- Library Home /
- Search Collections /
- Open Collections /
- Browse Collections /
- UBC Theses and Dissertations /
- City size distributions: foundations of analysis
Open Collections
UBC Theses and Dissertations
UBC Theses and Dissertations
City size distributions: foundations of analysis Mulligan, Gordon Fredrick
Abstract
While many observers recognize the significance of the city size distribution topic, the resolution of several apparent inconsistencies in the body of literature has not yet been achieved. This may explain why geographers, sociologists, demographers, historians, economists, and planners essentially tend to describe intercity patterns, are biased toward ad hoc interpretations, and are prone to making intuitive statements in their research. The primary purpose of this thesis is to evolve a more consistent methodological viewpoint within the community size topic. Efforts are made to unite analytical statements resting upon a common premise, to qualify, in this light, the approaches prevalent in empirical research, and to relate theory and empiricism by adopting a flexible explanatory framework. The discussion necessarily involves a critique of existing arguments and certain extensions that, we can devise from those arguments. While there is considerable attention directed to presenting empirical methodologies, no original data analysis is included. Contending that the notions should be bound together within a systems framework, we naturally devote initial emphasis to the features of central place systems as outlined in the partial equilibrium theory of Christaller (1966) and Losch (1954). We place particular stress upon the Christaller model, the simpler and apparently more realistic of the two approaches. A major thrust of the paper is an integration of several city size models, all of which display a Christallarian hierarchy. The simplest models are shown to be special cases of a more general formulation given by Dacey (1966). Besides, we illustrate to what degree the characteristic property (that is, the constant proportionality factor) of the most elementary model (Beckmann, 1958) may be considered a limit of empirical generalization. Using the hierarchial concept, we also provide some rather novel views on the relation between community economic base and the distribution theme. It is felt that this subtopic may be useful in bridging the intra-and interurban scales. The widely expounded rank-size rule, essentially a consequence of empirical research, is then formally attached to the hierarchical models. At this stage our arguments become increasingly rigorous in order to qualify certain intuitive notions that seem accepted in the literature. The idea of hierarchical sets is crudely developed to complement the uni-hierarchy arguments. The basic conclusion here is that existing city size models hardly explain the rank-size phenomenon butt that the two notions cannot be considered totally incompatible. Empirical research methodologies are stressed as another fundamental subtopic. We suggest certain avenues along which empirical efforts must be strengthened before either (i) rigorous inductive generalizations or (ii) firm theory substantiation become more realizable. Particular attention is given to delimitation of the study area (and, therefore to the scale problem), the comparison of frequency curves, and the value of inferences we can make using rather crude statistical tools. At this stage we introduce other skew distributions that are genetically similar to the rank-size curve. Furthermore, the stochastic models that seemingly account for these distributions are taken to complement the deterministic theory mentioned above. Here we support the central place argument as the only existing source of models that explicate those factors inducing spatial differentiation of economic activities and, as a consequence, urban populations. Finally, we pursue the idea of growth within the interurban structure. At this time, however, discussion is certainly exploratory and so is limited to developing notions concerning the interrelations of growth variables (population, income, etc.) and hierarchal structure in the broadest sense. Within this analytic framework we can suggest only the most general factors that may be associated with low degrees of primacy (a quality of interurban structure that we view as a deviation from a characteristic skew distribution). This particular subtopic promises to be an exciting research theme in its own right as investigators move from equilibrium to dynamic modelling.
Item Metadata
Title |
City size distributions: foundations of analysis
|
Creator | |
Publisher |
University of British Columbia
|
Date Issued |
1972
|
Description |
While many observers recognize the significance
of the city size distribution topic, the resolution of
several apparent inconsistencies in the body of literature
has not yet been achieved. This may explain why geographers,
sociologists, demographers, historians, economists, and
planners essentially tend to describe intercity patterns,
are biased toward ad hoc interpretations, and are prone
to making intuitive statements in their research.
The primary purpose of this thesis is to evolve
a more consistent methodological viewpoint within the
community size topic. Efforts are made to unite analytical
statements resting upon a common premise, to qualify,
in this light, the approaches prevalent in empirical
research, and to relate theory and empiricism by adopting
a flexible explanatory framework. The discussion necessarily
involves a critique of existing arguments and certain
extensions that, we can devise from those arguments.
While there is considerable attention directed to presenting
empirical methodologies, no original data analysis is
included.
Contending that the notions should be bound
together within a systems framework, we naturally devote
initial emphasis to the features of central place systems as outlined in the partial equilibrium theory of Christaller
(1966) and Losch (1954). We place particular stress upon
the Christaller model, the simpler and apparently more
realistic of the two approaches.
A major thrust of the paper is an integration of
several city size models, all of which display a Christallarian hierarchy. The simplest models are shown to be
special cases of a more general formulation given by
Dacey (1966). Besides, we illustrate to what degree the
characteristic property (that is, the constant proportionality factor) of the most elementary model (Beckmann, 1958)
may be considered a limit of empirical generalization.
Using the hierarchial concept, we also provide
some rather novel views on the relation between community
economic base and the distribution theme. It is felt
that this subtopic may be useful in bridging the intra-and interurban scales.
The widely expounded rank-size rule, essentially
a consequence of empirical research, is then formally
attached to the hierarchical models. At this stage our
arguments become increasingly rigorous in order to qualify
certain intuitive notions that seem accepted in the
literature. The idea of hierarchical sets is crudely
developed to complement the uni-hierarchy arguments. The
basic conclusion here is that existing city size models
hardly explain the rank-size phenomenon butt that the two
notions cannot be considered totally incompatible. Empirical research methodologies are stressed as
another fundamental subtopic. We suggest certain avenues
along which empirical efforts must be strengthened before
either (i) rigorous inductive generalizations or (ii) firm
theory substantiation become more realizable. Particular
attention is given to delimitation of the study area
(and, therefore to the scale problem), the comparison of
frequency curves, and the value of inferences we can
make using rather crude statistical tools. At this stage
we introduce other skew distributions that are genetically
similar to the rank-size curve. Furthermore, the stochastic
models that seemingly account for these distributions are
taken to complement the deterministic theory mentioned
above. Here we support the central place argument as the
only existing source of models that explicate those factors
inducing spatial differentiation of economic activities
and, as a consequence, urban populations.
Finally, we pursue the idea of growth within the
interurban structure. At this time, however, discussion
is certainly exploratory and so is limited to developing
notions concerning the interrelations of growth variables
(population, income, etc.) and hierarchal structure in the
broadest sense. Within this analytic framework we can
suggest only the most general factors that may be associated
with low degrees of primacy (a quality of interurban structure
that we view as a deviation from a characteristic
skew distribution). This particular subtopic promises to be an exciting research theme in its own right as investigators
move from equilibrium to dynamic modelling.
|
Genre | |
Type | |
Language |
eng
|
Date Available |
2012-03-29
|
Provider |
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
|
Rights |
For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use.
|
DOI |
10.14288/1.0107072
|
URI | |
Degree | |
Program | |
Affiliation | |
Degree Grantor |
University of British Columbia
|
Campus | |
Scholarly Level |
Graduate
|
Aggregated Source Repository |
DSpace
|
Item Media
Item Citations and Data
Rights
For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use.