This book contains papers from a conference on the role of the city in the modernization of Latin America. Essays on historical, economic, demographic, and political aspects of urbanization are interlarded with editorial introductions, summaries, and “elaborations.” The editor, who is director of the Center for Housing and Environmental Studies at Cornell, also contributed a paper on planning and a resumé. An eight-page article on urbanization in Caracas is relegated to the book’s single appendix. The end product is the sort of potpourri which too often results from publishing the papers and proceedings of scholarly meetings.

The conference was planned to focus on “the positive functions performed by the city in the modernization process, instead of on the usual ‘urban problems.’ ” How one isolates “urban problems” from urban “modernization” is far from clear. Hoselitz’ quip that “what made possible the invention of cities was the invention of agriculture” (i.e., between 6000 and 4000 B.C.) is a reminder that the growth of cities affects and is affected by rural change. If we jump from Hoselitz’ “agricultural revolution”, in antiquity to twentieth-century Latin America, we find little that is revolutionary, but much that is disruptive in the rural-urban migration.

A part of the urban explosion is demographic, and this is a problem that modernization has not resolved. “Birth control,” Luis Alberto Sánchez declares, “will not solve the problem of urban growth.” Noting that Latin America has the “productivity and the space for a much bigger population,” Sánchez argues almost incredibly that those most interested in fertility control are “large landowners and proprietors, and the most backward capitalists.”

On the positive side, one can agree with Germani that the city may serve as “an integrating mechanism for the rise of a modern, well-developed national society.” Despite the mushrooming of shanty towns in Rio, Caracas, Lima, and elsewhere, the majority of migrants seem to consider their lot bettered; but this is much less a compliment to the city than a condemnation of primitive rural conditions. At least, living in the city increases the probability that children will go to school. Horowitz, writing on “The City as a Crucible for Political Action,” believes that the movement of the peasantry from rural to urban areas has clearly reduced revolutionary discontent. Among the data presented are figures showing (except for Argentina and Cuba) “significant correlation between deaths from mass violence and numbers of people engaged in farming activities.” Much ado about agrarian reform obscures the fact that the Latin American city is now “the center of reform.”

This will be rewarding reading for those seeking insights into the phenomena of urbanization, a record of research accomplished, and suggestions for further study. But at every turn one sees more problems than accomplishments, for the failures of urban modernization are glaring.