The purpose of this short paper is to indicate a way of reconceptualizing central place theory in dynamic terms. In the present case the approach taken is essentially a conservative one in that it is largely determined by two general criteria: that the resulting theory be usable, and that it be as closely analogous as possible to existing theory. The first criterion rules out any approach based on such traditional assumptions as uniform population distribution, distance minimization by consumers, or the existence of a hierarchy of centers. Such postulates, in the context of central place theory, beg the question, and what is more beg it with an incorrect answer. On the other hand, while many of the particular postulates of the traditional theory are rejected, under the second criterion the more general assumptions as to the nature of the problem are retained, i.e., assumptions which those postulates exemplify. Thus the dynamic formulation outlined in the present paper, like most other approaches in central place theory, adheres to the position that the central place problem is essentially one of examining the implications arising from the union of the microeconomic theory of the firm with the theory of consumer spatial interaction. Nevertheless, while the approach is largely a conservative one, it does in certain respects require a new perspective on the nature of the central place problem. Thus, it is necessary to reject the assumption growing out of the traditional models of Losch and Christaller
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Roger White (1974) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: