Urban policentricity in Apulia. An attempt to apply the Interlocking Network Model

Journal title ARCHIVIO DI STUDI URBANI E REGIONALI
Author/s Cosimo Alessandro Quarta
Publishing Year 2014 Issue 2014/109
Language Italian Pages 26 P. 48-73 File size 205 KB
DOI 10.3280/ASUR2014-109004
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

With the release of the European Spatial Development Perspective, the European Union has identified urban polycentricity as a balanced development model for the European territory and also as a strategy for achieving economic and social cohesion. By using the models of urban network analysis worked out within the framework of world city research, this paper tries to analyze the functional polycentricity degree of a key region of Southern Italy.

Keywords: Policentricity, Southern Italy, global cities, urban network, mega-cityregion, advanced producer services

  1. Beaverstock, J.V., Smith R.G. and Taylor F.J. (2000). World City Network: A New Metageography?. Annals of Association of American Geographers, 90: 123-34. DOI: 10.1111/0004-5608.00188
  2. Burger M.J. e Meijers E.J. (2012). Form follows function? Linking morphological and functional polycentricity. Urban Studies. 49, 5: 1127-1149. DOI: 10.1177/0042098011407095
  3. Burt R.S. (1983). Corporate profits and cooptation: networks of market constraints and directorate ties in the American economy. New York: Academic Press.
  4. Cafiero S. (1988). Il ruolo delle città per lo sviluppo. Rivista economica del Mezzogiorno, 1.
  5. Castells M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.
  6. CENSIS (2008). 42° Rapporto sulla situazione sociale del Paese. Milano: Franco-Angeli.
  7. Commissione Europea (1999). SSSE Schema di Sviluppo dello Spazio Europeo. Verso uno sviluppo territoriale equilibrato e sostenibile dell’UE. Approvato dal Consiglio informale dei Ministri responsabili dell’assetto del territorio, Potsdam.
  8. Compagna F. (1967). La politica della città. Bari: Laterza.
  9. Daniels P. and Moulaert F. (1991). The Changing Geography of Advanced Producer Services. London: Belhaven Press.
  10. Derudder B., Taylor P.J., Witlox F. and Catalano G. (2003). Hierarchical tendencies and regional patterns in the world city network: A global urban analysis of 234 cities. Regional Studies, 37: 875-886. DOI: 10.1080/0034340032000143887
  11. ESPON 1.1.1 (2005), Potentials for polycentric development in Europe. DOI: 10.1080/02697450500414728
  12. Florida R., Gulden T. and Mellander C. (2007). The Rise of the Mega Region. Toronto: Rotman. DOI: 10.1093/cjres/rsn018
  13. Hall P. and Pain K. (2006). The polycentric metropolis: learning from mega-city regions in Europe, London: Earthscan. DOI: 10.1080/01944360802146410
  14. Hall P. (1999). Planning for the mega-city: a new Eastern Asian urban form? In: Brotchie J., Newton P., Hall P. and Dickey J., eds., East-West Perspectives on 21st Century Urban Development: Sustainable Eastern and Western Cities in the New Millennium, Ashgate: Aldershot.
  15. Hoyler M., Kloosterman R.C. and Sokol M. (2008). Polycentric puzzles. Emerging mega-city regions seen through the lens of advanced producer services. Regional Studies, 42: 1055-1064. DOI: 10.1080/00343400802389377
  16. ISTAT (1997). I sistemi locali del lavoro 1991. In: Sforzi F., a cura di, Argomenti n. 10. Roma: ISTAT.
  17. Kloosterman R.C. and Musterd S. (2001). The polycentric urban region: towards a research agenda. Urban Studies, 38: 623-633. DOI: 10.1080/00420980120035259
  18. Knoke, D. and Kuklinski J. H. (1982). Network Analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage.
  19. Liu X. and Derudder B. (2012). Two-Mode Networks and the Interlocking World City Network Model: A Reply to Neal. Geographical Analysis. 44: 171-173. DOI: 10.1111/j.1538-4632.2012.00844.x
  20. Lüthi S., Thierstein A. and Goebel V. (2010). Intra-firm and extra-firm linkages in the knowledge economy: the case of the emerging mega-city region of Munich. Global Networks, 10: 114-137. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0374.2010.00277.x
  21. Lüthi S., Thierstein A. and Bentlage M. (2011). Interlocking Firm Networks in the German Knowledge Economy. On Local Networks and Global Connectivity. Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 69. DOI: 10.1007/s13147-011-0088-0
  22. Neal Z. (2012). Structural Determinism in the Interlocking World City Network. Geographical Analysis, 44, 162-170. The Ohio State University. DOI: 10.1111/j.1538-4632.2012.00843.x
  23. Rossi E.C., Beaverstock J.V. and Taylor P.J. (2007). Transaction links through cities: ‘decision cities’ and ‘service cities’ in outsourcing by leading Brazilian firms. Geoforum, 38: 628-642. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2006.11.005
  24. Sassen S. (2001). The Global City. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  25. Sassen S. (2006). Le città nell’economia globale. Bologna: Il Mulino.
  26. Sassen S. (2007). Megaregions: Benefits beyond Sharing Trains and Parking Lots? In: Goldfeld K.S., ed., The Economic Geography of Megaregions, Princeton, N.J.: The Policy Research Institute for the Region – Princeton University.
  27. Schema di Sviluppo dello Spazio Europeo (1999). Verso uno sviluppo territoriale equilibrato e durevole del territorio dell’Unione Europea, Potsdam: Consiglio informale dei Ministri responsabili della gestione del territorio.
  28. Scott A.J., ed. (2001). Global City-Regions: Trends, Theory, Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  29. Sommella R., a cura di (2008). Le città del Mezzogiorno. Politiche, dinamiche, attori. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  30. SVIMEZ (2011). Rapporto sull’economia del Mezzogiorno, Bologna: il Mulino.
  31. Talia I. (1996). Sud: la rete che non c’è. Cause ed effetti della mancata integrazione economico-territoriale del Mezzogiorno. Milano: Giuffrè.
  32. Taylor P.J. (2001). Specification of the World City Network. Geographical Analyses, 33, 2. DOI: 10.1111/j.1538-4632.2001.tb00443.x
  33. Taylor P.J. (2004). World city network: a global urban analysis. London: Routledge. Taylor P.J., Evans D.M. and Pain K. (2008). Application of the Interlocking Network Model to Mega-City-Regions: measuring policentricity within and beyond City-Regions. Regional Studies, 42: 8. DOI: 10.1080/00343400701874214
  34. Taylor P.J. and Aranya R. (2008), A global “Urban roller coaster”? Connectivity changes in the world city network, 2000-2004. Regional Studies, 42: 1-16. DOI: 10.1080/00343400601145202
  35. Van Oort F., Burger M. and Raspe O. (2010). On the economic foundation of the urban network paradigm: spatial integration, functional integration and economic
  36. complementarities within the Dutch Randstad. Urban Studies, 47: 725-48. DOI: 10.1177/0042098009352362
  37. Viganoni L., a cura di (1991). Città e metropoli nell’evoluzione del Mezzogiorno. Milano: FrancoAngeli

Cosimo Alessandro Quarta, Policentrismo urbano in Puglia. Un tentativo di applicazione dell’Interlocking Network Model in "ARCHIVIO DI STUDI URBANI E REGIONALI" 109/2014, pp 48-73, DOI: 10.3280/ASUR2014-109004