Is there still a place for the central place

Is there still a place for the Central Place?

Christaller’s location theory re-applied to the 21st century. A case of the city of Eindhoven

Is there still a place for the Central Place? Christaller’s location theory re-applied to the 21st century. A case of the city of Eindhoven Chris Steenhuis (0869726) 07-06-2015 Supervised by: dr. Sergio M. Figueiredo Urban Concepts (7W265) Eindhoven University of Technology

Abstract The Central Place theory (CPT) developed by German geographer Walter Christaller (1893 – 1969) is an economic model that simulates the economic activity of cities in a strict hierarchical way. Although much criticized (Parr, 1980; Ullman, 1941; Von Böventer, 1969; Fisher, 2011) it is argued that it still serves a certain value. Applicability of the CPT in the 21st century is discussed. The model is applied in practice on the city of Eindhoven. The results show profound implications on the city. In order to achieve the central place structure the city center must be de-densified in order to to strengthen surrounding central places and satellite towns of Eindhoven must been moved invoking severe spatial and social implications for the center of Eindhoven. These implications often conflict with the current policy employed by the city.

Keywords: Central Place Theory, Walter Christaller, Location theory, Spatial organization 1

7W265 Urban Concepts Central Place theory

1. INTRODUCTION

Economics of Location” appeared in 1954.

This paragraph will give a brief introduction to In this book he refined and generalized the Central Place Theory (CPT), its limitations Christaller’s theory of central places — but, as and its historical foundations. Finally a short he claims, without even knowing Christaller’s book beforehand. Lösch’s approach leads overview of the paper will be given. to different types of places which specialize in different goods, but are not in a strict Foundations hierarchical order (Fisher, 2011). Lösch’s main Modern Angelo-American location analysis contribution is the creation of a more flexible predominated during the 1950’s and 1960’s Central place theory.

(Coe et al, 2007), during this period regional

What these models all have in planning found a strong scientific basis in the common is that they consider the land to development of spatial distribution models be homogeneous and they assume that (Eiselt & Marianov, 2011). These quantitative consumers are rational in their choices, focused models for the allocation of something that will be discussed later. distribution places for goods try to answer the question why economic activities are The Central Place Theory concentrated in a certain space and not in others. One of these theories is the Central The CPT is comparatively simple and is based Place Theory (CPT) developed by German on two key variables (Coe et al, 2007): the first geographer Walter Christaller (1893 – 1969). being maximum distance people are willing The model simulates the economic activity of to travel to buy the good (the range), in other cities in a strict hierarchical way. Christaller words the economic distance. The second was however not the only one who working one being the minimum level of business in this field. Two other important names need required to be viable (the threshold). The CPT to be mentioned here, those of Thünen’s combines these two variables in a hexagonal (with his Ring Theory) and Lösch’s Theory of distribution of suppliers, reflecting the theoretically most efficient geometrical Economic Regions.

Johann Heinrich von Thünen’s (1783 design.

Christaller was the first to research – 1850) developed his land-use theory prior to Christaller. His theory was fully focused the hierarchy of different towns, instead of on the agricultural use of land (Fisher, 2011). studying them as a single unit. Christaller is Von Thunen considers an “isolated state” mainly interested in the laws and principles where there is a central city surrounded by that determine the number, size, and wilderness. Like the Central place the land distribution of towns, in order to explain is considered homogeneous and farmers the existing structures he observed in are rational in maximizing their profit. Von Southern Germany (Fisher, 2011). From his Thünen wants to determine to which use the point of view, these could not be explained land should for what kind of use, depending by geographical aspects, but only through economic theory and, therefore, economic on the distance to the central town.

In 1940, August Lösch (1906 – 1945) laws.

The CPT theory is based around the published his book “Die Räumliche Ordnung der Wirtschaft”. The English translation “The concept of central places. Christaller defines 2

Chris Steenhuis: Is there still a place for the Central Place?

Figure 1 A cut out of Christaller’s theoretical model. Source: Author.

central places as those settlements which are important for the surrounding area because they provide it with so-called central goods.

Central goods and services are produced at only a few central places, but are needed and consumed at many different and dispersed places. Examples include medical services, cinemas, schools, and stores. The centrality is not so much about the production of the goods but more about the consumption of it.

To make the CPT work Christaller had to make three important assumptions (Fisher, 2011; Von Böventer, 1969). Firstly, the land is considered a flat homogenous surface on which the population is evenly distributed.

Secondly all consumers have the same demand regarding the “central goods,” and they all have the same income and identical purchasing power. The assumption is that the market is uniform and the same everywhere.

Thirdly, transportation costs are assumed to be proportional to the distance. Travel costs are the same everywhere and in every direction and increase in proportion to the distance traveled. Customers will therefore

always travel to the nearest central place.

Hierarchy From the assumption that every customer is always served from its nearest location, Christaller developed his iconic hexagonal spatial pattern. With relation to the sphere of influence, Christaller distinguishes between centers of high and low order. The higher the order of the central place (and usually, the larger the place itself), the more different central goods are on offer (Fisher, 2011). The characteristics of the goods are important as well: A central good that can easily be substituted will have a lower range, than a good which can hardly be substituted at all.

For example, bread can be bought in many stores and hence can be substituted without difficulty, while a special wedding cake has to be ordered at a specialized bakery.

Within his model Christaller has made various versions of his theory all based on the same economic laws. Every model uses a different K-value. These K-values represent the sphere of influence of that central place. In 3

7W265 Urban Concepts Central Place theory

P1

HIGHER ORDER PLACE HIGHER ORDER CENTRAL CENTRAL PLACE

P2

LOWER ORDER PLACE LOWER ORDER CENTRAL CENTRAL PLACE

P3

LOWEST ORDER CENTRAL PLACE LOWEST ORDER CENTRAL PLACE

Figure 2 Division of central places of the higher and lower order (K=3 model). Source: Author.

figure 2 a simplified version of the K=3 model is explained. The principle here is that central places are on the edges of the hexagon. This maximizes the number of connections to it.

Therefore this model has minimal distance to each point, but not the most efficient, having to turn at every corner.

beach where two carts, orange and green, are selling ice-cream with an equal distance to each other. They both serve their own part of the beach. However one day the orange cart decides to move his cart a little closer to the middle of the beach capturing some of the customers that where going to the green stand before. To equalize the customer base the green cart moves more to the middle as well and regains its customers. The following days they keep on moving closer to the middle of the beach and ultimately they both end up at the center and have an equal base of customers. Christaller’s model does not consider agglomeration benefits since every central place has its own customer base.

Spillover effects and localization benefits of certain businesses are not considered.

Christaller thinks of the land as a flat plain where landscape characteristics have no role, he considers it as a homogeneous plain (2). There is however no such place and therefore there is no place that the model can applied to in reality. Most important factors he did not consider are:

Limitations of the Central Place Theory

From the literature four main points of critics have been derived. They are not so much based on the model itself but the assumptions Christaller had to do to make his theory work.

The three main points of critique are that agglomeration economies are not taken into account (1), that there is no such thing as a homogeneous plain (2), that no economic relation is being considered (3) (Parr, 1980; Ullman, 1941; Von Böventer, 1969; Fisher, 2011) and (4) that consumers are always fully informed (Goodchild, M. F. (1997).

The point of agglomeration economies (1) can be best illustrated with the economic principle of Hotelling’s law. This theory is often explained with the example of ice-cream sales on a beach. Imagine a 1) Climate and soil qualities: Fertility/ 4

Chris Steenhuis: Is there still a place for the Central Place?

productivity of the soil,

has a certain number of “satellite” cities of the next lower order.

