orange book: much larger and more important that any other city in that country. This is true of Buenos Aires, Argentina and Copenhagen, Denmark.
Many LDCs as well as some European countries follow the primate city rule.
blue book: In some countries, the primate city is so dominant that no other cities fir the rank-size rule; they are far smaller than the primate city.
Ex: Seoul South Korea.
Even in more developed countries in Europe, the rank-size rule does not apply; London dominates Britain, Paris dominated France, etc.
In countries where a primate city dominates, the rest of the country depends on it for cultural, economic, political, and major transportation needs. On the other hand, the primate city depends on the rest of the country as paying consumers of the services produced in the city.
URBAN VS. RURAL
blue book: In the 1930s, social scientist Louis Wirth defined a city as a permanent settlement that has three characteristics that create living experiences for urban residents that are different from residents in rural areas:
1. large size: social contacts are very different in urban areas, where one comes in contact with many people, but doesn't get to know them well, opposite from rural
2. High population (Density): people in cities have highly specialized jobs which allows a lot of people to live in one space. Each person plays a role which allows the system to run smoothly. At the same time, high density encourages competition for space, causing domination of some social groups. It also leads to higher prices for property and rents, further distinguishing between rich and poor.
3. Social heterogeneity: large settlements include people with diverse backgrounds. Wirth nots that despite the freedom and independence that cities offer, a downside of urban living is that people may feel lonely and isolated.
orange: def + In the urban world most relationships are contractual and employment is more highly specialized than in rural areas. In MDCs social distinctions between urban and rural residents has become more blurred than in LDCs because nearly everyone in an MDC is now urban.
Urban settlements now can be physically defined by legal boundary, as continuously built-up area, and as a functional area.
Developed in the 1930s by Walter Christaller, this model explains and predicts patterns of urban places across the map. In his model, Christaller analyzed the hexagonal, hierarchical pattern of cities, villages, towns, and hamlets arranged according to their varying degrees of centrality, determined by the central place functions existing in urban places and the hinterland they serve.
picture: hexagonal market areas
orange book: provides a framework for looking at the relationship between settlements of different sizes, especially their ability to provide various goods and services.
blue book: Christaller provided a model for settlement patterns based on several assumptions:
-no topographic barriers
-no difference in farm productivity
-an evenly dispersed farm settlement
-people with similar lifestyles
-purchase of goods and services
His results have formed the basis of central place theory ever since:
1. The landscape is divided into noncompeting market areas (complementary regions).
2. The market areas form a series of hexagons that cover the area, with no area unserved and no area with equal service from two centers.
3. The central place is at the center of each hexagon.
4. The size of the market area of each central place is based on the number of goods and services offered. (direct relationship)
5. Within each hexagon lie smaller hexagons with central places that serve smaller areas. This nesting of small hexagons within larger ones creates a hierarchy of central places, with small centers providing lower-order servies than the large centers do.
Christaller came to two important conculsinos regarding settlement patterns.
1. Towns of the same size are evenly spaced bc they are in the center of like-sized market areas. Larger towns will be farther apart than smaller towns bc their market areas are larger.
2. Towns are part of an interdependent system. If a central place is eliminated, the entire system readjusts, altering the spatial pattern to meet the needs and demands of the inhabitants.
These conclusions describe agricultural cities particularly well. It does fairly accurately describe special-function cities and transportation-based cities.
vocab for this theory:
central place: urban centers that provide services to their surrounding rural people
range: maximum distance people are willing to travel to use a service
threshold: minimum number of people needed to support a service
spatial competetion: central places compete with each other for customers
notes:-helps decide best place for a new business
-hexagon shaped bc circle not practical because of overlapping and it leaves open spaces, square not ideal because it isnt equidistant. Hexagon was final solution
This model, conceived by Homer Hoyt, predicts and explains North American urban growth patterns in the 1930s in a pattern which similar land uses and socioeconomic groups clustered in linear sectors radiating outward from a CBD, usually along transportation corridors.
blue book: developed as a variant of the concentric zone. According to Hoyt, the city develops in a series of sectors, not rings, as Burgess described. The sectors may be determined by environmental factors or simply by chance. As a city grows, particular activities expand outward in a wedge like sector from the center. Once a district is established for industry, other industry will cluster around it, creating the wedge. Middle class residences are adjacent to the hih-income areas, and low income areas occupy the left over areas. Notes that as the city grows, residential areas once occupied by the wealthy "filter down" to the middle class, and eventually to the lower class.
orange book: he believed that certain areas of the city might be more attractive for various activities because of environmental reasons. The sectors often followed transportation lines. claimed social patterns in Chicago support this model.
-high income areas along fashionable boulevards or rail lines, water, high ground, and far from industry
-industry radiates along river or rail lines
-low income radiates near industry
-zone of transition=basic sector
Developed in the 1950s by Chauncy Harris and Edward Ullman, this model explains the changing growth pattern of urban spaces based on the assumption that growth occured independently around several major nodes, many of which are far away from the CBD and only marginally connected to it.
orange book: believed that cities lack one central core, and instead have numerous nodes of activity.
blue book: The sector and concentric zone model say that urban growth develops outward from a CBD. Countering that, the multiple nuclei model says the large cities develop by spreading from several nodes of growth not just one. These nodes have functional activity, like PORTS, businesses, universities, airports, and different levels of residences. This model explains that incompatible land use activities do not cluster in the same locations, so the nodes influence the type of development that occurs around them. The clusters expand as the city grows, and when the clusters come into contact, incompatible land uses develop along the lines of juncture.
For example, a university node may attract well educated residents, pizzerias, and bookstores. Whereas an airport may attract hotels and warehouses.
On the other hand, incompatible land-use activities avoid clustering in the same locations. Heavy industry and high-class housing, for example, rarely exist in the same neighborhood.
Larry Ford and Ernest Griffin created a model of the pattern of urban growth in Latin America. Their model contains elements of Latin American culture and imprints of colonization and globalization, such as a prominent plaza and heavy growth around the CBD. However, in the Latin American pattern shown in their model, residential quality decreases with distance from the CBD. The model also presents a zone of maturity, populated with services and a wealthier population, a zone of squatter settlements, where recent urban migrants set up makeshift housing; and a zone of in situ accretion, which is a transitional zone that shows signs of transition to a zone of maturity.
-wealthy live in same sector-stronger infrastructure
DEF of infrastructure: all the facilities that support basic economic activities to such a degree that a city cannot function without them
orange book: shows the wealthy living close to the CBD. Industrial sectors radiate out from the CBD, and the poorest live on the urban fringe in squatter settlements; known by a variety of names such as barrios (Mexico) and favelas (Brazilian)
blue book: model that blends traditional elements of Latin American culture with forces of modernization that are changing them rapidly. The CBD is the focus just like in North America, but it is divided into a market sector, where old-fashioned markets are set up; and a high rise sector, where more modern businesses are. From this area, a commercial spine radiates away from the city, and is surrounded by the elite residential sector. This leads to an edge city.
The remaining concentric zones are residential areas for the poor and the middle class. Closer in are the middle classes who form a "zone of maturity" where they generally maintain their homes well enough to keep them from deteriorating.
The disamenity sector is a relatively stable slum area that radiates from the central market to the outermost zone of peripheral squatter settlements consists of hih-density shantytowns.