Capitalist dynamics and New Urbanist principles: junctures and disjunctures in project development

Abstract

Both conservatives and liberals have criticized the New Urbanist movement with respect to its built outcomes and underlying theory. Conservatives admit that New Urbanism represents a particular market segment, but contend that most Americans prefer the traditional auto‐oriented suburb. Many critics on the left argue that New Urbanism is a false hope for improving urban life because it is limited to physical design, deals inadequately with issues of social justice and political economy, and is easily appropriated by the real estate industry as just another consumer product. The existing literature offers little systematic discussion of how the capitalist system matches up with New Urbanist principles and practices. This paper explores this issue by creating a framework for understanding the intersection of the three circuits of capital – finance capital, fixed capital, and research and technology capital – with three key New Urbanist principles – design fit; sustainability; and a composite principle encompassing civility, diversity, and equity. Given the three circuits of capital and the three design principles, there are nine points of interaction between New Urbanism and capitalism. Rather than taking capitalist principles for granted when evaluating the challenges facing New Urbanism, the authors use a critical perspective of this economic system. The conclusion suggests some changes in finance, regulation, politics, and design philosophy that may be needed before the full benefits of New Urbanism can be realized.

Keywords:

• New Urbanism
• urban design
• political economy
• sustainability
• real estate
• land development
• place making

Notes

1. Kevin Lynch (1981) remarked: “The fit of a settlement refers to how well its spatial and temporal pattern matches the customary behavior of its inhabitants” (p. 151).

2. Yosef Rafeq Jabareen notes that sustainable urban forms should address compactness, sustainable transport, density, mixed‐land uses, diversity, passive solar design, and greening.

3. See: Rob Steuteville (2002b, p. 20); Rob Steuteville (2003b, pp. 4–6); Philip Langdon (2006, pp. 5–6).

4. Developer Robert Davis (2002, p. 21) notes: “Today, shortsighted greed is rewarded by a finance and production system that views real estate as a high‐risk crap shoot, one that you'd better get into and out of quickly … It takes time to build, or revive, a town or an urban neighborhood.”

5. Rob Steuteville (2006, p.13).

6. There are indications that gated communities are not as accepted as previously thought. Only 17% of Americans believe that gates play a role of having an ideal neighborhood. See: Robert Steuteville (2007b, p. 3).