© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. W4/25/12 Distribution of People in Cities (Ch. 13.2 – pp. 410-418)

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc.

W4/25/12

Distribution of People in Cities

(Ch. 13.2 – pp. 410-418)


I. Models of Urban Structure– Overview

– used to explain where people live in cities

– 3 models, all developed in Chicago

» few physical limitations in Midwest

– A. Concentric zone model• E. W. Burgess – Chicago – 1923 - sociologist

• Cities grow out from central core– Similar to tree rings

– Rings may differ in size

• 5 rings– 1. CBD – non-residential, businesses

– 2. Transition zone – industry, poorer (immigrants)

– 3. working-class homes – more modest, simpler homes

– 4. better housing – middle-class

– 5. commuters – on outskirts of city


Concentric Zone Model

Figure 13-4


I. Models of Urban Structure– B. Sector model

• Homer Hoyt – Chicago – 1939 – economist– Cities develop in sectors rather than rings– Some areas more attractive for a specific need/activity– Cities expand in wedges, rather than circles

» Refinement of concentric zone model– pattern of wealthy districts moving further and further away

from CBD over time

• Both Hoyt & Burgess used Chicago as model


Sector Model

Figure 13-5


I. Models of Urban Structure– C. Multiple nuclei model

• C.D. Harris & E.L. Ullman – geographers – 1945– Cities are complex & can include more than one center– Multiple nodes (ex: ports, universities, transportation, etc.)– Areas are attractive or unattractive to specific nodes– Some nodes avoid each other

» Also used Chicago as model


Multiple Nuclei Model

Figure 13-6


I. Models of Urban Structure• D. Geographic Application of the Models

• Models can be used to show where different social groups live in the cities

• Data used to support and/or counter models– Census tracts – U.S. Bureau of Census divides country into

clusters of ~5,000 ppl.» Tries to maintain neighborhood boundaries» May include multiple characteristics of area

– Social area analysis» Studies comparing population distributions based on

specific characteristics

• E. Criticism of the Models– Models may be too simple & outdated– Make more sense when parts of each are used to explain

contemporary circumstances


II. Applying the Models Outside North America– A. European cities

• Opposite pattern from U.S.– Wealthy live in CBDs– Poor live in suburbs

• High-density suburbs to avoid suburban sprawl– Leads to greater pockets of poverty

– B. Less developed countries• Regional distinctions – Americas, Asia, Africa

– Few cities prior to European colonialism in Africa & America– Asia had major cities

• 1. Pre-colonial Cities– Often focused on religious structure– Lone American exception was Mexico - Tenochtitlan


Income Distribution in the Paris Region

Figure 13-10


II. Applying the Models Outside North America– B. Less Developed Countries (cont.)

• 2. Colonial Cities– Similar to Eur. cities due to colonial influence

» Urban – wealthier» Suburban – poorer

– Often built new city next to, or over, “old city”» Fez, New Delhi – next to» Saigon (Ho Chi Minh City) – over

• 3. Cities since Independence– Continue Eur. pattern

» Mexico City, Rio de Janeiro

• 4. Squatter Settlements – Massive housing shortage– Too many people w/out enough money to afford housing– Incredible poverty

» Slums in Mumbai


Model of a Latin American City

Figure 13-14

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. W4/25/12 Distribution of People in Cities (Ch. 13.2 – pp. 410-418)

Documents

Transcript of © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. W4/25/12 Distribution of People in Cities (Ch. 13.2 – pp. 410-418)