Untangling Urban Sprawl and Climate Change: A Review of the Literature on Physical Planning and Transportation Drivers
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
3.1. Defining, Characterizing, and Measuring Sprawl
3.1.1. Defining Sprawl
3.1.2. Measuring Sprawl Key Characteristics
3.2. Sprawl and Climate Change
3.2.1. The Impacts of Urban Density on Fossil Energy Consumption and GHG/CO2 Emissions
3.2.2. The Impacts of Land Use and Land Cover on Fossil Energy Consumption and GHG/CO2 Emissions
3.2.3. Transportation, Automobile Dependence, Energy Consumption, and GHG/CO2 Emissions
3.3. On Some Gaps, Limitations, and Ambiguities in the Literature
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Baklanov, A.; Molina, L.T.; Gauss, M. Megacities, air quality and climate. Atmos. Environ. 2016, 126, 235–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ewing, R.; Hamidi, S. Compactness versus Sprawl: A Review of Recent Evidence from the United States. J. Plan. Lit. 2015, 30, 413–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baur, A.H.; Förster, M.; Kleinschmit, B. The spatial dimension of urban greenhouse gas emissions: Analyzing the influence of spatial structures and LULC patterns in European cities. Landsc. Ecol. 2015, 30, 1195–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stone, B.; Hess, J.J.; Frumkin, H. Urban Form and Extreme Heat Events: Are Sprawling Cities More Vulnerable to Climate Change Than Compact Cities? Environ. Health Perspect. 2010, 118, 1425–1428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Stone, J.B. Urban sprawl and air quality in large US cities. J. Environ. Manag. 2008, 86, 688–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ewing, R.; Bartholomew, K.; Winkelman, S.; Walters, J.; Chen, D. Growing Cooler: The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change; Urban Land Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Ismael, H.M. Urban form study: The sprawling city—Review of methods of studying urban sprawl. GeoJournal 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rubiera-Morollón, F.; Garrido-Yserte, R. Recent Literature about Urban Sprawl: A Renewed Relevance of the Phenomenon from the Perspective of Environmental Sustainability. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grant, M.J.; Booth, A. A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Inf. Libr. J. 2009, 26, 91–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- IPCC. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Integovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Watson, R.T., Core Writing Team, Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Hamin, E.M.; Gurran, N. Urban form and climate change: Balancing adaptation and mitigation in the U.S. and Australia. Habitat Int. 2009, 33, 238–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bart, I.L. Urban sprawl and climate change: A statistical exploration of cause and effect, with policy options for the EU. Land Use Policy 2010, 27, 283–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bulkeley, H.; Betsill, M. Rethinking Sustainable Cities: Multilevel Governance and the ’Urban’ Politics of Climate Change. Environ. Politi 2005, 14, 42–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hennicke, P. Long term scenarios and options for sustainable energy systems and for climate protection: A short overview. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 2, 181–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yigitcanlar, T. Kamruzzaman Investigating the interplay between transport, land use and the environment: A review of the literature. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 11, 2121–2132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- While, A.; Jonas, A.E.G.; Gibbs, D. From sustainable development to carbon control: Eco-state restructuring and the politics of urban and regional development. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 2010, 35, 76–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change, Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Edenhofer, O., Pichs-Madruga, R.Y., Sokona, E., Farahani, S., Kadner, K., Seyboth, A., Adler, I., Baum, S., Brunner, P., Eickemeier, B., et al., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2014; Available online: http://ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/ (accessed on 11 March 2018).
