The past fifty years have witnessed a major transformation of Britain’s urban system. Some cities have consistently prospered and been relatively successful in terms of maintaining or increasing their share of national employment and population, whilst others have lost ground and have struggled to attract new investment and jobs. This changing geography of where people live and where economic activity locates are major systematic long-term trends persisting over decades rather than years. Paralleling the process of geographical restructuring and closely related to it, have been other economic, social and technological changes that have profoundly changed the role of different cities in the national economy in terms of their changing industrial specialisation. A familiar and well-documented theme has been the relative decline of the manufacturing sector in the conurbations and larger cities and the growth of financial and business services in conurbations such as London and some of the larger cities. Improved communications, declining transport costs, increasing capital intensity and more flexible production processes have been some of the post-war developments which have eroded the traditional locational advantages of cities for manufacturing firms and whilst transport costs and proximity to suppliers continue to matter for location, for many firms in this sector the costs of a city location would seem to outweigh the benefits. In this context we are concerned with four main questions in this paper: Which industries continue to find urban locations favourable?; Are there newly emerging patterns of specialisation within the urban system?; Which locations are favoured by high-technology industry?; and Is industry specialisation beneficial for the growth of the city? Our research argues for an urban system perspective when addressing these problems, and whilst accepting the need for locally based policy intervention in selected problem areas, also recognises the inter-dependence between cities at a regional and national level and therefore the need for policy to be orchestrated at a wider spatial scale than the local area.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number
ersa06p715.
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Alex Anas & Richard Arnott & Kenneth A. Small, 1998.
"Urban Spatial Structure,"
Journal of Economic Literature,
American Economic Association, vol. 36(3), pages 1426-1464, September.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions: