scholarly journals Modelling of spatial organization and the dichotomy of centre–periphery

Geografie ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 119 (4) ◽  
pp. 384-405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marián Halás

One way to understand peripherality is to view it as a characteristic reflecting geographical and spatial organisation. In such case, attributes such as location, population density, infrastructure, etc. feature as primary indicators. A second approach to peripherality places emphasis on the assessment of social and economic indicators, irrespective of location in a geographic sense. The first, geographic or geometric, approach towards peripherality can be more readily depicted by graphic spatial models. This contribution attempts to identify the general patterns of spatial organisation of the core – periphery dichotomy and to capture the graphic depiction of this distribution for the example of Slovakia and Czechia. This effort resulted in the identification of common and different features of the spatial distribution of central and peripheral regions in both countries. The organisational hierarchy and the theoretical core–periphery distribution model have been adopted from the central place theory and from the fractal theory.

Author(s):  
Cansu Güller ◽  
◽  
Çiğdem Varol ◽  

Technological developments such as the extensive use of modern communication tools and increasing infrastructure opportunities have changed the spatial organization forms and daily life practices in cities. Previously, central place theory, which explains hierarchical urban patterns based on the minimum population size-based threshold concept and the maximum distance-based range concept has become incompetent to explain the spatial organization of today's settlements. At this point, in defining the urbanization processes and explaining the spatial organization, the search for new conceptual and methodological approaches has become important. In this study, changing urban systems are evaluated in terms of closeness centrality, attribute centrality, network centrality, and geographical centrality based on space of flows and interpreted by current parameters. It is concluded that in defining the structure and spatial organization of urban systems, the morphological and functional dimensions of urban systems should be evaluated besides the parameters of population, geographical proximity or network relations. In this context, a model proposal has been developed by using current parameters such as density, diversity, mobility, connectivity, spatial-temporal structure, and urban networks.


1991 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Little

The rational-choice paradigm has been attractive to many area specialists in their efforts to arrive at explanations of social and political behavior in various parts of the world. This model of explanation is simple yet powerful; we attempt to explain a pattern of social behavior or an enduring social arrangement as the aggregate outcome of the goal-directed choices of large numbers of rational agents. Why did the Nian rebellion occur? It was the result of the individual-level survival strategies of north China peasants (Perry 1980). Why did the central places of late imperial Sichuan conform to the hexagonal arrays predicted by central-place theory? Because participants—consumers, merchants, and officials—made rational decisions based on considerations of transport cost (Skinner 1964–65). Why was late imperial Chinese agriculture stagnant? Because none of the actors within the agricultural system had both the incentive and the capacity to invest in agricultural innovation (Lippit 1987).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document