- Iwata, K.; Managi, S. Can land use regulations and taxes help mitigate vehicular CO2 emissions? An empirical study of Japanese cities. Urban Policy Res. 2016, 34, 356–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marshall, J.D. Energy-Efficient Urban Form. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 3133–3137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Newman, P.; Kenworthy, J. Gasoline consumption and cities: A comparison of U.S. cities with a global survey. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 1989, 55, 24–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seto, K.C.; Dhakal, S.; Bigio, A.; Blanco, H.; Delgado, G.C.; Dewar, D.; Huang, L.; Inaba, A.; Kansal, A.; Lwasa, S.; et al. Human Settlements, Infrastructure and Spatial Planning. In Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Edenhofer, O., Pichs-Madruga, R.Y., Sokona, E., Farahani, S., Kadner, K., Seyboth, A., Adler, I., Baum, S., Brunner, P., Eickemeier, B., et al., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Reba, M.; Reitsma, F.; Seto, K.C. Spatializing 6,000 years of global urbanization from 3700 BC to AD 2000. Sci. Data 2016, 3, 160034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Newman, P.; Kenworthy, J. Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Burchell, R.W.; Shad, N.A.; Listokin, D.; Phillips, H.; Downs, A.; Seskin, S.; Davis, J.S.; Moore, T.; Helton, D.; Gall, M. The Costs of Sprawl Revisited: Transportation Research Board Report 39; National Academy Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Hamidi, S.; Ewing, R.; Preuss, I.; Dodds, A. Measuring Sprawl and Its Impacts. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2014, 35, 35–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeng, C.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Qiu, L. Urban sprawl and related problems: Bibliometric analysis and refined analysis from 1991 to 2011. Chin. Geogr. Sci. 2013, 24, 245–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Torrens, P.M. A Toolkit for Measuring Sprawl. Appl. Spat. Anal. Policy 2008, 1, 5–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cutsinger, J.; Towns, D.; Galster, G.; Wolman, H.; Hanson, R. Verifying the Multi-Dimensional Nature of Metropolitan Land Use: Advancing the Understanding and Measurement of Sprawl. J. Urban Aff. 2005, 27, 235–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, E.H.; Hurd, J.D.; Civco, D.L.; Prisloe, M.P.; Arnold, C. Development of a geospatial model to quantify, describe and map urban growth. Remote Sens. Environ. 2003, 86, 275–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galster, G.; Cutsinger, J. Racial Settlement and Metropolitan Land Use Patterns: Does Sprawl Abet Black-White segregation? Urban Geogr. 2007, 28, 516–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, M.P. Environmental Impacts of Urban Sprawl: A Survey of the Literature and Proposed Research Agenda. Environ. Plan. A 2001, 33, 717–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ewing, R. Is Los Angeles-Style Sprawl Desirable? J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 1997, 63, 107–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whyte, W. The Exploding Metropolis; Doubleday: Garden City, NY, USA, 1958. [Google Scholar]
- Garreau, J. Edge City: Life on the New Frontier; Anchor Books: New York, YN, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Barnes, K.B.; Morgan, J.; Roberge, M.C.; Lowe, S. Sprawl Development: Its Patterns, Consequences and Measurement; Retrieved 11 March 2021 from SPRAWL DEVELOPMENT: (towson.edu); Towson University: Towson, MD, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Feng, Q.; Gauthier, P. Urban Sprawl and Climate Change: A Survey of the Pertinent Literature on Physical Planning and Transportation Drivers-Report; Financed by OURANOS and MITACS; OURANOS: Montreal, QC, Canada, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Breheny, M. The Compact City and Transport Energy Consumption. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 1995, 20, 81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galster, G.; Hanson, R.; Ratcliffe, M.R.; Wolman, H.; Coleman, S.; Freihage, J. Wrestling Sprawl to the Ground: Defining and measuring an elusive concept. Hous. Policy Debate 2001, 12, 681–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pendall, R. Do land-use controls cause sprawl? Environ. Plan. B 1999, 26, 555–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, D. The Modifiable Area Unit Problem (MAUP), In The SAGE Handbook of Spatial Analysis; Fortheringham, A.S., Rogerson, P.A., Eds.; SAGE Publications, Ltd.: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flowerdew, R. Understanding the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. 2009. Available online: https://www.ed.ac.uk/files/imports/fileManager/RFlowerdew_Slides.pdf (accessed on 28 November 2017).
