Abstract

A rethinking of urban economics involves transforming time from a metronomic parameter to an assaying of connection, separation, and memory. Accordingly, what should be the proper weighting of history in analyses of the urban economic environment, and how might the differing takes on the nature of urban space figure in reimagining such analyses? From a mathematical, social, and historical perspective three types of challenges emerge. For example, the assumption of mathematical continuity, underlying an implicit axiom of mobility, must be counterposed to the virtues of immobility, namely housing security, a social consideration contributing to why housing markets are different. What follows is a critique of abstracted models in urban economics, as they must be comprehended as narratives, ultimately grounded in history. In the process one may uncover counter-narratives leading to markedly different conclusions, as in the case of rent control or the role of land speculation in urban development.