I have suggested this before in a tongue in cheek manner but we should have some serious discussion on this subject
Auckland has about one third of the total population of this country
I believe that is too large a percentage and that having that large a percentage will badly distort the development of the rest of the country that way that London has damaged the UK
This leads to
What is the optimum size for a city?
Large enough that it can afford all of the benefits of city life, the concentration of market and people that drives industry
Not so large that the costs and inconvenience of moving inside it become too large a negative
The way I see it the advantages of scale will follow a curve of diminishing improvement – increasing size may continue to offer advantages but they will become less as the city grows
The disadvantages of scale will follow a different type of curve – getting steadily greater as the city grows
The disadvantages of size will be made worse if the city is in an area with limited growth capacity due to the local topography– like Dunedin as opposed to Chrischurch
Having decided on an optimum size we should use a taxation/subsidy regime to reduce the growth pressure on cities (Auckland) above that size and to transfer that growth to cities that are below the optimum size
Do you like this suggestion?