This paper summarises the usefulness of the differential urbanisation model, to characterise regional urban development in terms of a temporal sequence of stages from urbanisation through polarisation reversal to counter–urbanisation, as revealed in nine empirical tests (Britain, Estonia, Finland, Western Germany, India, Italy, Russia, South Africa, and Turkey). First, results of the testing are summarised. Based on the results of these nine empirical tests, we attempt to answer the question ‘Did the differential urbanisation model fit reality?’ Also discussed are modifications to the model suggested during the course of empirical testing. Then directions for future testing and improvements to the model are suggested.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kontuly et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: