whether the city expansion could bring the economical growth of the nation, or on the contrary, the economical growth drives the urbanisation such as population centeration?
In which are those the factors in city development?
1. Although there are examples from the processes of industrialisation and urbanisation run parallel in Europe, there is no correlation between levels of urbanisation and subsequent rate of economic growth supporting the theory.
2. opposite example: non economic forces driving urbanisation-> more urban dwellers, can it be regarded as over-urbanised?
3. excessive urban concentration can have a negative impact on a nation's economic productivity. (due to efficiency and equility) but studies show that it is usually the primitive sign of economical growth, at the same time having more tendency appearing in non-domoestic countries because of political power magnetic effects.
4. Cities as engines of growth - urbanisation economies. A subclass of external economies of scale, in which benefits from the diversity of economic activities concentrated in space (facilitate the cross fertilization of knowledge and ideas-simulation o innovation). It elaborates the efficiency of individual firms to drive the economic growth.
# the idea is not only limited in material-wise thinking to reduce the logistics cost, but also the skilled working force.
5. urbanisation economies are not the same as localization economies because the latter can be happened in a city with only one industry.
6. 'Connection across firms and industries are fundamnetal to competition, to productivity and to the direction and pace of new business formation', Porter, 2000.
- ▼ 2015 (8)
- ► 2014 (13)
- ► 2013 (18)
- ► 2012 (16)
- ► 2011 (33)
- ► 十二月 (7)
- ► 九月 (18)
- ► 三月 (14)
- ► 七月 (16)
- ► 五月 (10)
- ► 二月 (12)
- ► 十二月 (7)
- ► 十二月 (9)
- ► 2005 (12)
- ► 2001 (13)