check on the power of their national competitors, providing more room for elected officials to formulate policies that challenged their more monopolistic corporate interests. </p>
<p>As one or a few companies have come to dominate major industries, they have the power to block policies that benefit consumers. These businesses <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Fracturing-American-Corporate-Elite/dp/0674072995">are also able to enrich themselves</a> at the expense of rivals and others and to appropriate resources needed for the investments in infrastructure and education that are needed to sustain American competitiveness. </p>
<p>Enron, which <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Smartest-Guys-Room-Amazing-Scandalous/dp/1591840538">imploded into bankruptcy in 2001</a>, was emblematic of the political effects of such monopolistic companies. Enron was able to gain control over energy markets in a number of states, including California. The company’s leverage over federal and state regulators ensured that it was able to overcharge California industrial businesses as well as ordinary consumers. </p>
<h2>The importance of reinvigorated enforcement</h2>
<p>The Obama administration <a href="https://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/has-the-obama-justice-department-reinvigorated-antitrust-enforcement/">has been tougher</a> in reviewing mergers than any administration since Nixon’s. Yet Obama has not been tough enough to reverse the tide of consolidation. </p>
<p>Most often Obama administration regulators have merely imposed limited conditions before allowing mergers to proceed. In other words, the “gigantification” that has dominated corporate America for the past 40 years has proceeded largely unhindered. </p>
<p>The question is whether this will change under the next administration. Fortunately, in my view, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-time-warner-m-a-at-t-idUSKCN12N0OF">there are signs</a> that it will.</p>
<p>Hillary Clinton, for her part, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/05/upshot/liberal-economists-think-big-companies-are-too-powerful-hillary-clinton-agrees.html?action=click&contentCollection=The%20Upshot&module=RelatedCoverage&region=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article">had pledged</a> before the AT&T news to increase antitrust enforcement, with some of her own economic advisers arguing that consolidation has worsened inequality by concentrating profits with a handful of companies. She said AT&T’s deal <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/time-warner-m-a-at-t-clinton-idUSKCN12N0UX">deserves close scrutiny</a>. </p>
<p>Donald Trump <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/22/media/donald-trump-att-time-warner/">has come out forcefully against</a> the merger, declaring it “a deal we will not approve in my administration because it’s too much concentration of power in the hands of too few.”</p>
<p>If the next administration is able to follow through – which it’s free to do without Congress’ approval – room would be created for more competitors in various industries. Those new, or newly viable older, businesses will bring their particular and conflicting interests to bear on the making of regulations and legislation and on decisions about federal and state spending. Legislators will come under more diverse pressures and will have expanded opportunities to attract support and build coalitions. </p>
<p>Politics won’t be a confrontation between the interests of one or a few corporations against citizens who usually are disorganized and not mobilized. Conflicts among firms within and across industries would create openings for less wealthy citizens to gain leverage as firms need allies in legislative and regulatory arenas they no longer can control through sheer size. </p>
<p>Antitrust was rightly <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/the-forgotten-wisdom-of-louis-d-brandeis/485477/">understood</a> a hundred years ago as a way to empower citizens as well as to reduce prices and improve product quality for consumers. </p>
<p>Antitrust again can help reduce the advantage the biggest corporations have in politics.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/67361/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Lachmann does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>AT&T’s planned merger would add to a growing list of mega deals that have not only harmed consumers and exacerbated inequality but also undermined our democracy.Richard Lachmann, Professor of Sociology, University at Albany, State University of New YorkLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/658702016-09-28T20:13:35Z2016-09-28T20:13:35ZDensity, sprawl, growth: how Australian cities have changed in the last 30 years<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/139123/original/image-20160926-13532-1rkrzsx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">More than any other Australian city, Melbourne has led a 30-year turnaround in inner-city density (red indicates increases and blue decreases in density as persons per square kilometre).</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Since settlement, Australian cities have been shaped and reshaped by history, infrastructure, natural landscapes and – importantly – policy.</p>
<p>So, have our cities changed much in the last 30 years? Have consolidation policies had any effect? Have we contained sprawl? Yes, probably and maybe, according to our <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00049182.2016.1220901">newly published research</a>.</p>
<h2>Reviving the centre</h2>
