Future urbanization - urban growth - seems to always be presented from a positivist standpoint as a neutral fact. However, from a critical perspective, it seems obvious that urbanization as well as economic and material growth are tightly intertwined and mutually feeding phenomena. Urbanization is embedded in a system of policies, economic incentives, cultural norms, etc. Urbanization is rooted in a political economy. It is not neutral. It is at the same the condition of and the requirement for economic growth through the availability of workforce for industry and services, accumulation of capital, etc.
Do you know of any academic work that has articulated a proper critique of the premise that urbanization would be an inescapable future or necessity? I am particularly interested in a critique from a socio-ecological point of view.
It seems to me that the whole sustainability discussion is entirely accepting current business-as-usual urbanization projections not only an inescapable phenomenon, but a desirable one. But, I see many points where this premise can be challenged and I would expect that scholars have already done it. Still I have hard time finding it. Any hints?
I would anticipate critique from neo-marxist theorists of urbanization like David Harvey or from academic communities from the degrowth, post-growth, diverse economies, feminist economics, etc.
