Footprints of Regional Science

Great Minds in Regional Science

Peter Batey
David Plane Editors

Great Minds in
Regional Science,
Vol. 2
Footprints of Regional Science

Editors-in-Chief
Peter Nijkamp, Open University, Heerlen, The Netherlands;
Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, Iasi, Romania
Karima Kourtit, Open University, Heerlen, The Netherlands;
Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, Iasi, Romania
Kingsley E. Haynes, Schar School of Policy and Government,
George Mason University, Arlington, VA, USA

Subseries: The Voice of Regional Science

Series Editors
Bruce Newbold, School of Geography and Earth Sciences,
Hamilton, ON, Canada
Vicente Royuela, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
Mia Wahlström, Tyréns (Sweden), Gustavsberg, Sweden

Subseries: Great Minds in Regional Science

Series Editors
Peter Batey, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
David Plane, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
Footprints of Regional Science

The Regional Science Academy (TRSA) is an important growth point for Regional Science. Since early
2016, a highly successful series of Academy sessions has been held at locations throughout the world,
focusing on The Voice of Regional Science (general and strategic reflections on new topics in regional
science) and Great Minds in Regional Science (presenting in each case a contemporaneous view on the
scientific relevance of a great thinker in regional science). Both sets of mini-lectures (sometimes
complemented with additional contributions) have been expanded into chapters now being published as two
sub-series under the auspices of The Regional Science Academy, and jointly forming a book series entitled
Footprints in Regional Science, under the general editorship of Kingsley Haynes, Karima Kourtit and Peter
Nijkamp.
The book series Great Minds in Regional Science showcases the work of great thinkers in regional science
and provides a contemporaneous perspective on their scientific achievements and relevance. This sub-series is
edited by Peter Batey and David Plane.
The book series The Voice of Regional Science presents general and strategic reflections on new topics in
regional science. This sub-series is edited by Bruce Newbold, Vicente Royuela Mora and Marie Hårsman
Wahlström.

Subseries: Great Minds in Regional Science

The book series Great Minds in Regional Science showcases the work of great thinkers in regional science and
provides a contemporary perspective on their scientific merits and relevance. Each of the volumes presents
several great minds from around the world—well-known figures, as well as those whose work deserves much
greater recognition—who have made valuable contributions to the theory and/or promoted the application of
regional science methods and concepts in practical contexts. Each chapter examines the broader context of the
work, assesses its current relevance, and discusses its standing, political and scientific impact.
The sub-series Great Minds in Regional Science, together with The Voice of Regional Science, forms
a series entitled Footprints of Regional Science. All three present work stemming from and related to the
activities of The Regional Science Academy (TRSA) (www.regionalscienceacademy.org).

Subseries: The Voice of Regional Science

The field of regional science continues to advance. The book series The Voice of Regional Science presents
new scholarly thinking on important emerging issues and new scientific advances in the broad and
multidisciplinary domain of regional science research. The contributions to the series invoke the aim of the
Regional Science Academy to rethink “the spatial dynamics of people and socio-economic activities in the
connected and complex spatial systems of our earth.” The volumes in this series will serve the global regional
science community by providing new insights on, or by calling attention to, recent developments that are
rarely covered by conventional conferences, or are indicative of novel research directions.
The Voice of Regional Science welcomes both edited volumes and monographs, with works originating
in the meetings of the Academy or proposed by external authors and volume editors. It features scholarly
works that are retrospective only to the extent necessary to lay the groundwork for visions of future research
in the area; all volumes have a forward-looking focus. Further, the series’ emphasis on thematic publications
is intended to promote a more future-oriented strategic focus for regional science research. Applied studies in
regional science are also welcome, provided they reflect this forward-looking focus.
Peter Batey · David Plane
Editors

Great Minds in Regional

Science, Vol. 2
Editors
Peter Batey David Plane
Department of Geography and Planning School of Geography, Development
University of Liverpool and Environment
Liverpool, UK University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ, USA

ISSN 2662-9623 ISSN 2662-9631 (electronic)

