In his Economics of Cities course at Harvard College, professor Ed Glaeser tells a story of environmentalism that contradicts many nature lovers’ instincts. In 1844, Henry David Thoreau, the “secular saint of environmentalism,” sought out the sanctity of the woods to celebrate nature and enjoy a campfire, but he inadvertently started a forest fire that burned 300 acres of pristine New England forest. Thoreau’s desire to surround himself in the beauty of nature only served to harm the very thing he loved so much. The moral of the story as Glaeser tells it is a tough pill to swallow for many environmentalists: “If you love nature, move to the city.”
In today’s world, environmental challenges run far deeper than tragically destructive accidents, but the lessons of urbanism remain the same. Amidst an urgent climate crisis and increasingly out-of-control environmental destruction, denser urban living is a surefire way to substantially reduce people’s carbon footprints.
As of now, American cities are continuing to sprawl out into scattered suburbs, with more and more Americans living farther out of the city and commuting extremely long journeys to work. When people drive farther to their workplaces, stores, restaurants, and friends, they burn much more gas. In contrast, city dwellers are able to rely on far more public transportation to get around, dramatically lowering their carbon footprint. Just in terms of driving, Glaeser’s research with UCLA’s Matthew Kahn found that “households in areas with more than 10,000 people per square mile average 687 gallons of gas per year, while households in areas with fewer than 1,000 people per square mile average 1,164 gallons of gas per year.” As the data shows, living closer together is the best way to mitigate the environmental costs of transportation.
In cities, more compact neighborhoods and housing also make for a greener lifestyle. Townhouses and apartment buildings contain multiple homes, a far more efficient model than building individual houses. The U.S. Energy Information Administration reports that electricity generation contributes one-third of the country’s carbon emissions. Single-family homes mean more electricity to heat, cool, and otherwise power the building, so combining these homes into apartment buildings reduces each resident’s carbon footprint. Beyond the housing itself, land use is far more efficient in denser areas. When land is carved up into one-acre lots for single-family homes with manicured lawns, wildlife and trees are destroyed. This situation is exacerbated by the exorbitant amount of land required for the vast strip malls and seas of parking lots that accompany suburban America. Living in urban areas is the best way to prevent the inefficiency and deforestation of suburban sprawl.
The goal of this column is not to shame countryside dwellers. The United States will always be home to a wide variety of lifestyles, and urban living is not feasible for everyone. Still, the market has shown that Americans already love living in urban neighborhoods, as today’s first-home buyers are 21% more likely to move to cities than the previous generation. The challenge is that the cost of housing in America’s major cities has skyrocketed in recent years, forcing many who prefer city life to move farther out into the suburbs. Environmental urbanism has the potential to thrive as a model for future development; all it needs are policy changes that resolve the housing affordability crisis in cities.
The key to supporting more urban housing at lower prices is municipal zoning reform. In concert with a number of other affordable housing and transit policies, changing local zoning codes to allow the construction of duplexes, townhouses, and apartment buildings enables more housing in urban areas and lowers prices. While most cities reserve much or most of their land for single-family housing, some places have very recently begun broadly legalizing higher-intensity housing. Meanwhile, Minneapolis has ended single-family zoning altogether. At its core, zoning reform addresses the overall housing shortage by allowing a greater supply of housing in cities, reducing prices by the law of supply and demand. Leaders in the environmental movement have caught on, too. Organizations like the National Resources Defense Council are calling for urgent action to address the housing crisis. The United Nations Emissions Gap Report calls for lifting multifamily housing bans and emphasizes the environmental benefits of building “multifamily residences in denser urban areas.” If more environmental activists join pro-housing “YIMBYs” to support these changes, a denser housing landscape could become a reality.
Stopping suburban sprawl may not be as sexy as blocking pipelines or drilling sites, but it will be essential in order to quell the demand for fossil fuels and turn the tide of climate change and other environmental destruction. Drawn by far more than urban energy efficiency, Americans are spending their money in ways that show they already love cities. The market would love to accommodate this demand with more housing — if only local governments would get out of the way. The unprecedented environmental crisis that we have constructed calls for broad, structural change: Mother earth demands that humans build up, not out.
Image Credit: Piqsels