- Cervero, R.; Kockelman, K. Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transp. Res. Part D 1997, 2, 199–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boarnet, M.G. A Broader Context for Land Use and Travel Behavior, and a Research Agenda. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 2011, 77, 197–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ewing, R.; Hamidi, S.; Gallivan, F.; Nelson, A.C.; Grace, J.B. Structural equation models of VMT growth in US urbanised areas. Urban Stud. 2014, 51, 3079–3096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cervero, R.; Murakami, J. Effects of Built Environments on Vehicle Miles Traveled: Evidence from 370 US Urbanized Areas. Environ. Plan. A: Econ. Space 2010, 42, 400–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glaeser, E.L.; Kahn, M.E. The greenness of cities: Carbon dioxide emission and urban development. J. Urban Econ. 2010, 67, 404–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Karathodorou, N.; Graham, D.J.; Noland, R.B. Estimating the effect of urban density on fuel demand. Energy Econ. 2010, 32, 86–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fercovic, J.; Gulati, S. Comparing household greenhouse gas emissions across Canadian cities. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 2016, 60, 96–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Norman, J.; MacLean, H.L.; Kennedy, C.A. Comparing high and low residential density: Life-cycle analysis of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. J. Urban Plan. Dev. 2006, 132, 10–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nichols, B.G.; Kockelman, K. Urban form and life-cycle energy consumption: Case studies at the city scale. J. Transp. Land Use 2015, 8, 115–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nichols, B.G.; Kockelman, K.M. Life-cycle energy implications of different residential settings: Recognizing buildings, travel, and public infrastructure. Energy Policy 2014, 68, 232–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Senbel, M.; Giratalla, W.; Zhang, K.; Kissinger, M. Compact development without transit: Life-cycle GHG emissions from four variations of residential density in Vancouver. Environ. Plan. A 2014, 46, 1226–1243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osorio, B.; McCullen, N.; Walker, I.; Coley, D. Understanding the Relationship between Energy Consumption and Urban Form. Athens J. Sci. 2017, 4, 115–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tomlinson, R.W. CLIMATE CHANGE—Land Use, Land-Use Change and Carbon Stocks—Synthesis Report (ENVIRONMENTAL RTDI PROGRAMME 2000–2006); Environmental Protection Agency: Johnstown Castle, Ireland, 2006.
- United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Our Built and Natural Environments: A Technical Review of the Interactions between Land Use, Transportation, and Environmental Quality, 2nd ed.; 2013. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/our-built-and-natural-environments (accessed on 17 March 2018).
- Hankey, S.; Marshall, J.D. Impacts of urban form on future US passenger-vehicle greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 4880–4887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brownstone, D.; Golob, T.F. The impact of residential density on vehicle usage and energy consumption. J. Urban Econ. 2009, 65, 91–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Taniguchi, M.; Matsunaka, R.; Nakamichi, K. A time-series analysis of the relationship between urban layout and automobile reliance: Have cities shifted to integration of land use and transport? Urban Transp. XIV 2008, 101, 415–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Poumanyvong, P.; Kaneko, S.; Dhakal, S. Impacts of urbanization on national transport and road energy use: Evidence from low, middle and high income countries. Energy Policy 2012, 46, 268–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grazi, F.; Bergh, J.C.V.D.; Van Ommeren, J.N. An Empirical Analysis of Urban Form, Transport, and Global Warming. Energy J. 2008, 29, 97–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Holcombe, R.G.; Williams, D.W. Urban Sprawl and Transportation Externalities. Rev. Reg. Stud. 2010, 40, 257–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ewing, R.; Pendall, R.; Chen, D. Measuring Sprawl and Its Transportation Impacts. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2003, 1831, 175–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boarnet, M.G.; Sarmiento, S. Can Land-use Policy Really Affect Travel Behaviour? A Study of the Link between Non-work Travel and Land-use Characteristics. Urban Stud. 1998, 35, 1155–1169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crane, R. The Influence of Urban Form on Travel: An Interpretive Review. J. Plan. Lit. 2000, 15, 3–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bagley, M.N.; Mokhtarian, P.L. The impact of residential neighborhood type on travel behavior: A structural equations modeling approach. Ann. Reg. Sci. 2002, 36, 279–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bagley, M.N.; Mokhtarian, P.L.; Kitamura, R. A Methodology for the Disaggregate, Multidimensional Measurement of Residential Neighbourhood Type. Urban Stud. 2002, 39, 689–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bertolini, L.; Le Clercq, F.; Kapoen, L. Sustainable accessibility: A conceptual framework to integrate transport and land use plan-making. Two test-applications in the Netherlands and a reflection on the way forward. Transp. Policy 2005, 12, 207–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barbour, E.; Deakin, E.A. Smart Growth Planning for Climate Protection. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 2012, 78, 70–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Review Author (s), Year of Publication Title of the Review | Significance of the Study |
