The environment, for one thing. Cities emit much less CO2 on a per capita basis. E.O. Wilson put out a bold plan turn half of Earths landmass into a wildlife pr

The environment, for one thing. Cities emit much less CO2 on a per capita basis. E.O. Wilson put out a bold plan turn half of Earths landmass into a wildlife preserve[1] and something of that scale can only be accomplished by building very, very large cities. The other reason is economics, cities inherently generate greater GDP per capita, especially in highly creative fields. In parts of the world where real estate isn't subject to "hot money", they're also engines for economic advancement and social mobility. (And to an extent, they're somewhat that way in the US, UK, and other locations as well, but their impact is heavily diluted by lack of housing affordability.) [1] https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200318-the-worlds-largest-nature-reserve https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200318-the-worlds-large...