<p>The great Australian baby boomer dream of home ownership caused our cities to spread out during the second half of the 20th century. Urban fringes expanded with affordable land releases, large residential blocks and cheap private transport. </p>
<p>By the 1980s, across Australia’s cities, the urban fringes were ever-expanding. Inner areas had become sparsely populated “doughnut cities”. </p>
<p>By the end of that decade urban researchers, planners, geographers and economists began to warn of looming environmental, social and housing affordability problems due to unrestrained sprawling growth. </p>
<p>Governments responded swiftly, focusing policy attention on urban consolidation through programs such as Greenstreet and <a href="http://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p118181/mobile/ch08.html">Building Better Cities</a>. Concerned individuals formed groups such as <a href="http://www.smartgrowth.org/">Smart Growth</a> and <a href="http://www.newurbanism.org/">New Urbanism</a> to promote inner-city development and increased urban density.</p>
<p>Since this time, large- and small-scale policy interventions have attempted to repopulate the inner- and middle-urban areas. The common policy goal has been to encourage more compact, less sprawling cities. Subdivision, dual occupancy, <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-cut-urban-sprawl-we-need-quality-infill-housing-displays-to-win-over-the-public-63930">infill development</a>, smaller block sizes, inner-city apartments and the repurposing of non-residential buildings have all been used.</p>
<h2>Mapping the changes</h2>
<p>In a <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00049182.2016.1220901">newly published paper</a>, we map the changing shape of Australia’s <a href="http://blog.id.com.au/2016/population/australian-population/latest-population-figures-top-50-largest-cities-and-towns-in-australia/">five largest mainland cities</a> from 1981 to 2011. </p>
<p>Across each of these cities, which together are <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/3218.0Main%20Features12014-15?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=3218.0&issue=2014-15&num=&view=">home to 60% of Australians</a>, there has been substantial suburbanisation and re-urbanisation. In the last 20 years this has resulted in a repopulation of inner cities. </p>
<p>In Melbourne’s case, the return to the inner city has been particularly pronounced in the last decade. Here, the population jumped from around 3,000 to 4,000 people per km². The extent of this change is visualised in the chart below. </p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/ks1q3/3/" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="450"></iframe>
<p>Melbourne may well be the exemplar for inner-city rebirth. More than any other Australian city it demonstrates the 30-year turnaround from inner-city decline to densification. </p>
<p>Between 1981 and 1991 Melbourne became a classic “doughnut city”: population declining in inner areas, density increasing in the middle-ring suburbs, and growth steady in the outer suburbs. For example, in the inner 5km ring there was a decrease during this time of almost 200 people per km². </p>
<p>From 1991 to 2001, even though growth was still focused on the middle and outer areas, the inner area began to be repopulated. Overall, between 1981 and 2011 there were approximately 1,500 more people per square kilometre living in the inner 5km ring.</p>
<p>Over the last decade, greenfield development, infill and urban regeneration have increased urban density throughout Melbourne – as shown in the five-yearly map animation below. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/139093/original/image-20160925-13519-19e0mei.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/139093/original/image-20160925-13519-19e0mei.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=757&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139093/original/image-20160925-13519-19e0mei.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=757&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139093/original/image-20160925-13519-19e0mei.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=757&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139093/original/image-20160925-13519-19e0mei.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=952&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139093/original/image-20160925-13519-19e0mei.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=952&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/139093/original/image-20160925-13519-19e0mei.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=952&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Changes in Melbourne population density (persons/km² over the 30 years to 2011 (red is increasing, blue is decreasing).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>While the turnarounds in Sydney, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth have been less marked than in Melbourne, they are all no longer “doughnut cities”. This means that where people live in these cities has changed. </p>
<p>Australia’s cities are now more densely populated – and we are much more likely to live in inner areas than we were 30 years ago.</p>
<h2>A result of government policy?</h2>
<p>We can probably attribute the changes in where urban Australians live to government consolidation policies. </p>
<p>The policy focus throughout the late 1980s and early 1990s was based on incentives to repopulate inner and middle areas. </p>
<p>Policies were changed from 2000 to increase population density across whole metropolitan areas. State and territory strategic plans aimed to promote urban consolidation, with a focus on the inner city. </p>
