ABSTRACT
Cities may have problems, but they are not necessarily a problem in themselves. As Mitlin and Satterthwaite (1996, p.50) observe, it is the ‘failure of effective governance within cities that explains the poor environmental performance of so many cities rather than an inherent characteristic of cities in general’. There are more positive perceptions, such as those conveyed in the ideas for higher-density compact cities advocated in developed countries (e.g. Williams et al., 1999). The perception of these concepts in developing countries appears to be similar, with the belief that compaction will result in reductions in travel distances and thus vehicle emissions, and that the high densities can create greater viability for service provision, public transport, waste disposal, healthcare and education. The manipulation of urban form, and the provision of better forms of governance, may go some way to overcome city problems (e.g. Jenks, 2000). Despite many problems, even the densest, fastest growing cities in developing countries have positive benefits for those living there. They can provide ‘enhanced opportunity for millions of people’, and ‘refuges from a stifling, restrictive rural life’ that may no longer be economically sustainable (Seabrook, 1996, p.5). The sheer vitality and numbers of people and ideas tend to change attitudes and lifestyles, and lead to higher aspirations to improve standards of living (Pugh, 1996). How, then, does this relate to sustainable development and sustainable urban form?
