Definition Nature and Scope of Urban Geography

DEFINITION, NATURE AND SCOPE OF URBAN GEOGRAPHY
INTRODUCTION:
Urban geography as a discipline evolved in the twentieth century. Over the time it has
developed into a well-established discipline which deals with the study of urban settlements
within the framework of their geographical setting. One can say that the scope of the sub-
discipline constitutes the study of origin of urban settlements, their morphology and its
development, their functions in and around their environs. With the increase of population and
these settlements emerging as the magnets of economic, social and political developments; the
discipline had gained importance in social sciences. The earlier urban geographers mainly
concentrated on the physical aspects of the cities and their situation. The main emphasis was
on the relationship that existed between the location and the structure of some particular cities
and their surroundings.
With time the framework of urban geographers changed and in present times two
common approaches are identifiable. The first one mainly deals with cities as distinct
phenomenon located on the surface of the earth. They usually study the distribution, size,
function and growth rate of urban settlements along with the spatial interactions between
different urban centres. The second viewpoint analyzes cities with respect to their morphology
(layout and build up area) and intensity of land use within the city. Within this framework some
writers have also started analyzing problems related to urban growth and development.
DEFINITION: Dickinson (1901) defines urban geography as the study of a city directing the
neighbouring region. He describes that the city behaves like a king in its hinterland.
For Mayer (1951) urban geography is concerned with the study of the economic base
of cities with interpretations of the associations between cities as man’s habitat and economic
activities within the cities and its hinterland.
Nature and Scope of Urban Geography:

Aurousseau (1924) was among the first ones who gave an outline of the subject matter of the
urban geography. He is of the view that since this part of geography embraces a large part of
human geography if fails to be a specialized subject and therefore is not sure about the nature
of urban geography. But after analysing various approaches he concludes that the regional
study of towns and their functional study do form an important component of its scope. This
gave impetus to the ‘site and situation’ and ‘functional’ approaches within this discipline.
The morphological approach gained momentum with the emergence of the Chicago
School in the late 1920s. They paid attention to diverse social and economic factors that were
responsible for the segregated land use in the city. Thus, now the scholars diverted their
attention to the complexities of the cityscape rather than concentrating on the growth and layout
of the cities. This gave foundation to the new urban geography where this discipline became
more of an integrated systematic study. In the words of Dickinson (1947), urban geography is
not about planning but is concerned with various factors which are inherent to the spatial and
geographical structure of the city upon which planning should be based.
With planning gaining emphasis, functions too became important as now location was
understood through functions that are what a town does or did in the past. The functions now
also determine the pattern of city’s growth and development. When urban geography started
crystallising into a well define systematic study; came the quantitative revolution. Model
building came into existence and theory had to be tested in reality; which usually involved
statistical techniques; the most significant example being Christaller’s central place theory
(1933).
Quantification although transformed vague descriptions into crisp models through
which theory could be derived, it did not last long and collapsed. It became evident that
explanations conceived at the initial level were not enough. The scholars moved towards what
is called the behavioural approach. This approach was deep rooted therefore provided better
and satisfactory answers. Now the studies were dominated with the studies of behaviour of the
consumer and choices of the residence along with people’s perception of the city and the
opportunities it offers.
After the Second World War, the urban geographers acted more as consultants to
different planning organisations and moved away from the “social conscience” approach which
dealt with the study of spatial inequalities in urban settlements. Johnston (1977) correctly
identifies three branches within the urban geography that were the result of these changes in
the form of three different approaches. The first one is based on nomothetic philosophy and is
quantitative in nature, where the geographer documents the spatial organization of the
phenomenon. The second approach is behavioural in nature as it studies individual activities
within their paraphernalia. The third approach is radical in nature as it stresses on inequality
and constrains that the society imposes on the behaviour of certain identified groups within the
city.
The above account clearly depicts that over time urban geography has become less unified and
so it has become very difficult to compartmentalise its scope. Nevertheless one can delineate
the thrusts of the urban geography (Northam, 1975) as shown in figure 1.
Source: R. M. Northam (1975) Urban Geography, pp.5
Through this diagram he indicates the different inquiries that urban geography should look into.
A involves relationship between a place and its people; B deals with association between
different places; C is concerned with the study of relationship between people of different
places and D is associated with the relations that exist within one place or among the people of
one particular place.
Emrys Jones (1966) outlines various attributes of cities. In his words, a city is a
geographical reservoir of roads and dwellings, a centre of commerce and administration, a type
of society, even the cultural form of the mind of the urban people or the way of life style.
Various attributes that can form the scope and content of this sub-discipline of geography have
been summarized in the following diagram –
In India, one of the leading scholars in urban geography has been Prof. R.L. Singh (1955). He
stressed on three concepts under the scope of urban geography, these are:
(a) physical structure of the city,
(b) stage of city’s historical development, and
(c) processes that affect the city structure
ICSSR, in the fourth survey of geographical research shows that during the period 1976
and 1982 the urban geographers in India focussed on the following topics that come under the
umbrella of urban geography. These are - trends and patterns of urbanization; Urban
hierarchical order; Inner structure; Capital; Land use; Functional classification; Slums and
squatter settlements; Rural-urban interaction; The rural-urban fringe; The interaction between
the Umland and the city and surrounding settlements; Urban environmental problems like
Pollution, Poverty, Crime and quality of life; Urban Infrastructure; Urban governance;
Tourism; Urban planning and urban metropolitan problems.

Definition Nature and Scope of Urban Geography

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Definition Nature and Scope of Urban Geography

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DEFINITION, NATURE AND SCOPE OF URBAN GEOGRAPHY

Nature and Scope of Urban Geography:

Source: R. M. Northam (1975) Urban Geography, pp.5

You might also like