Read Online (Free) relies on page scans, which are not currently available to screen readers. To access this article, please contact JSTOR User Support . We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader. With a personal account, you can read up to 100 articles each month for free. Show
Already have an account? Log in Monthly Plan
Yearly Plan
Log in through your institution journal article The Bulldozer Revolution: Suburbs and Southern History since World War IIThe Journal of Southern History Vol. 75, No. 3 (AUGUST 2009) , pp. 691-706 (16 pages) Published By: Southern Historical Association
https://www.jstor.org/stable/27779033 Read and download Log in through your school or library Alternate access options For independent researchers Read Online Read 100 articles/month free Subscribe to JPASS Unlimited reading + 10 downloads Journal Information The Journal of Southern History, which is edited at and sponsored by Rice University, is a quarterly devoted to the history of the American South and is unrestricted as to chronological period, methodology, or southern historical topic. The Journal publishes refereed articles and solicited book reviews and book notes on all aspects of southern history. As the organ of the Southern Historical Association, which is headquartered in the Department of History at the University of Georgia, the Journal also publishes items pertaining to the business of the Association as well as news and notices of interest to historians of and in the South. The purpose of the Southern Historical Association is to encourage the study of history in the South with an emphasis on the history of the South. Publisher Information The Southern Historical Association was organized on November 2, 1934 and charged with promoting an "investigative rather than a memorial approach" to southern history. Its objectives are the promotion of interest and research in southern history, the collection and preservation of the South's historical records, and the encouragement of state and local historical societies in the South. As a secondary purpose the Association fosters the teaching and study of all areas of history in the South. The Association holds an annual meeting, usually in the first or second week of November, and publishes The Journal of Southern History. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. Author: Dr. Jean-Paul Rodrigue
1. Global UrbanizationUrbanization has been one of the dominant economic and social changes of the 20th century, especially in the developing world. Although cities played a significant role throughout human history, it was not until the industrial revolution that a network of large cities started to emerge in the most economically advanced parts of the world. It is through this interconnected network of cities that innovation diffused and most of the economic development took place. Since 1950, the world’s urban population has more than doubled, reaching nearly 4.4 billion in 2021, about 56.6% of the global population. This transition is expected to go on well into the second half of the 21st century, a trend reflected in the growing size of cities and the increasing proportion of the urbanized population. By 2050, 70% of the global population could be urbanized, representing 6.4 billion urban residents. Cities also dominate the national economic output as they account for the bulk of production, distribution, and consumption.
Global urbanization is the outcome of three main demographic trends:
Through urbanization, fundamental changes in the socio-economic environment of human activities have been observed, with new forms of employment, economic activity, lifestyle, and mobility. What drives urbanization is a complex mix of economic, demographic, and technological factors. The growth in GDP per capita is a dominant driver of urbanization, which is supported by corresponding developments in transportation systems. More recently, the diffusion of air conditioning allowed for settlements in high-temperature areas such as in the southwest of the United States or the Middle East (e.g. Dubai). World Urban Population, 1950-2015 with Projections to 2050Globalization and UrbanizationMetropolitan Areas with more than 12 million Inhabitants, 2018World’s Largest Cities, 1850 World’s Largest Cities, 2015Urban Population per Region, 1950-2030Demographic TransitionShare of Housing Units Equipped with Air Conditioning by Region in the United States, 1980-2020Perspectives about the Urban Spatial StructureUrban mobility problems have increased proportionally with urbanization, which is associated with two outcomes. First is the emergence of a network of megacities that account for the most salient urban mobility challenges. Second, mobility demands tend to be concentrated over specific urban areas, such as central business districts and main circulation corridors. Global trends indicate about 50 million new urbanites each year, roughly a million a week. More than 90% of that growth occurs in developing economies, which places pressure on urban infrastructures, particularly transportation. What is considered urban includes a whole continuum of urban spatial structures, ranging from small towns to large urban agglomerations. This also brings the question of optimal city size since technical limitations (road, utilities) are not much of an impediment to building very large cities. Many of the world’s largest cities can be labeled as dysfunctional mainly because as city size increases, the rising operational and infrastructure complexities are not effectively coped with managerial expertise. Still, urbanization remains the dominant socioeconomic paradigm, associated with improvements in levels of economic development. Urbanization has been shaped by transport infrastructures, such as roads, transit systems, or simply walkways. Since each city has a different temporal process of accumulation and development of transport infrastructures, there is a wide variety of urban forms, spatial structures, and associated urban transportation systems.
