全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

Evolutionary Model of the City Size Distribution

DOI: 10.1155/2014/498125

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

An evolutionary model of the city size distribution is presented that explains the size of a city from the reproduction process and the migration of humans between cities. The model suggests that the city size distribution is a lognormal distribution with a power law tail in agreement with empirical results and computer simulations. The main idea of the model is that the competition between cities in the migration process is the origin of Gibrat's law. While growth rate fluctuations generate the lognormal branch of the size distribution, the power law tail for large cities is caused by a small mean growth rate. 1. Introduction The paper aims at deriving the size distribution of cities from the idea that the evolution of a city is a self-organized process. The term city is used here very loosely to mean any human settlement not distinguishing between villages, towns, cities, or megacities. The size is usually characterized by the urban area or human population. Ranking cities of a finite region, for example, a country, from largest to smallest, Zipf observed in 1949 that the probability to find the size of a city that is greater than some is given by , with a Zipf exponent . This power law relationship is known as Zipf’s law [1]. Using appropriate definitions of the city size the validity of Zipf law was confirmed by the investigation of large cities [2–10]. For smaller cities empirical investigations established considerable deviations from this law. Eeckhout [11, 12] showed that taking all settlements into account the size distribution for small cities can be rather described by a lognormal distribution. Empirical investigations suggest therefore that the size distribution is lognormal with a power law tail [13–15]. Several theoretical models have been established to understand these empirical facts [7, 16–22]. Since classic economic theories fail to explain the size distribution [23] the majority of models have in common to apply Gibrat’s law of proportionate effects [24, 25] taking advantage of geographic and socioeconomic forces in their reasoning. The presented evolutionary theory goes beyond previous research by deriving Gibrat’s law from the main two processes governing the population size of a city: the reproduction of humans and their migration between cities. The key idea is to regard cites as entities of a self-organized system. The dynamics of self-organized systems is governed by positive feedback processes [26, 27]. Both the reproduction of humans and their migration are self-amplifying processes, while the migration flow is shown to be

References

[1]  G. Zipf, Human Behavior and the Principle of Last Effort, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass, USA, 1949.
[2]  G. R. Carroll, “National city-size distributions: what do we know after 67 years of research?” Progress in Human Geography, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–43, 1982.
[3]  H. A. Makse, S. Havlin, and H. E. Stanley, “Modelling urban growth patterns,” Nature, vol. 377, no. 6550, pp. 608–612, 1995.
[4]  Y. M. Ioannides and H. G. Overman, “Zipf's law for cities: an empirical examintion,” Regional Science and Urban Economics, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 127–137, 2003.
[5]  A. S. Garmestani, C. R. Allen, and C. M. Gallagher, “Power laws, discontinuities and regional city size distributions,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 209–216, 2008.
[6]  K. Giesen, A. Zimmermann, and J. Suedekum, “The size distribution across all cities—double Pareto lognormal strikes,” Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 129–137, 2010.
[7]  A. Saichev, D. Sornette, and Y. Malevergne, Theory of Zipf's Law and Beyond, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2011.
[8]  Q. Zhang and D. Sornette, “Empirical test of the origin of Zipf's law in growing social networks,” Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, vol. 390, no. 23-24, pp. 4124–4130, 2011.
[9]  H. D. Rozenfeld, D. Rybski, X. Gabaix, and H. A. Makse, “The area and population of cities: new insights from a different perspective on cities,” American Economic Review, vol. 101, no. 5, pp. 2205–2225, 2011.
[10]  Y. Ioannides and S. Skouras, “US city size distribution: robustly Pareto, but only in the tail,” Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 73, pp. 18–29, 2013.
[11]  J. Eeckhout, “Gibrat's law for (all) cities,” The American Economic Review, vol. 94, no. 5, pp. 1429–1451, 2004.
[12]  J. Eeckhout, “Gibrat's law for (all) cities: reply,” American Economic Review, vol. 99, no. 4, pp. 1676–1683, 2009.
[13]  E. H. Decker, A. J. Kerkhoff, and M. E. Moses, “Global patterns of city size distributions and their fundamental drivers,” PLoS ONE, vol. 2, no. 9, article e934, 2007.
[14]  Y. Malevergne, V. Pisarenko, and D. Sornette, “Testing the Pareto against the lognormal distributions with the uniformly most powerful unbiased test applied to the distribution of cities,” Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, vol. 83, no. 3, Article ID 036111, 2011.
[15]  B. J. L. Berry and A. Okulicz-Kozaryn, “The city size distribution debate: resolution for US urban regions and megalopolitan areas,” Cities, vol. 29, supplement 1, pp. S17–S23, 2012.
[16]  H. Simon, “On a class of skew distribution functions,” Biometrika, vol. 42, pp. 425–440, 1955.
[17]  X. Gabaix, “Zipf's law for cities: an explanation,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 114, no. 3, pp. 739–767, 1999.
[18]  X. Gabaix, “Zipf's law and the growth of cities,” The American Economic Review, vol. 89, no. 2, pp. 129–132, 1999.
[19]  X. Gabaix and Y. Ioannides, “The evolution of city size distributions,” in Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, V. Henderson and J. Thisse, Eds., vol. 4, North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2004.
[20]  J. C. Córdoba, “A generalized Gibrat's Law for cities,” International Economics Review, vol. 49, pp. 1463–1468, 2008.
[21]  M. Levy, “Gibrat's law for (All) cities: comment,” The American Economic Review, vol. 99, no. 4, pp. 1672–1675, 2009.
[22]  S. Lee and Q. Li, “Uneven landscapes and city size distributions,” Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 78, pp. 19–29, 2013.
[23]  P. Krugman, “Confronting the mystery of urban hierarchy,” Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 399–418, 1996.
[24]  R. Gibrat, Les Inegalites Economiques, Sirey, Paris, France, 1913.
[25]  H. D. Rozenfeld, D. Rybski, J. S. Andrade Jr., M. Batty, H. E. Stanley, and H. A. Makse, “Laws of population growth,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 105, no. 48, pp. 18702–18707, 2008.
[26]  F. Schweitzer and G. Silverberg, Eds., Evolution and Self-Organization in Economics, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, Germany, 1998.
[27]  R. Feistel and W. Ebeling, Physics of Self-Organization and Evolution, Wiley-VCH, New York, NY, USA, 2011.
[28]  J. Kaldasch, “Evolutionary model of the growth and size of firms,” Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, vol. 391, no. 14, pp. 3751–3769, 2012.
[29]  J. Kaldasch, “Evolutionary model of the personal income distribution,” Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, vol. 391, no. 22, pp. 5628–5642, 2012.
[30]  J. Kaldasch, “Evolutionary model of the bank size distribution,” Economics, 2014.
[31]  P. Richmond and S. Solomon, “Power-laws are Boltzmann laws in disguise,” International Journal of Modern Physics C, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 333–343, 2001.
[32]  K. T. Rosen and M. Resnick, “The size distribution of cities: an examination of the Pareto law and primacy,” Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 165–186, 1980.
[33]  S. Findeisen and J. Südekum, “Industry churning and the evolution of cities: evidence for Germany,” Journal of Urban Economics, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 326–339, 2008.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133