2) Course of rivers and natural traffic routes, The second contribution according is the hexagonal structure of locations and 3) Spatial distribution of natural resources, market areas. His model has influenced many scholars after Christaller and is still applied 4) Political and social factors (Von Böventer, as a planning method although not as strict 1969). hierarchical (Fisher, 2011).

Overview of the paper

Most of this critics where not very relevant when Christaller developed his initial theory for the southern Germany. The economy was mainly agricultural at the time, the plain was more or less homogeneous and politics was little central government.

Walter Christaller considers no economic relation (3) between the central places of the same sizes. It only considers central places supplying to their hinterlands.

Also not considered is the fact that people can buy multiple goods in one trip. For example going to the shoe repairman and doing groceries at the same time.

The last important assumption Christaller makes is that economic rationality always prevails and that consumers are always fully informed (4). Shoppers are treated as isolated actors who base their judgement on decisions that maximize their gain, they considered as the ‘homo economicus’ (Coe et al, 2007), they know what there is on offer at which facilities and at which price and always act on their own self interest.

In this first chapter a broad introduction was given to the CPT. In the next chapter the methods used to conduct the research for this paper have been outlined. The aim, scope and research question are discussed.

In the following chapter the model has been put into practice. Eindhoven is the case to test the implications the urban concept will have on the city form. In the fourth chapter implications are discussed, the CPT is placed in a 21st century perspective with a reflection on the model. In the last chapter some final conclusions are drawn.

2. METHODS This research attempts to find out if the central place theory is still applicable in the 21st century. In order to do so an analysis has been made how this would shape Eindhoven in practice. This chapter will outline the research that was conducted and will introduce the aim, scope and research question of this paper.

Most important contributions The theory is because of this simplicity much criticized (Parr, 1980; Ullman, 1941; Von Böventer, 1969). It would most of all not consider the complexity of the real economy.

The CPT however succeeded in creating a comprehensive model for location theory, where other theories fail in this extensiveness.

The first contribution is the hierarchy of locations or market places (Fisher, 2011).

The notion that each city of a certain order

Aim, scope and research question

The aim of the study is to apply a version of the CPT to Eindhoven. The goal in this is to research what the practical implications would be of this urban concept. The scope of the research is to give a broad indication of the possible impact the CPT could have on Eindhoven. For this the following research question has been formulated: 5

7W265 Urban Concepts Central Place theory

What are the social, functional and physical only a agglomeration of different smaller implications if the Central Place theory would be towns grown into each other. Only in 1920 applied to Eindhoven? town of Eindhoven was officially merged with its surrounding towns (Gestel, Stratum,

Simultaneously with this question an Strijp, Tongelre and Woensel) forming the attempt will be made to answer if Christaller’s municipality of Eindhoven as we know. These theory still applies in the 21st century historical cores are still visible in the urban economy. To what extend is the Central Place form of the city, although maybe not as theory still useable in the contemporary important as they once were. The center of complex distribution of goods? In a world that Eindhoven has now developed as he center is shaped by cheap and efficient transport with the highest hierarchy. The hierarchical systems where cities are just mere nodes in impact also manifests itself on a regional a global economy the theory does not seem level with Eindhoven being the fifth largest very applicable anymore. town in the Netherlands and the largest one

in the southern part of the country.

Design for Eindhoven Christaller has developed different models Applying the K=3 model of his CPT. For this research it was chosen to apply the K=3 model to Eindhoven with its most direct satellite towns. The model is called K=3 because the market area of a higher order place is three times the size of the market area of the next lower order place. The smallest central places (those of the lowest order) are only ‘supportive places’ found in the middle of the triangles (Fisher, 2011). The K=3 model (also known as the supply principle or the marketing principle) is chosen because it provides the smallest distance between each central place translating into the most fine grained available model and most efficient central places. The grid was first applied to the current situation (see figure 3). The placement was done so the P1 central places were as close as possible to the existing city centers.

Then adjustments were made (figure 5). The most important adjustments are summarized in appendix 1.

Instead of adjusting the model to Eindhoven, the urban form has been adjusted to the model, in which no concessions have been made. This is approach is different from the one Christaller took himself when he applied his theory to the south of Germany where he warped his grid to fit the region.

In the relocation of functions the focus was on the central places of the highest order.

The following steps were taken in adjusting the urban form. First the central places of the highest hierarchy (P1) were adjusted (see figure 4 for a legend of the different P-values).

This involved the relocation of several satellite towns in order to conform to the grid.

Important shopping centers other than the city center (such as Ekkersrijt and shopping center Woensel) have been relocated to central places of the highest order because in the current situation they where situated on the edges of the P1 hexagons.

Secondly the places lower (P2) order were checked by creating more mass around them to provide a more solid base of 3. APPLICATION TO EINDHOVEN consumers to provide these central places.

Eindhoven provides an interesting case to More important the city center was deapply the CPT to. This is because of the fact densified of some of its retail functions to Eindhoven is not a city in a historical sense, strengthen the other central places of equal 6

Figure 3 Current situation of Eindhoven with the application of Christallers grid (K=3). Source: Author.

7W265 Urban Concepts Central Place theory

hierarchical value and creating a more equal base of central places for the people to go to. It is however important to consider that in the new situation the city center still has a higher hierarchy then the other central P1 places considering Eindhoven has a broader function on a larger scale serving the whole Brabant region say on a level level P0 or level P-1 (minus one). Take for example the IKEA in the north of Eindhoven. This furniture shop might very well serve the whole East-Brabant region as the central place for furniture shopping.

Places of the lowest order (P3) were mostly untouched since they are only “supportive places” (Fisher, 2011) found only in the middle of the triangles. Shops of the lower order (such as bakeries for example) don’t have a high priority to move because they are probably already distributed quite evenly each serving their own customer base.

In Christaller’s Eindhoven people would be more evenly distributed over the cities’ satellite towns distributed more evenly to the offered central places. This contradicts Eindhoven’s current policy intentions where the mayor has recently declared that he wants the city in the near future to grow to 300.000 inhabitants within the city borders densifying the existing city (Eindhovens Dagblad, 2015).

The intentions of the city hall therefore contradict Christaller’s even distribution of people and goods, which according to his idea would mean that expansion should happen in the satellite towns creating an equal distribution of places of the same hierarchy.

Clusters of shops that are themed to a certain retail segment that are now present in Eindhoven, such as the Ekkersrijt furniture boulevard, would be non existent in Christaller’s Eindhoven. These furniture shops would be relocated through the city in a hierarchical way distributed evenly over the amount of people. The most important and largest shops would located at the highest P1 (P4) central place. In Christaller’s vision, taking the IKEA example again, the IKEA would be relocated from the north of Eindhoven to the P3 center of the city. This move would provoke severe infrastructural implications for the city.

The IKEA now conveniently located next to the A50 highway would move to the car free shopping center of Eindhoven. The increase P2 of cars in the city center contradicts current policy employed by the municipality which is Figure 4 Division of central places of the higher and lower order. aimed at reducing the amount of cars in the Source: Author. center (Eindhovens Dagblad, 2014).

To end with a positive note another Implications implication of the CPT could be to help The proposed alterations for Eindhoven are maintain the retail facilities of shrinking substantial and have consequences for the satellite towns around Eindhoven. The trend urban life within Eindhoven invoking social that shops in smaller towns are struggling to implications for the center of Eindhoven keep their stores open could be reversed. and are conflicting with the current policy The CPT can provide a new critical mass of the consumers in order to sustain these employed by the city.

8

Figure 5 Altered situation of Eindhoven where a devision has been made to distribute the central places more evenly. Source: Author.

7W265 Urban Concepts Central Place theory principle

facilities. No longer local neighborhood supermarkets will close down because there are to few people. Government policy will direct these people back to these towns by building new houses to support these facilities (theoretically speaking).

4. DISCUSSION In this chapter possible policy implications are discussed. What would the effects be on the city of Eindhoven. What important modifications would need to be made. How realistic would these be?

Application

Figure 6 K=3 model. Central places are located at the intersections

principle

Eindhoven’s rough hourglass shape proved of the hexagons. Source: Author. to be a difficult urban form to apply the Central Place theory to. The areas closest to the bodice are mostly green and not densely populated. In the present situation they would only have central places of the lower order. Christallers theory however demands an equal distribution of the central places. This translated in the creation of new centers of the highest order in the east and west parts around the city giving the fringe of Eindhoven more body.

In this research the K=3 model has been applied to Eindhoven (see figure 6).

This might have not been the best choice of the available options. With hindsight it could have been better to apply the K=4 (see figure 7) model to the city because conforms more to the natural shape of Eindhoven considering the artery system of roads connection to the Figure 7 K=4 model. Central places are located in the middle of the inner ring of the city as the main lines where hexagons. Source: Author. central places are situated. Reflecting on this situation smaller adjustments could have Thoughts and implications of the 21st been made with the K=4 model and the city century could have been more true to its original Christaller published his book “Die Zentralen urban form.

Orte in Süddeutschland” (“Central Places in Southern Germany”) in 1933. This was before 9

Chris Steenhuis: Is there still a place for the Central Place?

wide spread space shrinking techonology, such as the automobile, took place. Besides this the economy in the south of Germany was at that time mostly centered around agriculture (Von Böventer, 1969). Today however the economy operates on a much faster pace. When looking at consumer retail the internet and the emergence of digitalized shopping has had a real impact on the existence of brick and mortar shops.

Geography however still matters for e-shopping. Research conducted by Farag et al (2006) suggests that people in highly urbanized areas have a higher likelihood of buying online, but people with a low shop accessibility buy more often online. Other research by Farag et al (2005) suggests that online buyers make more shopping trips than non-online buyers do. The implications of e-shopping vary per product, nondaily goods are most often bought online (Weltevreden and van Rietbergen, 2004).

As far as I could find there is little to no theory available covering the relation between the CPT and the impact of digitalized shopping. It is however an interesting concept to put more thought in. Two of the main points of critique on Christaller’s initial theory discussed in the introduction could be addressed by the uniformity and accessibility of the internet. Firstly it was argued that there is no such thing as a homogeneous plane in the world and the CPT would therefore always be an theoretical exercise. In theory the internet is homogeneous and uniform.

There are no boundary conditions, everyone has the same basis. If you have access to the internet everyone can shop online (or start a web shop) regardless of their place in the world (to a certain extend). Secondly it was argued that no economic relation is considered between central places of the same size. The internet has a very good infrastructure to compare and pick from different web stores. Internet search engines

have made consumers more aware of what is available and have made comparisons of different web stores very accessible.

Consumers are now more informed than they ever were. Consumers have more potential of becoming the ‘homo economicus’ described in the introduction.

Offline (brick and mortar) shopping is however still an important economic driver.

One factor however not considered by Christaller is the attractiveness of shopping.

Shoppers do not necessarily shop at the closest available place. “Rather, they take into account many aspects of shopping destinations and, when considered on aggregate, distribute their (nonfood) shopping expenditure according to their assessments of the attractiveness of the destinations (Dennis et al, 2002: p.196)”.

The CPT model is of today used in a much broader sense then only for economic spatial planning situations. Examples of other applications of the CPT model include access to sports and recreation (Daniels, 2007), schools (Boussauwa et al, 2014) and green space (Smith & Floyd 2013). This research has however been limited to research consumer retail goods. For this type the model it was most appropriate for comparing internet related activity such as e-shopping for example.

5. CONCLUSION First and foremost it must be said that this research has been a theoretical exercise and is by no means a realistic proposal for the readjustment of the city of Eindhoven. The research has however shown that according to the principles of Christaller Eindhoven and its satellite towns are not an optimally distributed. To achieve an optimal situation, severe adjustments are needed. Most of these adjustments are directly opposite of the current policy intentions of the city hall.

10

7W265 Urban Concepts Central Place theory

6. LITERATURE

M. Dijst (2006) E-shopping in the NetherBoussauwa, K., M. van Meeterena, F.Witlox lands: does geography matter? Environment (2014) Short trips and central places: The and Planning B: Planning and Design 33: 59home-school distances in the Flemish prima- 74. ry education system (Belgium). Applied GeFischer, K. (2011) Central Places: The Theoography 53: 311–322. ries of von Thünen, Christaller, and Lösch. In: Coe, N. M., P. F. Kelly & H. W. C. Yeung (2007) H. A. Eiselt & V. Marianov, editors, FoundaEconomic Geography. A Contemporary In- tions of Location Analysis. New York: Springer, 471-505. troduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Daniels, M.J. (2007) Central place theory and Goodchild, M. F. (1997) Towards a geograsport tourism impacts. Ann Tourism Res 34: phy of geographic information in a digital world. Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 332–347.

21 (6): 377-391.

Dennis, C., D. Marsland & T. Cockett (2002) Central place practice: shopping centre attractiveness measures, hinterland boundaries and the UK retail hierarchy. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 9: 185–199.

Parr, J. B. (1980) Frequency Distributions of Central Places in Southern Germany: A Further Analysis. Economic Geography 56 (2): 141–54.

Eiselt, H. A. & V. Marianov (2011) Pioneering Developments in Location Analysis. In: H. A. Eiselt & V. Marianov, editors, Foundations of Location Analysis. New York: Springer, 3-22.

Smith, J. W., M. F. Floyd (2013) The urban growth machine, central place theory and access to open space. City, Culture and Society 4 (2): 87–98.

Eindhovens Dagblad (2014) Vestdijktunnel in Eindhoven wellicht definitief dicht: minder ruimte voor autoverkeer in centrum.

Eindhovens Dagblad 18 August 2014 [online] http://www.ed.nl/regio/eindhoven/ vestdijktunnel-in-eindhoven-wellicht-definitief-dicht-minder-ruimte-voor-autoverkeer-in-centrum-1.4490148. Last accessed on 07-06-2015.

Ullman, E. (1941) A Theory of Location for Cities. American Journal of Sociology 46 (6): 853–64.

Von Böventer, E.. (1969) Walter Christaller’s Central Places and Peripheral Areas: The Central Place Theory in Retrospect. Journal of Regional Science 9 (1): 117–24.

Eindhovens Dagblad (2015) Burgemeester Van Gijzel: ‘Eindhoven heeft 300.000 inwoners nodig’. Eindhovens Dagblad 5 January 2015 [online] http://www.ed.nl/regio/eindhoven/burgemeester-van-gijzel-eindhovenheeft-300-000-inwoners-nodig-1.4700418.

Last accessed on 07-06-2015.

Farag, S., J. Weltevreden, T. van Rietbergen, 11

Chris Steenhuis: Is there still a place for the Central Place?

7. APPENDIX 1: ADJUSTMENTS URBAN FORM The following most important adjustments were made to Eindhoven to fit within the K=3 model.

Adjusments of the largest impact: • Bliksembosch and Ekkersrijt are turned around • The town of Acht is moved to the east creating a new central place • De-densified the city center of Eindhoven and moved those buildings to the P2 areas.

Adjustments with smaller impact: • The town of Aalst is moved to the south • The town of Waalre is moved to the east • The town of Best is moved to the north • Changed the centers of the Woensel shopping center with the Geldrop subcenter • Moved the town of Son and Breugel to the east to create a new central place

12