While polycentric urban regions identified by scholars as a new urban phenomenon and is a spreading pattern worldwide, what are the opposing reasons to this approach? Are there any ideas supporting the former patterns that mostly can be seen in developing countries-Urban Primacy?
Hi, I don't really have the depth of knowledge here and seeing more opinions would be great so I'll add and hopefully get some more discussion happening.
One issue is that of governance and the division of power. Planning Asian Cities by Hamnet discusses it a bit in relation to Manila and Jakarta. Reading about the cities in Manila doing their own thing and the central government hasn't managed to get conformity so different rules and regulations (such as building standards) throughout the greater area. I'd also see this giving rise to competition between the different centres and the playing of one 'local' government against each other.
We modelled future urban growth in Australia and examined it in respect to a regional plan covering a number of local government areas. Too broad scale for urban design work but overall the regional plan was very good. However it is only a guideline for the local governments who have the capacity to ignore it. We've also had local government feel specific new developments are inappropriate for their area or will give rise to other issues - traffic, changing the nature of the place etc and have then been overridden by a higher tier of government.
Total speculation: Depending on size of the city and distances between centres there may be advantages with not having to replicate facilities and infrastructure which may give an advantage with economics of scale?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Asia
- India