Footprints of Regional Science
ISSN 2662-964X ISSN 2662-9658 (electronic)
Great Minds in Regional Science
ISBN 978-3-031-13439-5 ISBN 978-3-031-13440-1 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2023
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse
of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
David Plane and Peter Batey

Antecedents of Regional Science

Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy for Regional
Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Roberto Camagni
Johann Heinrich Von Thünen (1783–1850): A Systemic View
of Human Interaction Within Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Tomás Ponce Dentinho
Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father of Industrial Location
Theory and Supply-Chain Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Richard L. Church
Corrado Gini (1884–1965): Versatile Originator of Measures
of Variability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Peter Rogerson

Laying the Foundations of Regional Science

Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994): A Rational Thinker on Inequality
and Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Peter Nijkamp
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional
Scientist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
Abdul Shaban
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial
Economy and Spatial Autocorrelation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Daniel A. Griffith

v
vi Contents

Crawford “Buzz” Holling (1930–2019): Progenitor of Resilience

in Regional Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
Amitrajeet A. Batabyal
Karen R. Polenske (1937–): A Journey from Rural Idaho to MIT . . . . . . 213
Geoffrey J. D. Hewings
Wolfgang Weidlich (1931–2015): A Pioneer in Sociophysics . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
Denise Pumain
Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man in Regional Science . . . . . . . . . 249
Laurie A. Schintler
Editors and Contributors

About the Editors

Peter Batey is the current President of The Regional Science Academy. He held
the Lever Chair in Town and Regional Planning at the University of Liverpool (UK)
until his retirement in 2015 and is now Emeritus Professor. A Past President of
the Regional Science Association International (RSAI), Peter was elected a Fellow
in 2006. He is the RSAI’s Archivist and has a particular interest in the history of
planning methodology.

David Plane is Professor Emeritus of Geography and Regional Development at the

University of Arizona in Tucson (USA), where he served on the faculty from 1981
to 2019 and as Department Head from 1990 to 1997. He is a Fellow of the Regional
Science Association International and the Western Regional Science Association.
In 2013 he was honored with the Lifetime Achievement Award of the American
Association of Geographers (AAG) Population Specialty Group.

Contributors

Amitrajeet A. Batabyal Department of Economics, Rochester Institute of Tech-

nology, Rochester, NY, USA
Peter Batey Department of Geography and Planning, University of Liverpool,
Liverpool, UK
Roberto Camagni Department ABC: Architecture, Built Environment and
Construction Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy
Richard L. Church Department of Geography, University of California, Santa
Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, USA

vii
viii Editors and Contributors

Tomás Ponce Dentinho Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences,

University of the Azores, Angra do Heroismo, Portugal
Daniel A. Griffith School of Economic, Political, and Policy Sciences, University
of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, USA
Geoffrey J. D. Hewings Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics,
University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA
Peter Nijkamp Open University, Heerlen, The Netherlands
David Plane School of Geography, Development and Environment, University of
Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
Denise Pumain University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne, Paris, France
Peter Rogerson School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning, Arizona
State University, Tempe, AZ, USA
Laurie A. Schintler Schar School of Policy and Government, George Mason
University, Arlington, VA, USA
Abdul Shaban School of Development Studies, Tata Institute of Social Sciences,
Mumbai, India
Introduction

David Plane and Peter Batey

This second volume in the book series, Great Minds in Regional Science, continues
telling the story, begun in the first volume, of the intellectual history of regional
science. The perspective provided is through the lens of the contributions made
by individual scholars influential to the multidisciplinary field’s establishment and
development.
The Great Minds series is a project of The Regional Science Academy (TRSA).
The contributing authors are, themselves, leading scholars in the field, many having
already been elected to membership in the Academy and as Fellows of the Regional
Science Association International. Each chapter gives the author’s contemporaneous
view on the scientific relevance of a great thinker. The sets of Great Minds featured
in the specific volumes of the series have been chosen to include a blend of well-
known figures and others meriting wider recognition for having advanced—in some
significant way—the field’s pedagogy and institutionalization.
The books in the series, Great Minds in Regional Science, together with those
in The Voice of Regional Science (general and strategic reflections on new topics in
regional science) currently comprise the Regional Science Academy’s meta-series,
Footprints of Regional Science, under the general editorship of Kingsley Haynes,
Karima Kourtit, and Peter Nijkamp. Since early 2016, highly successful series of
sessions sponsored by the Academy have been held at locations throughout the world
and featuring mini-lectures on topics germane to the two constituent book series. The
chapters published in this volume of Great Minds in Regional Science derive from
these earlier presentations.