---|---|
Ismael (2020) Urban form study: the sprawling city—review of methods of studying urban sprawl | selectively reviewed important existing and novel methods to study and measure urban sprawl from the field of urban geography. |
Rubiera-Morollon and Garrido-Yserte (2020) Recent Literature about Urban Sprawl: A Renewed Relevance of the Phenomenon from the Perspective of Environmental Sustainability | reviewed the literature on sprawl since 2000, mainly from 2010–2020, while identifying key factors behind its renewed relevance with respect to environmental sustainability in relation to new methodological and recent theoretical advances. |
Ewing and Hamidi (2015) Compactness versus Sprawl: A Review of Recent Evidence from the United States | revisited the debates about urban sprawl and compact city and summarized the pertinent literature on characteristics, measurements, causes, impacts, and remedies of sprawl. |
Yigitcanlar and Kamruzzaman (2014) Investigating the interplay between transport, land use and the environment: a review of the literature | surveyed publications from database-ScienceDirect from 1990 and onwards on the latest empirical approaches and best practices worldwide to examine the interplay between transport, land use, and the environment. |
Wilson and Chakraborty (2013) The Environmental Impacts of Sprawl: Emergent Themes from the Past Decade of Planning Research | extended and updated Johnson’s (2001) work by collecting articles published since 2001 related to the environmental impacts of sprawl. |
Burchell et al. (2002) Costs of Sprawl, 2000. | analyzed urban sprawl, its impacts on resources, personal costs of sprawl, benefits of sprawl, and ways to reduce its negative effects. |
Johnson (2001) Environmental impacts of urban sprawl: a survey of the literature and proposed research agenda | one of the most widely cited and influential reviews associated with the environmental impacts of sprawl. |
Burchell et al. (1998) The Costs of Sprawl—Revisited | provided “a detailed examination of most of the information that can be assembled on both sprawl and its costs…” (p.ii) |
Ewing (1994) Characteristics, Causes, and Effects of Sprawl: A Literature Review | reviewed literature on definitions, characteristics, and effects of urban sprawl. |
Authors/ Year of Publication | Definition of Urban Sprawl | Particularity of the Definition |
---|---|---|
Burchell et al., (1998) | “Sprawl refers to a particular type of suburban peripheral growth.” (p. 6). | They stress that sprawl’s distinguishing trait: density, should be assessed in relative terms: i.e., especially density should be set “in context”, relative to localized circumstances (cultural, geographical, etc.) and relative to the sound use of the resources in that particular context. |
Sierra Club, (1998) | “low-density, automobile-dependent development beyond the edge of service and employment areas”. | The definition stresses some of the sprawl’s spatial characteristics (density, position relative to service, etc.) and effects (automobile dependence). |
Nelson and Duncan, (1999) | “Unplanned, uncontrolled, and uncoordinated single-use development that does not provide for an attractive and functional mix of uses and/or is not functionally related to surrounding land uses and which variously appears as low density, ribbon or strip, scattered, leapfrog, or isolated development.” (p. 1). | The definition mixes normative and affective criteria (functional, attractive), spatial attributes (scattered, isolated, etc.), and the characterization of development processes (uncontrolled, etc.). |
Barners et al., (2001) | “sprawl as a pattern of land-use/land cover conversion in which the growth rate of urbanized land (land rendered impervious by development) significantly exceeds the rate of population growth over a specified time period, with a dominance of low-density impervious surfaces.” (p. 4). | The definition refers to urbanization processes (land cover conversion, the ratio of land urbanized/population growth) and the resulting spatial patterns (land-use) and spatial properties (density, impervious surfaces, etc.). |
Gaslter et al., (2001) | “Sprawl (n.) is a pattern of land use in a UA that exhibits low levels of some combination of eight distinct dimensions: density, continuity, concentration, clustering, centrality, nuclearity, mixed uses, and proximity.” (p. 685). | Sprawl is defined in purely spatial terms, as the pattern resulting from the combination of eight properties manifested at “low-levels” of intensity. The said properties allow quantification, hence inaugurating the “first multidimensional measures of sprawl by disaggregated land-use patterns into eight different dimensions” (Ewing and Hamidi, 2014). |
