Assignment Two
Urban sprawl, being one of the unavoidable adverse effects of global economic growth, means uncontrolled city expansion. It contributes to higher demand in consumption goods such as the gasoline and vehicles, which allows the economy continues to flourish in many developed countries as well as developing countries (especially in China). However, urbanization poses an acute ecological threat because it highly depends on the massive development of motorization which is a significant driver of more energy and lands consumption and more emissions of global warming gases. Furthermore, as the motorized urban sprawl means unhealthier, less affordable places for the poor to survive caused by the dispersal of their communities, on the one hand, and growing public health problems, on the other, it also creates serious social problems. To address these adverse effects of urbanization, the technological solution is recommended given that nowadays technology plays a crucial role in socio-ecological development. This essay will outline the problems driven by urbanization and argue that the technological solution is not the most fundamental one to deal with the social and ecological problem driven by urban sprawl. In terms of social problems associated with the spread of urban development, the technological solution may pose greater difficulties to cope with the social polarization in the sprawled cities. The global development of urban sprawl will lead to the explosion of motorization which is a typical example of individualized, privatized technology (Martin, 2007, p.67). According to Martin (2007, p.68), this will cause transport inequality because the dominance of private cars will make it more expensive for the poorer social groups to afford and degrades the public transport system simultaneously. In addition, the technical requirements of driving will exclude many disabled and aged people from participation which also results in serious social fragmentation and segregation (Martin, 2007, p.68). As s result, the only option for the poor is poorer public transport (Martin, cited in Bullard and Johnson 1997, p.68). Moreover, innovative technology will accelerate the up-scale development. As Martin (2007, p.69) points out, this will lead to the dispersal of poor communities to the fringes of the city which widen the gap between the rich and the poor. Consequently, the poor and people of color are more likely to live in estates where there is more pollution and less access to amenities such as parks (cited from Wikipedia, p.2). It also makes convenience stores and health food stores less accessible to the poor, which also indicates a kind of social inequality resulting from the up-sale constructions (Freund& Martin, 2005, p.315).
The technological approach also cannot create substantial disincentives for the public health problems which has accompanied the urban sprawl. For one thing, technology may cure of the diseases related to urbanization, but it cannot prohibit people form suffering from them by stopping air pollution directly. The auto-dominant urban sprawl means excessive pollution which is detrimental to people’s well-beings (Freund& Martin, 2005, p.313). Freund & Martin (2005, p.314) gives the example that the contaminated air will lead to notorious effects such as asthma, coronary heart disease and emphysema. Additionally, the noise pollution caused by the overuse of automobile is closely linked with the blood pressure which also affects people’s health in a significant way (Freund& Martin, 2005, p.314). For another thing, the more convenience advanced technology brings to people, the less actively physical lifestyle they will own. According to Martin (2007, p.68), this is due to that motorization further renders such public space as squares and parks socially worthless through its heavy traffic flows. Thus, the auto-oriented lifestyle discourages walking and cycling and consequently results in serious obesity problems (Freund & Martin, 2005, p.314). For instance, the motorized urban sprawl is believed to be the trigger for the rise in obesity in America (Martin, cited in McCann and Ewing 2003, p.68).
With respect to the climate change linked with urban sprawl, it may be true that technological solution could potentially lower the emissions of climate change gases through paperless conversions in business activities, application of innovative technology such as the electric cars (Gonzalez, 2005, p.347). However, such approach relying on technology still has some dangers and limitations which cannot confront the question of global warming adequately. The most obvious reason is that no advanced technology as yet has been developed to deal with it effectively, or supply a complete substitute for fossil fuel efficiently which is relatively inexpensive and clean (Gonzalez, 2005, p.348). Furthermore, Gonzalez (2005, p.350) states that the time wasted on technological innovation would lead to irreversible environmental degradation. Another reason should be added is that the solution based on technology is not ecological viable, because it is likely to shift the ecological stress from one aspect to another of the ecosystem (Gonzalez, cited in Dryzek 1987, p.348). For instance, nuclear energy can reduce the greenhouse gases, but it also results in its own serious environmental problems such as the contamination with radiation Gonzalez, cited in Stoett 2003, p.348). Finally, as a representative advanced technology, the multiplication of vehicles contributes mainly to the global warming (Martin, 2007, p.66). According to Martin (2007, p.68), there be considerable higher level of per capita emissions in cites with more motorization, which shows that technology will not address climate change fully. To sum up, although the urban expansion serves to stabilize the global economy and is the main factor of future economic growth, people still suffer from significant social and ecological effects resulting from it that are difficult to resolve. Foremost among these negative impacts are increasing social segregation, public health problems and global warming. Based on what has been mentioned above, it is apparent that technological solution’s various limitations overshadow its contribution to greenhouse emissions. Thus, the solution depending on technology should not be championed, because it cannot completely deal with the ecological and social problem associated with the sprawl pattern of urban development.