D. Plane (B)
School of Geography, Development and Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721,
USA
e-mail: [email protected]
P. Batey
Department of Geography and Planning, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 1

P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_1
2 D. Plane and P. Batey

Our intention as the editors of Great Minds in Regional Science is to release

a new volume annually. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic, which began to
sweep about the globe in early 2020, resulted in the cancellation of a number of the
international conferences of the Regional Science Association International and of
its member organizations. At several of those meetings, Regional Science Academy
sessions would have been held but had to be canceled. As well, special, stand-alone,
TRSA symposia where Great Minds presentations could have been presented were
in abeyance. Volume 2 is thus being published a year later than originally planned.
We would like to express our appreciation for the patience of those chapter authors
whose contributions have been held longer than otherwise would have been needed
to assemble a full volume.
Each volume in the Great Minds series consists of a dozen or so chapters drawing
upon a dozen or so presentations. Each chapter goes beyond the presentation of
facts to include an evaluation of the Great Mind’s contribution to regional science
and is organized with a similar format: a factual bio-sketch; a description of major
contributions; an analysis of the broader context of the work; and an assessment of
its present relevance, its scientific contribution, and its policy and scientific impact.
The Great Minds book series is intended to reflect regional science across the
world, not just in its traditional heartlands of North America and Europe. Equally,
the editors consider it important to include both prominent figures whose contribu-
tions have been to theory and those who have played major roles in promoting the
application of regional science methods and concepts in practical situations.
The eleven Great Minds whose singular contributions are described in this second
volume of the series have been grouped under two headings: Antecedents of Regional
Science and Laying the Foundations of Regional Science.

1 Antecedents of Regional Science

The chapters in this section assess the relevance and importance to the multidisci-
plinary field of the work of four eminent scholars born in the eighteenth and nine-
teenth centuries. Their influential work was carried out before the regional science
movement and the founding of the Regional Science Association in the early 1950s,
but they either worked in areas that today would be recognized as regional science, or
their seminal contributions to social science thought and methodology would provide
important underpinnings for the subsequent corpus of scholarship coming under the
regional science brand.
The four scholars spotlighted herein are:
• Adam Smith, the ‘Father of Economics,’ whose book, The Wealth of Nations,
as well as other writings, were not only foundational to modern-day economics
but also contained valuable insights into the regional and spatial dimensions of
human affairs.
Introduction 3

• Johann Heinrich Von Thünen, whose concepts were seminal to ongoing regional
science research on the spatial patterns of land use and who provided evidence
on, and innovative ideas about, the functioning of markets for goods, land, and
labor.
• Alfred Weber, widely acclaimed for his contributions to industrial location
theory, but whose lesser-known concepts and location principles form the initial
basis for supply-chain design, as well as industrial and service facility location.
• Corrado Gini, originator of the eponymous index of inequality, who also devel-
oped methods and measures for locating centers of population, making interna-
tional price comparisons, constructing indexes of agreement and classification
accuracy, and measuring diversity.

Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy for Regional Science

Roberto Camagni
We lead off Volume 2 with a major piece of original scholarship by Roberto Camagni.
The aim of the chapter is to justify the inclusion of Adam Smith among the Great
Minds of Regional Science. This endeavor may seem curious, because Smith was
never associated with regional topics, space economy, or geography, and he is rarely,
if ever, explicitly referenced on particular issues in the regional science literature.
In fact, however, it is possible to find in Smith’s works a clear systematization of
important concepts normally used in regional science. The most significant of these
concepts is that of land rent, in its twofold nature as agricultural rent and ‘situation’
rent. Smith analytically defines, in the latter case, the concept of bid rent, usually
attributed to Von Thünen fifty years before him. Above all, to author Camagni’s
knowledge, Smith was the first to build a theory of urban land rent, detailing its
components and sources, as well as providing justification of its ‘peculiar’ taxation.
His theory was entirely accepted during the following one hundred years—until
Marshall and Pigou—and it is still referenced today. Moreover, Smith analyzed the
‘city’ and the ‘country’ as the two archetypes of the territorial realm, interpreting
the historical evolution of their relationship as the pathway of the progress of human
institutions and the human mind. In his theoretical interpretation, he considered both
functional complementarities and hierarchical, distributive, and power relations—
concepts very instructive for the interpretation of the present role of large cities.
The importance of Smith’s legacy, however, extends much beyond these direct
contributions to regional science issues. His conception of economic progress as
closely interwoven with political and social processes pointed to the importance of
civil institutions. His analysis of individual conduct—based on self-interest and ‘self-
love’ (not selfishness!), but also on ‘sympathy’ for joy or pain of others, relationality,
and reciprocity—revealed the existence of a wider, individual, and social goal beyond
‘opulence’: that of public happiness. His philosophical equalitarianism induced him
to condemn some harmful products of the invisible hand of the market when not
framed by appropriate institutions and even to question the much-praised principle
of the division of labor when it works against the progress and the emancipation of
the lower classes, thus anticipating Marx’s theory of worker alienation.
4 D. Plane and P. Batey

Most of these issues and fields of inquiry were advanced through new strands of
economic theory starting to be developed almost one hundred and fifty years after the
Wealth of Nations and mostly present within regional science. In this case, Camagni’s
intention is not to claim a historical priority for Smith’s contributions, but only to
signal that many theoretical developments could have been achieved earlier and more
easily had Smith’s legacy not been misunderstood or lost for so long.

Johann Heinrich Von Thünen (1783–1850): A Systemic View of Human

Interaction Within Space
Tomás Ponce Dentinho
Following the discussion in the first chapter of Adam Smith’s early systemization
of concepts central to subsequent theories of land use and land rent, we feel it most
appropriate for Johann Heinrich Von Thünen to be this volume’s second Great Mind.
Von Thünen’s work predated the formalization of regional science by more than
a century, yet scholars continue to refine and extend the foundational concepts he
formalized.
In this chapter, Tomás Dentinho provides a rich, systematic account of Von
Thünen’s major research contributions: its influence in the past and its relevance
today. The chapter aims to show how Von Thünen provided evidence on, and inno-
vative ideas about, the functioning of markets for goods, land, and labor, while
also contributing illuminating thoughts on economic efficiency, social equity, and
sustainable land use.
The approach Dentinho takes is to analyze Von Thünen’s body of published
work—complemented by what was written about his theory of the ‘Isolated State’
over the subsequent century and a half by different scholars—from the perspective
of Von Thünen in his real-life role as a wise and informed farmer and as both a
manager and a landlord. On the one hand, he was interested in maximizing the value
added of his farm, namely by developing the theory of land rent; on the other hand,
he was concerned about the effects of urbanization and industrialization, a concern
he addressed, chiefly, by creating the theory of the natural wage. Being both a farm
manager and a proprietor and trying to detach himself from physiocrats, Von Thünen
may have missed the multiplier effects of land rents that generate the city, while
favoring the perspective of urban agglomeration economies, which are implicit in
his work.
The chapter concludes by arguing that there remains much to explore in the
seminal intuitions of, and the empirical evidence provided by, Johann Heinrich Von
Thünen. To name just three: the spatial distribution of the multiplier effects of the rents
from natural resources, the identification of policy tools for land use management,
and the hierarchy of cities that develop when various cities interact with each other.

Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father of Industrial Location

and Supply-Chain Design
Richard L. Church
In this chapter, Richard Church discusses Alfred Weber’s seminal work, The Theory
of Location of Industries. Weber published his book in the early part of his career,
Introduction 5

and rather than attempt to describe why new industries emerge, he sought to describe
why certain locations are chosen for the production of a given product. Central to his
theory was the need to serve one or more places of consumption of a product with
raw materials that are only found at discrete places.
Most recognize Weber for what is termed the locational triangle, a figure involving
the placement of a factory between two needed, localized raw material sources and
one market. He is also widely recognized for his analysis of different industrial loca-
tion decisions in terms of an orientation toward a raw material source or oriented
toward a market. And, in addition, he was the first to describe the notions of agglom-
eration and the impact of specialized labor forces. But few are familiar with his
detailed discussion of complexities found in production systems, involving problems
of multiple plant locations, capacitated raw material sources, raw material source
allocation, and even staged production systems, where production is split among
geographically separated production facilities. He was also the first to describe the
impact of varying labor costs and the potential for a factory to be moved to take
advantage of inexpensive labor, substitutable resources (e.g., coal vs. water power),
and land prices. Many of these concepts and location principles form the initial basis
for supply-chain design, as well as industrial and service facility location.

Corrado Gini (1884–1965): Versatile Originator of Measures of Variability

Peter Rogerson
Although the bulk of Corrado Gini’s career predated the beginnings of the field
of regional science and recent developments in spatial econometrics, his ideas and
contributions have been, and continue to be, influential in past and current work
carried out in many areas of regional science research. While the coefficient of
inequality that bears his name is by far his most well-known contribution, his other
work has also had a lasting impact and influence on the development of important
measures in regional science and geography. Much of what Gini contributed was
rediscovered or reintroduced many years later. For example, in a very early contribu-
tion, he discussed subjective probability, beliefs, and inductive probability. In many
ways, this anticipated the seminal work on inductive logic of Carnap (1945) and
Bayesian probability.
In this chapter by Peter Rogerson, the measures of variability that Gini originated
are reviewed, and applications to geography and regional science are emphasized.
A detailed treatment of his well-known and eponymous measure of inequality is
presented, and then four other areas of measurement that have been critical for
progress in a variety of research areas in geography and regional science are detailed:
locating centers of population; making international price comparisons; constructing
indexes of agreement and classification accuracy; and measuring diversity.
6 D. Plane and P. Batey

2 Laying the Foundations of Regional Science

In the second section of the volume, the spotlight turns to Great Minds whose foun-
dational work was completed in the years since the Regional Science Association
was founded in 1954. The academic fields and distinguished university positions
held by this group illustrate the remarkable, fundamentally multidisciplinary nature
of regional science. These seven scholars include three economists, one of whom
who carried out doctoral research with well-known physicists and another who held
a professorship in urban studies and planning; a geographer whose dissertation and
early work was in climatology but made major contributions to economic geography
and spatial statistics; an ecological scientist; and two mathematical physicists, one
of whom would be appointed to a professorship in geography.
Chapters in this section examine the careers and contributions of:
• Jan Tinbergen, Nobel Prize winner in Economic Sciences, who trained in physics
and was drawn into regional science through his interest in human and social
inequity problems.
• Albert O. Hirschman, a product of implosion in Central Europe during the
1930s and 1940s, who migrated to the USA and contributed a number of seminal
concepts, methods, and policy suggestions for regional development.
• Leslie Curry, whose transformative pioneering work on settlement theory and
stochastic processes helped build bridges between the emerging field of regional
science and human geography.
• Crawford ‘Buzz’ Holling, the first scholar to give scientific meaning to the
term resilience, an ecological systems concept pertinent also for analyzing
socioeconomic systems studied by regional scientists.
• Karen R. Polenske, an important and influential contributor to regional and inter-
regional modeling in both the USA and China, who extended socioeconomic
modeling to embrace environmental linkages.
• Wolfgang Weidlich, who founded a new field, ‘sociophysics,’ whose work on
dynamic formalizations to represent socio-spatial transformations helped open
regional science to the study of system dynamics.
• Alan Wilson, a scientific and intellectual giant, who began his career as a mathe-
matician and theoretical physicist but soon realized that his ambition was to study
and model people in cities rather than particles in gas chambers.

Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994): A Rational Thinker on Inequality

and Distribution
Peter Nijkamp
Jan Tinbergen is generally seen as one of the greatest economists from the second
part of the last century. With a background in physics, he was able to introduce a wide
variety of quantitative modeling techniques in economic research. In this chapter,
Peter Nijkamp describes how Tinbergen’s interest in human and social inequity
Introduction 7

problems led him also into the field of regional science, where he produced several
remarkable and influential publications.
A prominent contribution to regional science can be found in the integration of his
pioneering work on international (or spatial) gravity models for trade and transport
with the hierarchical systems approach and central place theory paradigms developed
earlier by August Lösch and Walter Christaller, respectively. Another path-breaking
contribution of Jan Tinbergen can be found in his thorough quantitative analysis of
income inequality and poverty in different regions of the world.
Jan Tinbergen continues to be a source of inspiration for scholars who combine a
sharp analytical mind with a deep concern on wellbeing and livability issues on our
planet.

Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional Scientist

Abdul Shaban
In this chapter, Abdul Shaban examines the career and unorthodox economics schol-
arship of Albert O. Hirschman, who was a product of implosion in Central Europe
during 1930s and 1940s and who, like many other scholars, was forced to migrate to
safer places. In the USA, he grew as a scholar and carried out pioneering research
extending our understanding of regional and development economics. The chapter
illustrates Hirschman’s unique approach, detailing his contributions related to unbal-
anced growth strategy, the relationship between social overhead capital and directly
productive activities, linkages, grassroots development, trade and regional develop-
ment, non-economic factors in development, and rival interpretation of capitalism or
varieties of capitalism.
Among luminary economists and regional scientists, Hirschman stands out
because of his wide-ranging work on seemingly unconnected aspects of economic
and social life, his unorthodox methods of investigation, and his quintessentially
liberal ideological approach. Hirschman combined German idealism, English-US
empiricism, and political economy and Italian liberal socialism, providing insights
about the development process based on his observations rather than formal develop-
ment models. He sought to turn economic theories on their heads by extending alter-
native explanations while always looking for endogenous social and development
theory.

Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial Economy

and Spatial Autocorrelation
Daniel A. Griffith
Leslie Curry’s scholarly contributions had significant impacts on the early formation
and evolution of the multidisciplinary field of regional science, especially in terms of
its quantitative theoretical geographic thinking and heritage. He made a lasting contri-
bution to a better understanding of geospatial data through his spatial autocorrelation
work (foreshadowing the emergence of the spatial statistics and spatial econometrics
subdisciplines), and his revolutionary treatment of the gravity model—a key regional
science instrument and one of the most popular regional science models—captures
8 D. Plane and P. Batey

spatial autocorrelation latent in geographic flows. His influential insights about these
descriptors of georeferenced phenomena also link him to other prominent American
geographers who contributed to the emergence of regional science, including the two
featured in Great Minds in Regional Science, Volume 1: Waldo Tobler and Edward
Ullman.
Curry’s academic career being concomitant with the early days of regional science
helped him to build bridges between this emerging multidisciplinary field and human
geography. Interestingly, he proved to be a scholar before his time with regard
to the quantitative revolution in geography. Although the same spatial economics
pioneers inspiring Curry also later inspired Garrison’s Seattle geography group, his
scholarship clearly departed from their approach. Curry pursued interdisciplinary
research, synergistically merging concepts from geography with those from biology,
economics, physics, and mathematics. Regional science attracted Curry because of
its multidisciplinary nature—one of its early-day strengths. One outcome was an
allegiance to regional science that garnered him the distinction of being named (in
Isserman 2004) an intellectual leader of the founding generation of regional scientists.
In this chapter, author Daniel Griffith contends that Leslie Curry left an indelible
mark on regional science, one with a legacy. Going forward, Curry’s bolstering of
the gravity model—his uncovering of its dormant, marked, spatial autocorrelation
complications—allowed a contemporary refinement of this construct’s success story.
He pioneered transformative work about settlement theory and stochastic processes,
mostly with regard to map pattern description, and posited theories and concepts that
have promoted a better understanding of the space economy. Curry’s multiple-scale
conceptualization of georeferenced data should continue to help regional scientists
and quantitative geographers solve new problems.

