ABSTRACT
Strong arguments have been presented for two extremes, centralisation and containment, and dispersal and low density development, both of which assert a link between urban form and sustainability. But there is no consensus. Concentration in city centres is claimed to reduce journeys and improve the quality of life, but the balance of evidence in this book suggests that it may not. The counter-arguments, coming predominately from Australian experience, claim that low densities can be sustainable (or at least no more unsustainable than compact urban forms) and that the quality of life within them is much higher. In achieving sustainability the arguments both for and against these positions do not appear to provide conclusive evidence of anything other than marginal gains resulting from changes in urban form alone, unless it is associated with variations in behaviour and lifestyle.
