Fringe suburbs have historically always had fewer jobs than workers. What policy makers should focus on is providing good transport links to the more central parts of the city where most of the employers want to be
There's very little reason to think the Andrews government's promised suburban loop rail line will catalyse jobs growth in suburban centres on a scale that even remotely justifies the cost
Understanding that most jobs are outside the city centre is vital, because the challenges they present for transport infrastructure policy are more complex and more politically difficult
There’s a meme that most recent jobs growth in Australia’s largest cities is now in the city centre. Not true; a lot is because it includes the CBD, but nowhere near most
Tall residential towers are widely seen as inappropriate in the suburbs. But maybe the idea of "the suburbs" is itself no longer appropriate
Inner city residents can access many more jobs than those who live in the outer suburbs. But it doesn't follow that sprawl means the urban fringe is a wasteland of economic opportunity
The received wisdom these days is the structure of big cities should be 'polycentric' rather than 'monocentric'. It's apparently so self-evidently desireable there's no need to consult with the public!
We're increasingly being told we need higher job densities in our cities to exploit 'agglomeration economies' associated with the 'knowledge economy'. But are the benefits exaggerated?
Jobs grew faster in Melbourne's centre than in Sydney's over 2006 to 2011. It might be that Melbourne makes it a lot easier for firms to locate in and near the CBD.
Bernard Salt had a fascinating but ultimately somewhat flawed article in The Australian last Saturday, Welcome to the Metropolis, which looks “at how Melbourne is narrowing the gap with Sydney in the contest to become the nation’s top city”. It’s gated, but well worth reading – I recommend doing what I did and taking out […]