EigoPro 1級 読解 — The Renaissance of Urban Density

For the better part of the twentieth century, the dispersal of population across ever-expanding suburban peripheries was treated as the inexorable trajectory of urban development. The automobile, cheap land, and a cultural reverence for the detached dwelling conspired to render density suspect, even synonymous with squalor. Yet a quiet inversion of this orthodoxy is now underway. A growing chorus of economists, ecologists, and planners contends that compact, vertically dense settlement is not a relic to be tolerated but a resource to be cultivated—the single most consequential lever for reconciling prosperity with planetary limits. The case rests on a counterintuitive arithmetic. Dense cities, far from being voracious consumers, are paragons of efficiency once one reckons per capita rather than in the aggregate. A Manhattan apartment, sharing walls and stacked atop its neighbours, demands a fraction of the heating, infrastructure, and roadway that a sprawling exurb requires. Proximity compresses the distances over which goods, labour, and ideas must travel, and it is this compression—what economists term agglomeration—that has historically made cities the crucibles of innovation. The empirical record is striking: doubling a city's density tends to raise productivity measurably while lowering the carbon footprint of each resident. Density, on this reading, is less a burden than a quiet subsidy that the dense pay to the dispersed. Such enthusiasm, however, courts a seductive fallacy. Density is a necessary but hardly sufficient condition for the goods ascribed to it. Pack people into towers served by no transit, riven by exclusionary zoning, and starved of public space, and one harvests congestion and resentment rather than serendipity. The dividend of proximity is realised only when density is married to design—to streets that invite walking, institutions that foster trust, and a built fabric porous enough to let strangers mingle. The advocates most worth heeding are therefore not those who fetishise the skyline, but those who grasp that the renaissance they herald is contingent, fragile, and perpetually liable to be squandered by the very growth it celebrates. To mistake the vessel for the elixir is to guarantee disappointment.

5問合格 60%以上普通

新規登録 または ログイン が必要です

この単元の問題を3問、解説つきで公開しています

1級 · 読解 · 全5問

問 1

Which statement best captures the central argument of the passage?

  • Economists and ecologists have failed to agree on whether density offers any measurable benefits at all.
  • Suburban sprawl driven by the automobile remains the most rational and inevitable form of modern urban development.
  • Dense cities are inherently superior to dispersed settlements regardless of how they are planned or governed.
  • Urban density can be a powerful asset for reconciling economic prosperity with environmental limits, but only when it is paired with thoughtful design.
Phrase

the renaissance they herald is contingent

1級読解主旨把握論旨
⚡ひとことで

密集は設計と結びついたときにのみ繁栄と環境を両立させる資源になる。

選択肢の解説Choice Analysis

「Urban density can be a powerful asset for reconciling economic prosperity with environmental limits, but only when it is paired with thoughtful design.」

正解

筆者は第2段で密集の効率性と生産性を評価しつつ、第3段で「Density is a necessary but hardly sufficient condition」と明言し、「density is married to design」のときにのみ酒野効果が生じると述べている。よって密集は設計と結びついて初めて資源となるという条件付きの主張が本文全体の論旨。

  • 「Suburban sprawl driven by the private automobile remains the most rational and indeed inevitable form of modern urban development.」

    = 郊外化こそ合理的で不可避だ ━ 第1段でその正統説が「inversion」されつつあると述べており、筆者はそれを支持していない。

  • 「Dense cities are inherently superior to dispersed settlements regardless of how they are planned or governed.」

    = 密集は設計に関係なく常に優れる ━ 第3段「necessary but hardly sufficient」と正面から矛盾し、設計の伴わない密集は混雑を生むと述べている。

  • 「Economists and ecologists have failed to agree on whether density offers any measurable benefits at all.」

    = 専門家は密集の便益で合意できていない ━ 第1段で「a growing chorus of economists, ecologists, and planners」が密集を資源と見なしているとあり、不一致とは逆。

▦Collocation
パターン意味例
reconcile A with BAとBを両立させるreconcile prosperity with planetary limits
a chorus of多くの～の声a growing chorus of critics
be contingent on～に左右されるSuccess is contingent on funding.
be liable to～しがちであるliable to be squandered
a lever for～のための手段the most consequential lever for change
❝例文

  • The policy seeks to reconcile growth with sustainability.

    その政策は成長と持続可能性を両立させようとする。

  • A growing chorus of voices demands reform.

    改革を求める声が次第に大きくなっている。

  • The outcome is contingent on factors beyond our control.

    結果は我々の制御を超えた要因に左右される。

  • Density alone is not a sufficient condition for vitality.

    密集だけでは活気の十分条件にはならない。

💡Tip · 覚えるコツ

C2 の主旨問は「結論段の認め＋留保」構造を読むことが鍵。筆者は密集を評価しながらも however / hardly sufficient で限定をかけている。絶賛や全否定の選肢はこの両面性を見落としているため除外できる。

問 2

According to the passage, why are dense cities described as efficient?