Considering transport developments, the urban spatial structure can be categorized by its level of centralization and clustering:
Even if the geographical setting of each city varies considerably, the urban form and its spatial structure are articulated by two structural elements:
Depending on their nature, urban nodes and linkages provide for functional connectivity, implying interdependent urban functions related to trade, management, and production. Urban transportation is thus associated with a spatial form that varies according to the modes being used. Grid street patterns have endured throughout history, which was the case for many Roman cities built in the 1st century as it was for American cities built in the 20th century. The reasons behind this permanence are relatively simple; a grid pattern jointly optimizes accessibility and available real estate. Obviously, many cities are not as organized as a grid. They correspond to cities that grew from a constrained location such as a bay, an island, a hill, or a river junction. Local geographical and historical characteristics remain important influences on the urban form. Transportation, Urban Form and Spatial StructureTypes of Urban Spatial StructuresCities and ConnectivityOne Hour Commuting According to Different Urban Transportation ModesIsochrone Map of Manchester, 1917Street Network TypesPopulation Density of the World’s Largest Metropolitan Areas, 2012Population Density by Distance from City Center, Selected CitiesEvolution of Urban Densities in North America and EuropeIn the 20th century, cities developed a unique spatial structure relying on motorized transportation, particularly the privately owned automobile. This incited a shift from a grid pattern toward curvilinear and cul-de-sac patterns that are commonly found in suburban areas. Dispersion, or urban sprawl, is taking place in many different types of cities, from dense, centralized European metropolises such as Madrid, Paris, and London, to rapidly industrializing metropolises such as Seoul, Shanghai, and Mexico City, to those experiencing recent, fast and uncontrolled urban growth, such as Mumbai, Jakarta, and Lagos. Contemporary urban expansion is strongly shaped by road transportation as the support for mobility with its hierarchy of local streets, connectors, boulevards, and expressways. Therefore, there are significant differences in the density of cities across the world, in addition to a variety of density gradients observed within cities. The differences are particularly prevalent between North American and European cities. 3. Evolution of Transportation and Urban FormUrbanization is occurring in accordance with the development of urban transport systems, particularly in terms of their capacity and efficiency. Historically, movements within cities tended to be mainly restricted to walking, which made urban mobility rather inefficient and time-consuming. Thus, activity nodes tended to be agglomerated, and urban forms compact with mixed uses. Many modern cities have inherited an urban form created under such circumstances, even though they are no longer prevailing. The dense urban cores of many European and East Asian cities, for example, enable residents to make between one-third and two-thirds of all trips by walking and cycling. At the other end of the spectrum, the dispersed urban forms of most Australian, Canadian, and American cities, which were built more recently, encourage automobile dependency and are linked with high levels of mobility. Still, Chinese cities have experienced a high level of motorization, implying the potential for convergence towards more uniform urban forms. Many cities are also port cities with trade playing an enduring role not only in the economic vitality but also in the urban spatial structure, with the port district being an important node. Airport terminals have also been playing a growing role in the urban spatial structure as they can be considered cities within cities. The evolution of transportation has generally led to changes in urban form. The more radical the changes in transport technology, the more the alterations in the urban form. Among the most fundamental changes in the urban form is the emergence of new clusters in peripheral areas expressing new urban activities and new relationships between elements of the urban system. Many cities are assuming a polycentric form, a change that is associated with new mobility patterns. The central business district (CBD), once the primary destination of commuters and serviced by public transportation, has been transformed by new manufacturing, retailing, and management practices. Whereas traditional manufacturing depended on centralized workplaces and transportation, technological and transportation developments rendered modern industry more flexible. In many cases, manufacturing relocated in a suburban setting, if not altogether, to entirely offshore locations, expanding the reach and connectivity of cities. Retail and office activities are also suburbanizing, producing changes in the urban form. Concomitantly, many important transport terminals, namely port facilities, and railyards, have emerged in suburban areas following new requirements in modern freight distribution brought in part by containerization. The urban spatial structure shifted from a nodal to a multi-nodal character, implying new forms of urban development and new connections to regional and global economic processes. Initially, suburban growth mainly took place adjacent to major road corridors, leaving vacant plots or farmland in between. Later, intermediate spaces were gradually filled up, more or less coherently. Highways and ring roads, which circled and radiated from cities, favored the development of suburbs and the emergence of important sub-centers that compete with the central business district for the attraction of economic activities. As a result, many new job opportunities shifted to the suburbs, and the activity system of cities has been considerably modified. Depending on the economic sectors they specialize in, cities and even different parts of a metropolitan area can be experiencing development at entirely different rates (or even decline), leading to a highly heterogeneous urban landscape. These changes have occurred according to a variety of geographical and economic contexts, notably in North America and Europe, as each subsequent phase of urban transportation developments led to different spatial structures. Sometimes, particularly when new modern urban road infrastructures are built, the subsequent changes in the urban form can be significant. Two processes had a substantial impact on contemporary urban forms:
