Ecologists and economists are not conferring as they should and a certain societal schizophrenia has resulted. The ecologists tell us we must work toward sustainable systems immediately. But the economic do-gooders continue to insist that economic growth, meaning in part ongoing development, is absolutely essential. One analysis I read makes the reasonable case that the development of the New World starting around 1500 seduced western man into believing that unlimited development is possible and desirable when it is really only desirable at certain times and places. I subscribe to this view.
Development does bring jobs and people but at a price.
After a time a new equilibrium is achieved and you have the same or greater percentage of unemployed or underemployed and greater problems which now will not go away. Every large city in the US has intractable populations living in poverty and slums along with other quality of life problems from which there is no easy escape or turning back. By contrast, adequately industry diversified smaller to medium sized cities and towns tend to have jobs for most willing workers, and usually offer a decent quality of life overall. Realtors and developers benefit from ongoing development but most others, except in special circumstances, do not long term. In southwest Virginia we see a forerunner of what can happen.