  • Their inhabitants are wealthier and can therefore afford cleaner technologies.
  • When measured per capita, dense dwellings require far less heating, infrastructure, and roadway than dispersed ones.
  • Their total aggregate consumption of energy and resources is lower than that of suburban areas.
  • They contain fewer residents overall, which naturally reduces their environmental impact.
Phrase

reckons per capita rather than in the aggregate

1級読解詳細効率性の根拠
⚡ひとことで

密集の効率性は一人当たりで計ると高暖・インフラがわずかで済む点にある。

選択肢の解説Choice Analysis

「When measured per capita, dense dwellings require far less heating, infrastructure, and roadway than dispersed ones.」

正解

第2段で「paragons of efficiency once one reckons per capita rather than in the aggregate」とあり、続けて「a Manhattan apartment ... demands a fraction of the heating, infrastructure, and roadway」と具体例を示す。つまり効率性の根拠は一人当たりの消費量の少なさであり、正解はこれを言い換えている。

  • 「Their total aggregate consumption of energy and material resources is lower than that of comparable suburban areas.」

    = 都市の総消費が郊外より少ない ━ 本文は「per capita rather than in the aggregate」と明示し、総量（aggregate）ではなく一人当たりで計るべきと述べている。

  • 「They contain fewer residents overall, which naturally reduces their environmental impact.」

    = 住民が少ないから負荷が小さい ━ 密集（dense）は人口が多いことを意味し、人口が少ないという記述は本文にない。

  • 「Their inhabitants are wealthier and can therefore afford cleaner technologies.」

    = 住民が裕福で技術を買える ━ 収入や技術購入力による効率化は本文で一切述べられていない。

▦Collocation
パターン意味例
per capita一人当たりのper capita emissions
in the aggregate総計ではsmall in the aggregate
a fraction of～のごく一部a fraction of the cost
a paragon of～の模範a paragon of efficiency
stacked atop～の上に重なってstacked atop its neighbours
❝例文

  • Per capita water use fell sharply.

    一人当たりの水使用量は急減した。

  • In the aggregate, the savings are substantial.

    総計で見れば、その節約はかなりのものだ。

  • The repair costs a fraction of a new unit.

    修理は新品のごく一部の費用で済む。

  • She is a paragon of professional restraint.

    彼女は職業人としての自制の模範だ。

💡Tip · 覚えるコツ

C2 の詳細問では per capita と in the aggregate のような「測定単位の対比」が複数選肢の分岶点になる。本文がどちらの単位で語っているかを特定し、反対語を使ったダミー選肢を排除しよう。

問 3

What does the passage say results when density is not accompanied by good design?

  • It causes cities to consume more energy per capita than dispersed settlements.
  • It produces congestion and resentment rather than the chance encounters that foster innovation.
  • It generates the same agglomeration benefits but at a slower pace.
  • It immediately lowers property values and drives residents back to the suburbs.
Phrase

one harvests congestion and resentment rather than serendipity

1級読解詳細設計欠如の帰結
⚡ひとことで

交通や公共空間を欠いた密集は混雑と反発を生む。

選択肢の解説Choice Analysis

「It produces congestion and resentment rather than the chance encounters that foster innovation.」

正解

第3段で「Pack people into towers served by no transit, riven by exclusionary zoning, and starved of public space, and one harvests congestion and resentment rather than serendipity」と述べている。serendipity（思いがけない出会い）は innovation を生む出会いを指し、それが失われ congestion and resentment が残るという正解の記述と一致する。

  • 「It immediately lowers local property values and drives longtime residents back out to the suburbs.」

    = 地価が下がり住民が郊外へ戻る ━ 地価や郊外への回帰については本文に言及がなく、本文の結果は「混雑と反発」。

  • 「It generates the same agglomeration benefits but at a slower pace.」

    = 同じ集積便益が遅れて生じる ━ 設計を欠くと便益は「遅れる」のではなく実現しない（harvest ... rather than serendipity）。

  • 「It causes cities to consume more energy per capita than dispersed settlements.」

    = 郊外より一人当たり消費が增える ━ 第2段で密集は一人当たり消費を下げるとあり、設計欠如の帰結としては述べられていない。

▦Collocation
パターン意味例
starved of～を欠いてstarved of public space
riven by～で分裂したriven by zoning
harvest A rather than BBではなくAを得るharvest resentment rather than serendipity
served by～が通っているserved by no transit
pack into～に詰め込むpack people into towers
❝例文

  • The district is starved of green space.

    その地区は緑地を欠いている。

  • The town was riven by old rivalries.

    その町は古い反目で分裂していた。

  • Poor planning harvests congestion, not vitality.

    拙い計画は活気ではなく混雑を生む。

  • The estate is served by no railway.

    その団地には鉄道が通っていない。

💡Tip · 覚えるコツ

仮定法的な命令文（Pack people ..., and one harvests ...）は「もし～すれば結果は～」の口語的構造。C2 ではこの仮定推論を見抜き、「設計欠如→負の結果」の因果を正確に拾うこと。

残り2問は、解いて確かめられます

全5問すべてに、この形式の解説が付いています。 間違えた問題は記録され、あとから復習できます。

無料で登録して続きを解く

インストール不要・カード登録なし・いま全機能無料

この単元の講義を見る1級の単元一覧1級の用語集