Four categories of urban policies that potentially impact on economic policy, have
been identified (Haughton, 1997): the ‘self-relient’ city, the ‘redesigning’ city, the
‘externally dependent’ city, and the ‘fair shares’ city policy. The self-relient city is an
intrusive deep green approach to city management. It internalizes economic
development by emphasizing local economic development within the confines of the
‘bioregion’ - a region that is economically and politically defined in terms of the
natural boundaries of ecosystems. Although application of policies in this group is
possible at the micro scale, the location of existing cities not conforming to natural
bioregions, or extending over more than one bioregion, makes application of the
policy within such a framework difficult, if not impossible. Also, the distance that is
created in this model between human activities and natural ecosystems poses a
difficulty because the human-versus-nature mindset in ecology is rapidly changing.
As a science, ecology deals with the relationship between organisms and their
environment, and therefore human activities within the urban environment make
humans very much part of the ecosystem, economically, socially and biologically
(Picket, 1997; Jensen, 1998; Parlange, 1998). The impact of social and economic
networks inside and between urban nodes and their hinterlands, on the natural
environment, forms part of the plethora of factors that needs to be taken into account
when urban economic development policy is considered.
Redesigning city policy refers to approaches that are aimed at reducing resource
consumption and waste streams. The objective is to work with nature and to change
the environmentally damaging practices of people in cities. One way of achieving
this is through energy savings by compacting the city. While some social overhead
capital savings seem possible in this model, significant savings in transport costs
ultimately are not guaranteed, since the compacting of cities and the mixing of land
uses do not necessarily reduce home-to-workplace traveling. In fact, the densification
and mixing of land uses may eventually exacerbate traveling problems overall
because land uses that were concentrated in particular areas previously, potentially
improving the viability of mass and rapid transit systems, will now be more dispersed
throughout the city. From an environmental sustainable point of view, the approach
also defeats the objective of creating more livable urban space because compacting
city spaces would necessarily result in increasing person-land ratios. Ultimately, it
will reduce open spaces, make cities more ‘urban’, and increase pressure on social
overhead capital. Mixing and densifying land uses will also put pressure on personal
and social space, making it more difficult for people to recuperate psychologically.
This could ultimately increase tension between individuals and communities within
cities (Geyer, 2001) - something that we have learned from urban practices in Europe
during the Industrial Revolution.
Externally dependent city policy is a market-centred approach to environmentally
sustainable urban development. It seeks to modify market mechanisms to benefit both
the environment and the society at large, without necessarily terminally damaging
market systems. “Market reform is essential if sustained development is to be
achieved, but this reform must be geographically sensitized, as well as linked to
strong social justice programmes and environmental standards setting to ensure that
both local and global environmental carrying capacities are respected” (Haughton,
1997: 192). Based on the classic Kutznets (1955) study that pointed to a possible
divergence in secular income with economic growth, an underlying understanding of
this urban model is a Kutznets-like relationship in economic growth and
17