Three Fallacies in the Literature on Central Place Theory

Saey, Pieter

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9663.1973.tb00080.x

Cited by 31 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Saey 1973;Herbert and Thomas 1982), their extension of the model into a non-uniform environment encouraged others to do likewise. Apart from the somewhat optimistic attempts to circumvent real world irregularities via map transformations (Getis 1963;Rushton 1972), variations in urban morphology (Johnston 1966;Potter 1981), contrasting modes of transport (Johnston 1968), and Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 15:25 23 September 2012 commodity within a single centre; and, not least, for the very fact that dissimilar retail outlets cluster together into recognizable shopping centres, both planned and unplanned (Ghosh 1986;McLafferty and Ghosh 1987).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Retail location theory: evolution and evaluation

Brown¹

1993

The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Retail location theory: evolution and evaluation

Brown¹

1993

The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Nevertheless, such an approach may be of some relevance in indicating the forces which contribute to the emergence of a hierarchy of the type illustrated in Table 1 . Clearly, the approach needs to be extended, and one of the most important improvements would involve the inclusion and specification of a realistic set of behavioural assumptions, particularly in the light of recent work on this facet of central place theory (Rushton, 1969 andSaey, 1973) .…”

Section: The Hierarchical Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Models of the Central Place System: A More General Approach

Parr

1978

Urban Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates a central place model which possesses much of the simplicity of the Christaller model but which is of considerably greater generality . A prominent feature of the model is the existence of a hierarchy of central places which is based on functional complexity . The model has a number of conceptual advantages over the Christaller model, but also appears to offer a more accurate basis for the description and analysis of actual central place systems.For some time now, central place theory has held the interest of social scientists in a number of fields . It has been used as a framework for finding order and structure within economic landscapes and urban systems, and has also proven valuable as a basis for public policy decisions relating to service provision and the spatial planning of investment (Schultz, 1970 ;Treuner, 1970) . Although central place theory contains much that is conceptually useful, its overall value has been diminished by the fact that theoretical models are frequently incapable of satisfactorily describing and analysing actual central place systems .For example, the `complete-system' model proposed by Losch (1954) is sufficiently complex that it is difficult to test, and the nature of this complexity renders the model inappropriate for many central place systems . By contrast, the central place model developed by Christaller (1966) tends to be highly restrictive in terms of the number of different cases that it can accommodate and, for this reason, is frequently unable to describe actual conditions . Christaller (1950, p . 12) did recognise this deficiency and attempted to modify the original model -an approach which was imaginatively extended by Woldenberg (1968) . Although these modifications improved the descriptive power of the Christaller model, this was only achieved at the cost of increased 35 [Received May 1977] complexity in the spatial structure and in the underlying theoretical reasoning.A rather different approach is followed in this paper . The emphasis will be on exploring a model of the central place system which in several respects is similar to the Christaller model but which does not possess the inherent rigidities of that model . After the model has been outlined and theoretical examples presented, an attempt will be made to provide a rationale for such a model . Consideration will then be given to the possible use of the model in the analysis of actual central place systems .Background

show abstract

“…Rushton (1972), Goodchild and Massam (1969), and M o d and Kelley (1970) also incorporated the concept of threshold. Saey (1973), however, argued that Christaller's objective function was a setcovering objective: to minimize the number of firms. In the field of location modeling, Bahrenberg's (1982) is one of very few models in which the number of facilities is maximized.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Location‐Allocation Model of Lösch's Central Place Theory: Testing on a Uniform Lattice Network

Kuby

1989

Geographical Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper develops a location-allocation model of Liisch's central place theory thatmaximizes the number of firms that can coexist in the market, subject to range, threshold, hierarchy, and other constraints. F.0.b. costs, ecofiomies of scale, and elastic demand are included. Consumer b e h a w postulates concerning the "nearest center hypothesis" and the "indifference principle" are f m u l a t e d as nonlinear constraints but not used during solution. Methods are developed for simulating the continuous, infinite plain with a discrete, bounded network by use of an outer overflow network and a symmetrical market area constraint. The model is tested b y applying it to a u n i f m lattice network and comparing the results to the expected pattern of nested hexagons. Solutions consistent with the k = 3, 4, and 7 patterns are generated b y changing threshold values. However, remaining inconsistencies appear to be due to the inability to express the consumer behavior laws as linear constraints, to the bounded and discrete nuture of the network, and to the objective function being the sum of integer variables. The long-run purpose of developing and validating a location-allocation model of a location theory is to use it to relax the theory's restrictive assumptions and to apply the theory to n o n u n i f m regions.

show abstract

Three Fallacies in the Literature on Central Place Theory

Cited by 31 publications

References 2 publications

Retail location theory: evolution and evaluation

Retail location theory: evolution and evaluation

Models of the Central Place System: A More General Approach

A Location‐Allocation Model of Lösch's Central Place Theory: Testing on a Uniform Lattice Network

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About