UNIT 6: Cities and Urban Land Use LESSON 2 Principles that are useful for explaining the distribution and size of cities include rank-size rule, the primate city, gravity, and Christaller’s central place theory.

Understanding Distribution and City-Size Under very unusual circumstances, one might find that among a group of cities, no single city has unique site location advantages over others. This might happen out on a vast plain, like in Kansas, where there are no navigable rivers, waterfalls or ports. In instances like this, situation advantages come to the fore, and a regular, geometric pattern of cities may emerge. This process was more pronounced when transportation was primitive, and the friction of distance was considerable, but it can still be witnessed by picking up a map of almost any flat region of the earth. Geographer Walter Christaller noticed the pattern and developed the Central Place Theory to explain the pattern and the logic driving it forward. Central Place Theory. This diagram represents an idealized urban hierarchy in which people travel to the closest local market for lower-order goods, but must go to a larger town or city for higher orders goods.

Central Place Theory A central place is a market center for the exchange of goods and services by people attracted from the surrounding area. The central place is so called because it is centrally located to maximize accessibility from the surrounding region. Central places compete against each other to serve as markets for goods and services. This competition creates a regular pattern of settlements, according to central place theory. The geographic concept of central place theory explains how services are distributed and why a regular pattern of settlements exists – at least in MDCs such as the United States. Central place theory was first proposed in the 1930s by German geographer Walter Christaller, based on his studies of southern Germany. August Losch in Germany and Brian Berry and others in the United States further developed the concept during the 1950s. The theory applies most clearly in regions such as the Great Plains, which are neither heavily industrialized nor interrupted by major physical features such as rivers or mountain ranges. According to Christaller, if a group of people (like farmers) diffuse evenly across a plain (as they were when Kansas opened for homesteaders), a predictable hierarchy of villages, towns, and cities will emerge. The driving force behind this pattern is the basic need everyone has to go shopping for goods and services. Naturally, people prefer to travel less to acquire what they need. Market Area of a Service: The area surrounding a service from which consumers are attracted is the market area or hinterland. A market area is a good example of a nodal region – a region with a core where the characteristic is most intense. To establish the market area, a circle is drawn around the node of service on a map. The territory inside the circle is its market area. Because most people prefer to get services from the nearest location, consumers near the center of the circle obtain services from local establishments. The closer to the periphery (border, outside edge) of the circle, the greater is the percentage of consumers who will choose to obtain services from other nodes. People on the circumference of the market-area circle are equally likely to use the service or go elsewhere. Circles can be drawn to designate market areas of entire urban settlements, not just individual services. But circles cause a geometric problem. Circles are equidistant from center to edge, but they overlap of leave gaps. Squares nest together without gaps, but their sides are not equidistant from the center. Geographers use hexagons to depict the market area of a good or service because hexagons offer a compromise between the geometric properties of circles and squares.

Size of Market Area: The market area of every service varies. To determine that extent of market area, geographers need two pieces of information about a service – its range and its threshold. Range of a Service: The range is the maximum distance people are willing to travel to use a service. The range is the radius of the circle drawn to delineate a service’s market area. People are willing to go only a short distance for everyday consumer services, like groceries, laundromats, or coffee shops. But they will travel a long distance for other services, such as a major league baseball game or concert. Thus a convenience store has a small range, whereas a stadium has a large range. Retailers typically define their range as the maximum distance that most (two-thirds or three-fourths) of the customers are willing to travel. The range must be modified further because most people think of distance in terms of time, rather than in terms of a linear measurement like miles. If the range of a good or service is expressed in travel time, then the irregularly shaped circle must be drawn to acknowledge that travel time varies with road conditions. Threshold of a Service The second piece of geographic information needed to compute a market area is the threshold, which is the minimum number of people needed to support the service. Every enterprise has a minimum number of customers required to generate enough sales to make a profit. Once a range has been determined, a service provider must determine whether a location is suitable by counting the potential customers inside the irregularly shaped circle. For example, the median threshold needed to support a Kroger supermarket in Dayton, Ohio is about 30,000 people. Census data can help us determine the population within the circle. How potential consumers inside the range are counted depends on the product. Convenience stores and fast-food restaurants appeal to nearly everyone, whereas other goods and services appeal primarily to certain consumer goods. Movies attract younger people; chiropractors attract older folks. Poorer people are drawn to thrift stores; wealthier ones might frequent upscale department stores.

NOTES: CENTRAL PLACE THEORY ! Central place: market center for the exchange of goods and services by people attracted

from the surrounding area

! Best in regions that are neither heavily industrialized nor interrupted by physical features (rivers or mountain ranges) – Great Plains

! Hinterland: the area surrunding a service from which consumers are attracted

o Closer you are to the center, more likely to use that service. Closer you are to the periphery or circumference, more likely to go elsewhere

! Because hexagons offer a compromise between the geometric properties of circles (equidistant) and squares (don’t overlap)

! The market area of every service varies. To determine that extent of market area, geographers need two pieces of information about a service – its range and its threshold.

! RANGE: maximum distance people are willing to travel to use a service. The range is the

radius of the circle drawn to delineate a service’s market area.

o Differs for particular service ! Everyday consumer services = smaller range ! Concerts, stadiums = larger range

o Also must be modified because of distance

vs. time

! THRESHOLD: minimum number of people needed to support the service. Every enterprise has a minimum number of customers required to generate enough sales to make a profit.

o Type of consumer is considered: type of

service attracts certain types of people (thrift shops = poorer people, high end department stores = higher incomes)

Some villages will attract more merchants (and customers) and grow into towns or even cities. Some villages will not be able to attract or retain merchants, and they will not grow. Competition between towns on this plain prevents nearby locations from growing simultaneously. As a result, centrally located villages tend to grow into towns at the expense of their neighbors. A network of centrally located towns, will emerge, and among these towns, only a few will grow into cities. One very centrally located city may evolve into a much larger city.

RANK SIZE RULE In many MDCs, geographers observe that ranking settlements from largest to smallest (population) produces a regular pattern or hierarchy. This is the rank-size rule, in which the country’s nth-largest settlement is 1/n the population of the largest settlement. In other words, the second-largest city is one-half the size of the largest, the fourth largest city is one-fourth the size of the largest, and so on. When plotted on logarithmic paper, the rank-size distribution forms a fairly straight line (see image – top line). The distribution of settlements closely follows the rank-size rule in the United States and a handful of other countries. If the settlement hierarchy does not graph as a straight line, then the society does not have a rank-size distribution of settlements. Several MDCs in Europe follow the rank-size distribution among smaller settlements but not amongst the largest ones (see image – lower line). Instead, the largest settlement in these countries follows a primate city rule. According to the primate city rule, the largest settlement has more than twice as many people as the second-ranking settlement. In this distribution, the country’s largest city is the primate city. In Denmark, for example, Copenhagen is a primate city, because it has 1 million inhabitants, whereas the second-largest urban area, Arhus, has only 200,000, instead of the 500,000 that the rank-size rule predicts. The primate city in the United Kingdom – London – has 8 million, whereas Birmingham – the second largest city – has only 2 million inhabitants. Many LDCs also follow the primate-city rule. However, these countries, the rank-size rule tends to fail at lower levels in the hierarchy as well. In Romania, for example, the largest city, Bucharest has nearly 2 million inhabitants, and the second largest, Iasi, has 320,000. Romania also has fewer than expected settlements with population between 1,000 and 10,000. Rank-Size Rule=

Primate City Rule= Primate City=

The existence of a rank-size distribution of settlements is not merely a mathematical curiosity. It has a real impact on the quality of life for a country’s inhabitants. A regular hierarchy – as in the United States – indicates that the society is sufficiently wealthy to justify the provision of goods and services to consumers throughout the country. Conversely, the absence of the rank-size distribution in an LDC indicates that there is not enough wealth in the society to pay for a full variety of services. In Romania, the absence of settlements between 320,000 and 2 million inhabitants, and between 1,000 and 10,000, constitutes a hardship for people who must travel long distances to reach an urban settlement with shops and services such as hospitals. A trip to a shop or a doctor that takes a few minutes in the United States could take several hours in Romania. Recognizing the absence of a regular hierarchy of settlements by size, as found in MDCs, the government of Romania for a number of years had a policy of improving the rank-size distribution of their settlements. Restrictions were placed on the growth of Bucharest, and people needed a permit to move there. The government built new apartments and shops in cities such as Iasi. At the other end of the spectrum, rural Romanian settlements were designated for upgrading to small urban settlements. Government policy called for increasing the population of these small settlements from a few hundred to several thousand inhabitants. New apartments, schools, hospitals, and shops were planned, as well as electricity, paved roads, and sanitation. In this way, families living in rural areas would have greater access to the services essential for achieving a higher standard of living. What does the absence of rank-size rule in a country mean for its citizens? Using the example on Romania, make a list of how countries can improve on a regular hierarchy of settlements.

How to make Primate Cities smaller: How to make rural settlements larger:

What are the advantages and disadvantages of living in a primate city?

“The primate city is commonly at least twice as large as the next largest city and more than twice

as significant.” -MarkJefferson,1939 “The lack of a balanced urban hierarchy that we would see in countries where the rank-size rule applies is a political problem…because Britain lacks a true second city, London’s shadow looms too large for sustained national development outside of the primate city…” - SethDixon,2015

Examples of Primate Cities

Paris,atapopulationof9.6millionisdefinitelythefocusofFrance,whileMarseilleshasapopulationof1.3million.

IntheUnitedKingdomtheareaofLondonhasapopulationof7millionwhilethesecondlargestcity,Birminghamonlyhasaroundonemillionpeople.

MexicoCity,Mexicohasapopulationof8.6millionwhileGuadalajaraisonlyabout1/4ththesizeat1.6million.

Advantages of a Primate City Disadvantages of a Primate City • Magneticattractionforbusinesses,servicesandpeople(cumulativeeffect)

• Canattractinternationaltradeandbusiness • Centralizetransportationandcommunication • Enhancedflowofideasandinformationamonglargerpopulations

• Abilitytoofferhigh-endgoodsduetoincreasedthreshold

• Urban-ruralinequalities • Imbalanceindevelopment • ConcentrationofPower • Hasaparasiticeffect,suckingwealth,naturalandhumanresourcesintocity.• Becomecentersforunemployment,crime,pollution

Primate City: The largest city within a nation which dominates the country not solely in size – being more than twice as large as the second city – but also it terms of influence.

Bangkok: The Classic Primate City

Name Population1Bangkok,Bangkok 5,104,476

2MueangSamutPrakan,SamutPrakan 388,920

3MueangNonthaburi,Nonthaburi 291,555

4UdonThani,ChangwatUdonThani 247,231

5ChonBuri,ChonBuri 219,164

6NakhonRatchasima,NakhonRatchasima208,781

7ChiangMai,ChiangMai 200,952

8HatYai,Songkhla 191,696

9PakKret,Nonthaburi 182,926

10SiRacha,ChonBuri 178,916

Bangkok’s dominance InThailand...–80%ofphonesareregisteredtoBangkokAddresses–79%ofallpharmacistsarelocatedinBangkok–45%ofDoctorsarelocatedinBangkok–72%ofallregisteredcarsareinBangkok

Problems in Bangkok •Flooding•Garbage/HumanWaste•Transportation•RecreationSpaces•Pollution•PoorPlanning•Finance•Conflictingdemands•Rapidurbanization/Slums