Although transportation systems and travel patterns have changed considerably over time, one enduring feature remains that most people are willing to travel between 30-40 minutes in one direction, which is known as Marchetti’s constant. Globally, people are spending about 1.2 hours per day commuting, wherever this takes place in a low or high-mobility setting. Different transport technologies, however, are associated with different travel speeds and capacity. As a result, cities that rely primarily on non-motorized transport tend to be more compact than automobile-dependent cities. Transport technology thus plays a significant role in defining urban form and the spatial pattern of various activities. Still, the evolution of the urban form is path-dependent, implying that the current spatial structure is the outcome of past developments, but that those developments were strongly related to local conditions involving the setting, physical constraints, and investments in transportation infrastructures. It takes substantial effort and long-term commitment to change the spatial structure of a city in a noticeable manner. 4. The Spatial Constraints of Urban TransportationThe amount of urban land allocated to transportation is often correlated with the level of mobility. In the pre-automobile era, about 10% of the urban land was devoted to transportation, which was simply roads for pedestrian traffic and common uses. As the mobility of people and freight increased, a growing share of urban areas was allocated to transport and the infrastructures supporting it. Large variations in the footprint of urban transportation are observed between different cities as well as between different parts of a city, such as between central and peripheral areas. The major components of the footprint of urban transportation are:
The spatial importance of each transport mode varies according to a number of factors, density being the most important. Further, each transport mode has unique performance and space consumption characteristics. The most relevant example is the automobile. It requires space to move around (roads), but it also spends 98% of its existence stationary in a parking space. Consequently, a significant amount of urban space must be allocated to accommodate the automobile, especially when it does not move and is thus economically and socially useless. In large urban agglomerations, close to all the available street parking space in areas of average density and above is occupied throughout the day. At an aggregate level, measures reveal a significant footprint of road transportation among developed countries. In the United States, more land is thus used for the automobile than for housing. In Western Europe, roads account for between 15% and 20% of the urban surface, while for developing economies, this figure is about 10% but rising fast due to motorization. Pedestrian, Cycling and Road Spaces, Amsterdam, NetherlandsPerformance of Urban Transport Modes5. Transportation and the Urban StructureUrbanization involves an increased number of trips occurring in urban areas. Cities have traditionally responded to the growth in mobility by expanding the transportation supply by building new highways and transit lines. This has mainly meant building more roads to accommodate an ever-growing number of vehicles. Several urban spatial structures have accordingly emerged, with the reliance on the automobile being the most important discriminatory factor. Four major types can be identified at the metropolitan scale:
Another aspect of the relationship between transportation and the urban spatial structure involves the orientation of the networks and their level of entropy. Around the world, cities tend to have a cardinal orientation, underlining the influence of a frame of reference dominated by the north allowing to set grids or streets. Over time, the level of entropy (disorder) has declined as contemporary cities or neighborhoods tend to have car-oriented grids as opposed to the organic distribution of streets and alleys of pre-industrial cities. There are different scales where transportation systems influence the structure of communities, districts, and the whole metropolitan area. For instance, one of the most significant impacts of transportation on the urban structure has been the clustering of activities near areas of high accessibility. The impact of transport on the spatial structure is particularly evident in the emergence of suburbia, a process that occurs in every major metropolitan area worldwide. Although many other factors are important in its development, including low land costs, available land (large lots), environmental considerations (clean and quiet), safety, and car-oriented services (shopping malls), the footprint of the automobile is dominant. The automobile is also linked with changes in street layouts. While older parts of cities tend to have a conventional grid layout, from the 1930s, new suburbs started to be designed in a curvilinear fashion, which included some cul-de-sacs (dead ends). By the 1950s, the prevailing design for new suburbs was privileging cul-de-sacs. Although the aim was to create a more private and safe environment, particularly in cul-de-sac sections, the outcome was also a growing sense of isolation and car use. With the expansion of urban areas, congestion, and the increasing importance of inter-urban movements, the existing structure of urban roads was judged to be inadequate. Several ring roads have been built around major cities and became an important attribute of their spatial structures. Highway interchanges in suburban areas are notable examples of clusters of urban development that have shaped the multicentric character of many cities. The extension (and the over-extension) of urban areas have created what may be called peri-urban areas. They are located well outside the urban core and the suburbs, but are within reasonable commuting distances; the term “edge cities” has been used to label a cluster of urban development taking place in suburban settings. Scale and Urban Spatial StructureThe Rationale of a Ring RoadSuburban Development along an Highway InterchangeRelated Topics
Bibliography
Why did many Americans move to the suburbs after World War II?With access to cheap money veterans and their growing families sought relief from the housing shortages by moving into the growing suburbs accessible only by the ownership of an automobile and connected to their workplaces by the growing network of roads. To access suburban housing Americans needed transportation.
What caused people to move to the suburbs?Racial fears, affordable housing, and the desire to leave decaying cities were all factors that prompted many white Americans to flee to suburbia.
Why did people move to the suburbs after the war?Depression and war had created a postwar housing crisis. To help make decent, affordable housing available, the federal government passed laws that encouraged suburban housing development. Middle- and working-class families rushed to buy or rent homes in the new developments.
What 2 factors caused people to begin to move into cities?Urbanization Begins in the United States
“Cities grew because industrial factories required large workforces and workers and their families needed places to live near their jobs. Factories and cities attracted millions of immigrants looking for work and a better life in the United States.”
What were some of the drivers of urbanization in America?Based on the comprehensive method of analyzing urbanization, this paper sorts out five driving forces of urbanization, which are industrialization, modernization, globalization, marketization and administrative/institutional power.
What was the biggest thing that motivated people to move to cities in the late 1800s?The increasing factory businesses created many more job opportunities in cities and people began to flock from rural areas to large urban locations. Minorities and immigrants increased these numbers. Factory jobs were readily available for immigrants and as more came to the cities to work, the larger the cities became.
|