ABSTRACT
In a recent critique of Australian urbanism, Gleeson (2004) notes the demise of the conventional low-density suburb and the emergence of a bifurcated landscape consisting of spaces of intense poverty and despair on the one hand, and elite master-planned estates filled with mega-houses on the other. Both environments have negative implications for children’s freedom of movement. In the former, the presence of crime, prostitution and drug-dealing contributes to a public environment that is often antithetical to safe and happy childhoods. In the latter, risk-averse parenting cultures mean children are likely to be chauffeured to and from extra-curricular activities, and school, by private motor vehicle. In this chapter, we seek to link concerns about children’s increasing physical inactivity and confinement to private supervised spaces to the increasingly intense nature of urban and suburban landscapes.
