Urban Spatial Structure

  • Graham Hallett


A great deal of urban economics is not geographical; it is concerned with the production and allocation of urban ‘goods’, such as housing, without being primarily concerned with their location. But some of the most acute problems of cities are concentrated in particular areas or are linked with the location of residences and workplaces. A study of urban spatial structure is therefore a necessary background to the examination of certain aspects of public policy. This is a field which overlaps with urban geography, and much of the best recent work has been done by geographers, although the founding fathers of the subject were a sociologist and two practising land valuers.


Urban Form Urban Economic American City Land Prex Concentric Zone 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Select Bibliography

  1. Alex Anas and D. S. Dendrinos, ‘The New Urban Economics: A Brief Survey’ in G. J. Papageorgiou (ed.) Mathematical Land Use Theory, D. C. Heath & Co. 1976 p. 23.Google Scholar
  2. Harold Carter, The Study of Urban Geography Edward Arnold, 2nd ed. 1975.Google Scholar
  3. T. H. Elkins, The Urban Explosion, Macmillan 1973.Google Scholar
  4. B. T. Robson, Urban Social Areas, O.U.P. 1975.Google Scholar


  1. 1.
    First published in 1903. 1924 edition reprinted by Arno Press, New York, 1970.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Paul F. Wendt, Real Estate Appraisal, New York, 1956, p. 107.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. W. Burgess. ‘The Growth of the City: An Introduction to a Research Project’ in Park, R. E. et. al. The City, Chicago 1925.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    E. W. Burgess ‘Urban Areas’ in Smith T. V. and White L. D. (eds.) 1929 Chicago: An Experiment in Social Science Research Chicago.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hoyt, Homer. The Structure and Growth of Residential Neighbourhoods in American Cities, Federal Housing Administration, Washington D.C. 1939.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ibid. One Hundred Years of Land Values in Chicago. Chicago University Press, 1933.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Harris, Chauncy D. & Ullman, Edward L. ‘The Nature of Cities’ Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Service November 1945. Reprinted in Readings in Urban Geography p. 277. H. M. Mayer and C. F. Kohn (eds) University of Chicago Press, 1959.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    W. Firey. Land use in Central Boston. Cambridge, Mass. 1947. This explanation rather weakens the case for very high density (‘over 100 dwelling units per acre’) made by Jane Jacobs, largely with reference to the North End of Boston. The warmth and sociability which she found so attractive may not have been due to the very high density as such, but to the fact that it was a community of Italians — a gregarious people under any conditions — with cultural and vocational links stimulated by their immigrant status.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. Hoyt. ‘Residential Sectors Revisited’ The Appraisal Journal 27, 1950.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leo F. Schore, ‘On the Spatial Structure of Cities in the Two Americas’ in P. M. Hauser and Leo. F. Schore, The Study of Urbanisation, New York, 1965.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Homer Hoyt, ‘The Residential and Retail Patterns of Leading Latin American Cities’ Land Economics 39. 1963.Google Scholar
  12. It may be added that the direction of urban growth has been influenced by the questionale housing policies often adopted by city authorities. In Guayaquil, the largest town of Ecuador, there is a huge squatter area in a marsh which is flooded every day, although large areas of dry land are undeveloped. The good land is owned by the national housing agency, which builds houses which only a small proportion of the population can afford, and wishes to know nothing about the ‘self-build’ sector.Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    Homer Hoyt, ‘Recent Distortions of the Classical Models of Urban Structure’ in Land Economics May 1964 reprinted in Bourne (ed.) Internal Structure of the City. p. 84.Google Scholar
  14. 13.
    K. H. Schaeffer and E. Sclar, Access for All, Penguin (USA) 1975.Google Scholar
  15. 14.
    R. Vernon and E. M. Hoover. Anatomy of a Metropolis, Harvard University Press. 1959.Google Scholar
  16. R. Vernon. The Myth and Reality of Our Urban Problems Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 15.
    A sympathetic history of regional policy, together with some of the second thoughts which have now begun to appear in academic papers, is given in the contributions by G. Hallett and P. Randall in Regional Policy for Ever? IEA Readings 11, London 1973. Perhaps because of its publisher, this booklet was not reviewed in the journals. Better known are studies such as ‘Evaluating the Effects of British Regional Policy’ by B. Moore and J. Rhodes, Economic Journal, March 1973, which estimates the effect of policy changes on employment on the basis of the improvement in the overall ‘regional’ situation in the 1960s, or Capital versus the Regions, 1976, by Stuart Holland ‘an author who has been influential in formulating British Government policies’ who criticises traditional policy for failing to realise that ‘the regional problem is caused by capitalism’. The most comprehensive survey is The Framework of Regional Economics in the United Kingdom, A. J. Brown, CUP., 1972.Google Scholar
  18. 16.
    Building Societies’ Association. Facts and Figures quarterly.Google Scholar
  19. 17.
    Professor Neutze disagrees, maintaining that local authorities would sacrifice flexibility by disclosing their plans, and that private developers would be able to undermine them. (op. cit. p. 173n.)Google Scholar
  20. 18.
    H. W. Richardson et. al., Housing and urban spatial structure: a case study Saxon House, 1975.Google Scholar
  21. 19.
    B. T. Robson, Urban Social Areas, Oxford University Press, 1975. Perhaps the author accepts somewhat too readily the denunciations of a market economy in most of the literature he reviews: the assertion that housing is ‘a social need, not a consumer luxury’ (p. 52) appears less conclusive if one substitutes ‘food’ for ‘housing’ (although this is what advocates of permanent food rationing argued in the early 1950s ).Google Scholar
  22. 20.
    National Building Agency, Land Costs and Housing Development 1968.Google Scholar
  23. 21.
    P. A. Stone ‘The Price of Building Sites in Britain’ in P. Hall (ed.) Land Values London 1965, p. 1 ff.Google Scholar
  24. 22.
    Graham Hallett, Housing and Land policies in West Germany and Britain Macmillan 1977. p. 97.Google Scholar
  25. 23.
    There has been a theoretical debate in ‘NUE’ on the possibility of housing rent-bid curves sloping upward from the centre outward. The reality is that, even in North America, there are cities such as Toronto where house prices generally fall from the centre outward and others where the reverse is the case: it depends on the extent of physical and social decay in the central city. But in both cases there is no steady rise up or down, but rises and falls, varying in different directions.Google Scholar
  26. A tendency towards a ‘peak and plateau’ in land values is found not only in North America. Stockholm has very different land policies from those in the USA, including draconian planning regulations and extensive municipal ownership. However, a land value ‘model’ (literally) produced in the Royal Institute of Technology shows a very similar pattern.Google Scholar
  27. 24.
    L. S.Bourne, Private Redevelopment of the Central City, University of Chicago, 1961 ibid. ‘Urban Structure and Land Use Decisions.’ Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 66, No. 4, 1976.Google Scholar
  28. 25.
    Richard T. Ely and George S. George . Land Economics New York, 1940. p. 133ff.Google Scholar
  29. 26.
    H. W. Richardson. The New Urban Economics: and Alternatives. Academic Press, London, 1977.Google Scholar
  30. Professor Richardson reaches the very fair conclusion that ‘NUE’ is unlikely to give much insight into the solution of urban problems but that ‘progress in urban economics will be much stronger if the theorists and policymakers maintain contact, and try to learn from each other’ (p. 243).Google Scholar
  31. 27.
    W. Alonso. ‘A theory of the urban land market’, Papers and Proceedings of the Regional Science Association 1960. Reprinted in W. H. Leahy et. al. Urban Economics New York 1970. p. 55.Google Scholar
  32. 28.
    Richard F. Muth. Cities and Housing, Chicago 1969;Google Scholar
  33. 28.
    see also Alan W. Evans The Economics of Residential Location, London, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 29.
    L. S. Bourne, ‘Housing Supply and Housing Market Behaviour in Residential Development’ in D. T. Herbert and R. J. Johnston Social Areas in Cities, Wiley 1976.Google Scholar
  35. 30.
    Ralph Turvey The Economics of Real Property London 1957. p. 47.Google Scholar
  36. 31.
    Royal commission on the Distribution of Income and Wealth. Report No. 6. Lower Incomes Cmnd 7175. HMSO 1978.Google Scholar
  37. 32.
    J. Lessinger, ‘The Case for Scatteration’ Journal of the American Institute of Planners. Aug. 1962.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Graham Hallett 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Graham Hallett
    • 1
  1. 1.University CollegeCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations