The Relationship between the Physical Growth of the Central City and Metropolitan Socio-Economic Growth in US Metropolitan Areas from 1950 to 2000*
Received: Jan 26, 2015; Revised: Mar 10, 2015; Revised: Mar 20, 2015; Accepted: Apr 06, 2015
Published Online: Apr 30, 2015
Abstract
This paper examines Rusk’s central city elasticity theory that the expansion of central city borders from annexations and consolidations relates to economic growth and development in US metropolitan areas. The theory, as explored and discussed in the literature appeared to lack an adequate and full range of empirical data to deeply or fully understand the relationship between his central city elasticity theory and metropolitan geo- and socio-economic conditions. Two major findings are that: central city elasticity levels are strongly supported over all five dependent variables for metropolitan geo- and socio-economic conditions for the both 92 central and 244 non-central neighboring cities. Accordingly, Rusk’s central city elasticity theory that metropolitan socio-economic conditions depend on the growth of central cities is championed. In conclusion, Rusk’s central city elasticity theory is an important contribution to explaining the relationship between central and non-central neighboring cities in US metropolitan areas
Metrics
QR Code of this Article:
Related Articles
Metropolitan Governance Matters: The Low Economic Performance of Metropolitan Cities in South Korea
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2019;34(1):43-72.
Relationships between the Growth of Ethnic Groups and Socioeconomic Conditions in US Metropolitan Areas
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2011;26(2):121-136.
The Characteristics of Green Belts Land-Use Regulations in Seoul Metropolitan Areas
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2002;17(1):85-96.
University Choice and Students’ Migration: An Application of the Heckman Model*
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2010;25(2):65-79.