<p>State and territory plans now focus much more on specific zones throughout the whole of the city, including former industrial areas and surplus government land. New housing development occurs within these defined zones, particularly around transport and areas with urban-renewal potential. </p>
<p>South Australia’s <a href="https://livingadelaide.sa.gov.au/">30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide</a> targets growth in “current urban lands”, along major transport corridors and hubs. Similarly, the <a href="http://www.planmelbourne.vic.gov.au/Plan-Melbourne">Plan Melbourne – Metropolitan Planning Strategy</a> plans to establish the “20-minute neighbourhood”, contain new housing within existing urban boundaries, and focus development in new urban renewal precincts.</p>
<p>The map visualisations reinforce the scale of this absolute growth across each of the five major Australian cities over the last 30 years. </p>
<h2>Have we contained sprawl?</h2>
<p>Our research would suggest urban-consolidation policies have slowed but not prevented sprawl, especially in the <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/3218.0Main%20Features152014-15?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=3218.0&issue=2014-15&num=&view=">faster-growing cities</a> like Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Sydney. </p>
<p>So, have we reached the point at which our cities are full? How can we accommodate future population growth? And do we need to focus our attention on new urban areas? </p>
<p>Containing and, more importantly, controlling sprawl may present the next big challenge.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Two of the graphics in this article were updated to clarify that population density changes were shown in persons per square kilometre, consistent with the measure used in the text.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/65870/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Emma Baker receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI). </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jarrod Lange and Neil Coffee do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Many factors have influenced population density change in Australian cities over the past 30 years. Melbourne has led the way in inner-city rebirth as a way to help manage future growth.Neil Coffee, Associate professor, University of CanberraEmma Baker, Associate Professor, School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of AdelaideJarrod Lange, Senior Research Consultant (GIS), Hugo Centre for Migration and Population Research, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/580442016-05-10T00:58:37Z2016-05-10T00:58:37ZMedia picture of urban consolidation focuses more on a good scare story than the facts<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119619/original/image-20160421-8007-3wpfb3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C95%2C4000%2C1964&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Proposed developments in Brisbane illustrate the scale of urban consolidation.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/brisbanecitycouncil/21282543675/">flickr/Brisbane City Council</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Neighbourhoods as “battlefields”, “<a href="http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/new-developments-to-turn-brisbane-into-sardine-central/news-story/bffa3f329ddaaa30f163ab264c2428dd">sardine city</a>”, traditional suburbs as “threatened species” and urban hubs as the domain of “latte-sipping yuppies”. These are examples of the dramatic and negative imagery Queensland newspapers use to describe <a href="http://www.sage.unsw.edu.au/currentstudents/ug/projects/Wallace/consolidation.html">urban consolidation</a> in Brisbane. </p>
<p><a href="http://apo.org.au/resource/defining-density-debate-brisbane-how-urban-consolidation-represented-media">Our research</a> identifies depictions of urban consolidation in Brisbane by five newspapers: <a href="http://www.couriermail.com.au/">The Courier Mail</a> and Sunday Mail, <a href="http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/">Brisbane Times</a>, <a href="http://quest.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx">Northside Chronicle</a> and <a href="http://quest.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx">South-East Advertiser</a>. Our examination of 456 articles from 2007 to 2014 reveals a glut of negative imagery. </p>
<p>Urban consolidation is predominantly depicted as dangerous and uncontrollable. Dire warnings abound of a city bursting at the seams and sustained assaults on the Australian suburban dream. </p>
<p>Newspapers remain powerful forces despite their <a href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/11/13/magical-newspapers-take-a-hammering-in-circulation-figures/">declining fortunes in recent times</a>. Their capacity to shape public opinion remains strong. So how do Queensland newspapers heighten the drama of consolidated urban development? And what imagery do they use to sustain the narrative?</p>
<h2>Planning responses to growth</h2>
<p>Cities are rapidly changing all over the world as urban populations grow. Urban consolidation has become a common planning response. It focuses on concentrating growth in existing urban areas. This involves the delivery of higher-density housing and mixed-use developments.</p>
<p>Urban consolidation is often advocated as a neat solution to increasing populations, decreasing housing affordability and unsustainable urban sprawl. It is now a <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837714000301">key planning policy in many Australian cities</a>, including all of the capitals. </p>
<p>Of the 156,000 additional dwellings forecast to be developed in Brisbane between 2006 and 2031, <a href="http://www.ipswich.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/7916/seq-regional-plan-2009.pdf">The South East Queensland Regional Plan</a> has set the goal of delivering 88% in areas targeted for consolidation. The over-arching priority is to accommodate an <a href="http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/seq-population-growth-needs-12-springfieldstyle-mega-cities-to-cope-planner-20150626-ghyxzb.html">ever-increasing urban population</a> within existing boundaries.</p>
<p>Evidence of implementation in Brisbane can be seen all over the inner city and throughout inner and middle-ring suburbs. Apartment and unit development projects are proceeding at pace. This is leading to a <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/property/brisbane-unit-approvals-skyrocket-20150716-gie6b9.html">huge upswing in approvals</a> and new stock coming to market.</p>
<h2>The drama of consolidated development</h2>
<p>Media reports predominantly capture the drama of consolidated development with references to warfare or natural disasters. Articles commonly refer to floods of development or a city under siege.</p>
<p>Local politicians opposed to consolidation are characterised as saviours of the people. These white knights stand strong, benignly offering their constituents protection from the destruction of over-development.</p>
<p>Dramatic physiological language is used in articles discussing high-density apartment buildings. Such places are characterised as choking the city or ripping the heart out of its suburbs. Increasing urban densities are presented as threatening the overall health of the city.</p>
<p>Apartments are depicted as “shoeboxes”, “rabbit hutches” and “charmless chunks of brick”. The people who choose to live in them are routinely portrayed as outsiders. They are the unwelcome intruders who are taking over the city and corrupting traditional suburban values.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119620/original/image-20160421-8023-1dh59j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119620/original/image-20160421-8023-1dh59j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119620/original/image-20160421-8023-1dh59j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119620/original/image-20160421-8023-1dh59j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119620/original/image-20160421-8023-1dh59j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119620/original/image-20160421-8023-1dh59j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119620/original/image-20160421-8023-1dh59j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119620/original/image-20160421-8023-1dh59j4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Brisbane is portrayed as a battleground where leafy suburbs are under threat.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Brisbane_City_Train_Lines.jpg">Wikimedia Commons/Lachlan Fearnley</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>By contrast, articles featuring direct quotes from developers and planners tend to use more moderate imagery. Consolidation is portrayed more commonly as a means to create quality places to “live, work and play”. Associated images are usually consumption-based and focus on the benefits of access to inner-city employment and amenities.</p>
<p>While some imagery depicting cosmopolitan lifestyles finds traction, it is regularly offset by images of the declining suburban dream.</p>
<p>Usually this involves images of the “real Australians” whose happy suburban lives are threatened by over-development. These rarefied beings live on a median wage and host friendly barbecues in a suburb near you. Their depiction is far removed from that of their inner-city counterparts sipping lattes and swirling expensive wine.</p>
<h2>(Mis)representing urban realities</h2>
<p><a href="http://apo.org.au/resource/defining-density-debate-brisbane-how-urban-consolidation-represented-media">Our research</a> suggests Queensland newspapers create a sense of danger around urban consolidation in Brisbane. They perpetuate mostly negative imagery, referencing war, death and disease. Increased urban density becomes associated with towering buildings, faceless residents and unhealthy places. </p>
<p>Yet this isn’t necessarily the reality. Urban consolidation in Brisbane occurs as a result of managed planning processes. It is designed to meet the city’s current and future development needs. Developments generally occur in accordance with zoning regulations and development plans. </p>
<p>Newspapers have a tradition of sensationalising and simplifying news stories. And depictions of urban consolidation in Brisbane do tend towards sensationalism. The drama of consolidated development appears to work well to fill column inches and sell papers. </p>
<p>We argue that the use of negative imagery in Queensland newspapers relies more on subjective judgements than facts. Visions of unplanned, laissez-faire urban consolidation subsuming Brisbane are generally at odds with reality. Is the adage of not letting facts get in the way of a good story ringing true once more?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/58044/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tony Matthews receives funding from the Australian Research Council for research on harmonising social and planning policy to support transitions to a low-carbon society. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Katrina Raynor does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In the media, urban consolidation is often depicted as a threat to Australian suburban life. In reality, it’s a result of managed planning processes to ensure growing cities remain liveable.Katrina Raynor, PhD Candidate in Urban Studies, Queensland University of TechnologyTony Matthews, Lecturer in Urban & Environmental Planning, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.