Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
notions from related disciplines, like transportation science, decision theory, politi-
cal science, demography, sociology and the like. Regional science has very often
exhibited a strong methodological—often statistical-econometric—orientation.
Examples can be found inter alia in O'Sullivan (
1981
), McCann (
2005
), Brakman
et al. (
2009
) and Capello and Nijkamp (
2009
).
Location theory has always formed the heart of regional science, first in the
sense of industrial localization, but later on also in terms of residential location and
facilities location. This has spurred an overwhelming volume of advanced studies
on the foundations of the space-economy, including its complex space-time
interactions. A concise review of the principles of location theory can be found in
Gorter and Nijkamp (
2001
). In the course of time, location theory has been
integrated in a much wider context of dynamic evolution of regions and cities. To
a large extent, it has been mainstreamed with analytical spatial economics and
economic geography, on the basis of a strong quantitative orientation (see also
Fischer and Nijkamp
2013
).
In recent years, we have witnessed an increasing popularity of the so-called New
Economic Geography (NEG). NEG serves to find an interface between analytical
economic geography and mainstream economics from a more conceptual theoreti-
cal perspective, with a clear emphasis on formal modelling exercises which take
into account the heterogeneity in geography causing spatial disparities and imper-
fect competition. It places, therefore, particular emphasis on spatial agglomeration
forces and regional growth convergence. Its first orientation was towards centre-
periphery models, integrated regional and urban systems, and models of geographic
agglomeration and trade, while later on the attention shifted to monopolistic
competition issues, heterogeneity of production inputs, diversity in geographic
space, spatial spread of industries, and heterogeneous preferences of economic
actors.
According to Ascani et al. (
2012
) there are four characteristic features of NEG
that distinguishes this discipline from regional science and related methodological
frameworks:
Increasing returns to scale in relation to the spatial unevenness of economic
activity (explaining spatial concentration of industrial and human activity).
Monopolistic competition in relation to the absence of perfectly competitive
markets (inducing large industrial conglomerates).
Transport costs in relation to locational choices, e.g. the 'iceberg' transport costs
phenomenon (stimulating, for instance, multi-plant companies).
External economies in relation to labour market pooling or technological spill-
over effects (inducing a spatial concentration of labour force and industries).
All in all, NEG has built up a solid formal apparatus, although its empirical and
evidence-based underpinning is still feeble compared to modern applied modelling
experiments in regional science. Its orientation is predominantly towards 'stylized
facts'. It leans more on economics than on analytical economic geography, while it
has provided only new insights in a limited domain of economic geography
(in particular, locational analysis).
