Luis Bettencourt on cities

Posted on by

In 2013, Emily Badger wrote,

At their most fundamental, cities are not really agglomerations of people; they’re agglomerations of connections between people.

Bettencourt is basically describing interconnected relationships between the population growth of a city; the incremental expansion of the infrastructure networks that more people require; the socioeconomic outputs that come from our social interaction; and the density that necessarily develops over time so that we can still benefit from ever-more social connections without spending ever-more energy to reach each other.

There may be a lot of merit to these ideas. However, it seems to me that the prosperity of cities depends a great deal on accidental and historical factors.

I got to this story by starting from the Russ Roberts podcast with Philip Auerswald.

4 thoughts on “Luis Bettencourt on cities”

  1. While I agree that “accidental and historical factors” are very important to the prosperity of cities, over time policies matter. The most extreme examples are Singapore and Hong Kong, but reverse economic policies of Great Britain and France and think of how that would have impacted Paris and London. On a cost of living and demographic adjusted basis, Texas has a much lower poverty rate than California. I have little doubt that is also reflected in the relative prosperity of Los Angeles and Dallas. Yet without doubt “accidental and historical factors”, which I assume includes geography and weather, favor LA.

  2. If Singapore were located where Auckland is it probably not be as properous as it currently is … But would it be more properous than the Anglo Auckland that actually is there?

  3. Specifics can vary with locale, but there is a 15% savings in infrastructure that is key to the growth of cities as Geoffrey West has shown.

  4. When it comes to connections, it is realized connections that matter. Infrastructures make possible many paths. But not all of them are equally popular. Supply and demand again. People and firms see themselves as participating in many supply chains — as buyers and as sellers. They chose and evaluate locations in light of these roles. The scale of activities (at many sites) and the usage of links (many modes connecting many sites) emerge together.

Comments are closed.