Jaeger et al., (2010) | “A landscape suffers from urban sprawl if it is permeated by urban development or solitary buildings.” (p. 400). | Sprawl is defined in spatial and topological terms and as a gradient, which takes into consideration the developed, or “built” land cover. |
Jaeger and Schwick, (2014) | “A landscape suffers from urban sprawl if it is permeated by urban development or solitary buildings and when land uptake per inhabitant or job is high”. (p. 296). | Updated Jaeger et al. 2010 definition, sprawl is defined in spatial and topological terms and as a gradient, which takes into consideration the developed, or “built” land cover as well as land uptake (expressed in ratios inhabitants/land area and jobs/land area). |
Ewing, Tian, and Lyons, (2018) | “sprawl is operationally defined as low density, single-use, uncentered, or poorly connected development”. (p. 96). | This operational definition of sprawl centers on four spatial characters affecting the distribution of people and urban functions (land-use) and the configurational properties of the street network (connectivity). |
Category | Character | Variable Name | Definition |
---|---|---|---|
Urban sprawl | Density | Population density | Density is most commonly defined as population/housing or employment density, which are measured per unit of analysis. |
Residential density | |||
Land use | D variables, first 3 Ds the 5Ds, density, diversity, and design, destination accessibility and distance to transit) | The number of different land use in a given area (at a mesoscale: neighborhood or activity center, land use patterns are characterized by various measures of land use mix within neighborhoods and activity centers). Two land-use mix measures have become most accepted: an entropy index and a dissimilarity index. | |
Transportation/automobile dependence | Commute time | Vehicle hours traveled | |
Trip distance: VMT | Vehicle miles traveled (or vehicle hours traveled) “is a primary performance indicator for land use and transportation” (Ewing et al., 2014, p. 3080). | ||
Mode split | Probability (or percentage) of commuting by automobile, transit (rail or bus), or by non-motorized mode (walking/cycling); others also include moped, motorcycle, taxi. |
Author(s) Year of Publication | Type of Density | Relationship Studied with Density | Geographical Context | Main Results |
---|---|---|---|---|
Newman and Kenworthy (1989) | Population density | Gasoline consumption per capita | 32 global cities | Per capita gasoline consumption is negatively correlated with population density. |
Norman, MacLean, and Kenned (2006) | Residential density | Energy use and GHG emissions | Toronto | CO2 equivalent emissions are 60% less for high-density than for low-density development. |
Nelson and Duncan (1999) | Residential building density | GHG emissions | Toronto | Top ten in terms of GHG emission were all located in the low-density tracts. |
Andrews (2008) | Urban density | GHG emissions distribution along the rural-to-urban gradient | United States Canadian cities | Per-capita CO2 emissions vary widely following an inverted “U” shape, with post-war suburbs at the pinnacle. |
Ewing and Rong (2008) | House size and type | Housing types and energy consumption | United States | Houses located in compact counties require roughly 20% less primary energy than those in sprawling counties. |
Taniguchi, Matsunaka, and Nakamichi (2008) | Population density | Per capita automobile CO2 emissions | 38 Japanese cities | Density negatively correlated with automobile CO2 emissions Per-capita automobile CO2 emissions increased in all city types between 1987 and 2005. |
Glaeser and Kahn (2010) | Population density | Household emissions | 66 major US cities | Gasoline usage is negatively correlated with population density and positively correlated with distance from downtown. |
Kim and Brownstone (2010) | Residential density | Household annual mileage traveled and fuel consumption | United States | Households residing in an area that is 1000 housing units per square mile denser drive 1500 (7.8%) fewer miles per year and consume 70 (7.5%) fewer gallons of fuel than households in the less dense areas. |
Ala-Mantila, Junnila, and Heinonen (2013) | Residential types (Semi-detached and detached houses, apartment buildings) | Consumption-based carbon footprints by residential types | Finland | Low-rise lifestyle causes approximately 26% more emissions than high-rise. |
Pitt (2013) | Residential types (attached, multifamily, single-family detached housing) | Residential GHG emissions and energy consumption for future housing development | United States | On average, attached homes and multi-family structures are more energy-efficient than single-family detached housing types. |
Ala-Mantila, Heinonen, and Junnila (2014) | Housing and household types | Consumption-based carbon footprints by housing and household types | Finland | Rural lifestyle related to the highest GHG emissions. Emissions decrease as density increases while moving towards city centers. |
Fercovic and Gulati (2016) | Population density | Average household emissions | Canadian cities | Denser cities produce fewer emissions than low-density ones. Average household emissions across all cities over time are falling. |
Estiri (2016) | Households housing arrangement (city and suburban) | Energy consumption by households | United States | On average, US suburban households consume more energy in residential buildings than their city-dweller counterparts. |
Author(s) Year of Publication | Scope and Location | Main Method(s) | Data/Time Frame | Land Use Factors | Main Findings |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bart (2010) | EU Member States | A simple linear multiple regression analysis | CORINE database between 1990 and 2000 | Increase in artificial land area | Sprawling development is strongly associated with increases in transport-related emissions and is the most important driver of emission growth. |
Stone, Hess, and Frumkin (2010) | Metropolitan regions in the U.S. | Applying a widely used sprawl index | Urban form in 2000. Extreme Heat Events between 1956 and 2005 | Sprawl index, frequency of EHEs | “The rate of increase in the annual number of EHEs in the most sprawling metropolitan regions is more than twice the rate of increase observed in the most compact metropolitan regions” (p. 1425). |
Bereitschaft and Debbage (2013) | 86 U.S. metropolitan areas | A series of linear regression models have been applied | Air pollutants data collected based on 2000 census | 5 pre-existing urban sprawl indexes were selected | After controlling other variables, higher levels of urban sprawl or sprawled urban form are closely linked with a higher level of air pollution and CO2 emissions. |
Kim, Lee, and Choi (2014) | Los Angeles Metropolitan Area (LAMA) vs. Seoul Metropolitan Area (SMA) | Comparative approach by employing the Cobb-Douglas functions | Data were collected based on the status quo from 2008 | Distinctive land-use density: an auto-centric area vs. dense, intensive land-use area | Reduction of CO2 emissions in both areas can be achieved by the public transit mode share adjustment without weakening existing mobility levels. However, the amount of CO2 reduction of the SMA is much more significant than that of the LAMA. |
Adeyemi et al. (2015) | Tshwane metropolis, Gauteng Province, South Africa | a correlation analysis to test the relationship between Land Surface Temperature, Normalized Difference Vegetation Index, and Normalized Difference Built-up Index | Landsat 8 LCDM, 2003, and Landsat 7 ETM+, 2013 | Vegetation cover and impervious surface area | LST has a positive relationship with NDBI, while has a negative relationship with NDVI. |
Wang, Li, and Yang (2015) | Southern China | A structural equation model | 1988 and 2005 | Vegetation, urban and surrounding area, and other | “Adding vegetation area is the main method to mitigate regional climate change” (p. 1). |
Iwata and Managi (2016) | Japanese cities (1750) | Linear model | City-level data from 1990 to 2007 | Impacts of different land-use strategies | Different urban planning instruments impact the level of vehicular CO2 emissions differently. Some methods are more effective in low-density cities, while others work better in high-density cities. |
Emadodin, Taravat, and Rajaei (2016) | Tehran, Iran | MLP neutral network has been used; more detailed presentation sees p. 233. | Satellite images: every 5 years from 1975 to 2015; Local climatic data: 1990 to 2010. | IDM has been used to measure changes in aridity between 1990–2000 and 2001–2010. | Between these two time periods, the average temperature has increased from 17.43 to 18.31. More arid area has experienced greater temperature increase. |
Lu and Liu (2016) | 287 Chinese cities: four provincial-level cities and 283 prefecture-level cities | A geographically weighted regression (GWR) model | NO2 data from 2008; SO2 data from 2007 | Urban form indexes: the compact ration index, the fractal dimension index, and the Boyce–Clark shape index | Urban form characteristics significantly affect urban air quality in China. |
Cai et al. (2017) | Chinese and American cities | Compare and quantify the correlation among nighttime light intensity, surface thermal changes, and city size | MODIS LST and DMSP/OLS Nighttime light data sets 2001–2012 | Spatiotemporal changes of the urbanization process | In general, despite the spatial heterogeneities, light intensity increases with increasing city size. |
Moradi and Tamer (2017) | Bursa City | Paired Samples t-Test; Holdren Model | 1984 to 2014 | The growth of the urban settlement, the growth of urban population Emissions decrease as density increases while moving towards city centers. | During 1995 to 2003, urban growth was ascribed to 65% of urban sprawl, accompanied by a loss of forests and agricultural land, and an increase of 1.36 °C monthly minimums temperature (p. 26). |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Feng, Q.; Gauthier, P. Untangling Urban Sprawl and Climate Change: A Review of the Literature on Physical Planning and Transportation Drivers. Atmosphere 2021, 12, 547. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12050547
Feng Q, Gauthier P. Untangling Urban Sprawl and Climate Change: A Review of the Literature on Physical Planning and Transportation Drivers. Atmosphere. 2021; 12(5):547. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12050547
Chicago/Turabian StyleFeng, Qiu, and Pierre Gauthier. 2021. "Untangling Urban Sprawl and Climate Change: A Review of the Literature on Physical Planning and Transportation Drivers" Atmosphere 12, no. 5: 547. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12050547