Crawford ‘Buzz’ Holling (1930–2019): Progenitor of Resilience in Regional

Science
Amitrajeet A. Batabyal
In this chapter, the career of Crawford Stanley ‘Buzz’ Holling, a prominent Canadian
ecologist, is discussed. Holling was the first to give scientific meaning to the term
resilience in the post-World War II era and to demonstrate its use in studying ecolog-
ical systems. In the last four decades, a consensus has emerged that the notion of
resilience is pertinent not only for studying ecological systems but also for analyzing
socioeconomic systems studied by regional scientists.
Chapter author Batabyal details the contemporary relevance of resilience and
describes five aspects of the use of resilience in regional science. This discus-
sion includes commentary on the policy implications and the societal impacts of
a resilience-based approach to regional science.
Even though Buzz Holling never worked in regional science, his interdisciplinary
research and his founding of the Resilience Alliance have stimulated regional scien-
tists to pursue research where the focus is on the development of models integrative
of change that have practical value. After discussing three foundational and two
policy-related issues involving the use of resilience in regional science, the chapter
Introduction 9

concludes that additional research is necessary to: clear up some conceptual issues;
more fully demonstrate that, for socioeconomic systems, resilience is not always a
good thing; and focus clearly on the distinctions between resilience and sustainability
when formulating regional policies.

Karen R. Polenske (1937–): A Journey from Rural Idaho to MIT

Geoffrey J. D. Hewings
Karen R. Polenske has been a very important and influential contributor to regional
and interregional modeling in both the USA and China. Her work has extended to a
whole range of regional growth and development issues, as well as to the extension
of socioeconomic modeling to embrace environmental linkages. The latter work was
heavily focused on China with the novel use of enterprise accounts for an iron and
steel plant that was further elaborated to address production systems at different
technological and spatial scales and to consider the health implications of these
operations.
In this chapter, Geoffrey Hewings chronicles the remarkable perseverance that
Polenske exhibited in launching and sustaining her career, and then becoming an
internationally acclaimed intellectual leader. She had a major influence in the creation
and success of the North American Regional Science Council, and she became
one of the first group of scholars to be recognized as Fellows in the International
Input–Output Association, for which she also served as President. Her continuing
influence in the organization of science extended to the training and mentoring of
hundreds of Chinese scholars at MIT. A prize in her name, funded by her alumni,
bears eloquent testimony to her remarkable commitment to fostering both Chinese
regional economic development and successor generations of highly skilled regional
scientists.

Wolfgang Weidlich (1931–2015): A Pioneer in Sociophysics

Denise Pumain
German physicist, Wolfgang Weidlich, has been called ‘one of the great intel-
lects of the twentieth century’ and was the founder of a new field that he termed
‘sociophysics.’ His work harkened back to an earlier body of physics research
applied to social systems that was among constituent streams of thought that
Walter Isard merged into his early conceptualizations of the theory and methods of
regional science (Isard 1956, 1960, 1969). The theoretical approach and the models
Weidlich proposed in the 1980s and 1990s—applied for instance, to human migra-
tion systems—were at that time well in line with the expectations of geographers
interested in dynamic formalizations to represent socio-spatial transformations.
As described in this chapter by Denise Pumain, the work of this physicist inspired
many people and marked an important moment in the opening of regional science
to system dynamics. It will undoubtedly also have profound repercussions in the
coming decades for advancing our understanding of the evolution of public opinions
and interactions, as revealed from handling the massive data generated by various
uses of mobile sensors and social networks. Those in the regional science community
10 D. Plane and P. Batey

with whom Weidlich came into contact were blessed by their interactions: He was a
luminous speaker and a smiling, caring person, a man deeply imbued with humanism
and culture. Albeit not widely known among his contemporary and current cohorts of
regional scientists, Weidlich’s perceptive insights into the dynamics of social systems
merit his recognition and inclusion as a Great Mind.

Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man in Regional Science

Laurie A. Schintler
Sir Alan Geoffrey Wilson is no ordinary regional scientist. Some sixty years ago,
he began his career as a mathematician and theoretical physicist analyzing bubble
chamber events at the Rutherford Laboratory in Harwell, England. However, he soon
realized that his ambition was to study and model people in cities rather than particles
in gas chambers. His move to work with a transportation planning research group in
Oxford in 1963 would mark the beginning of a long, productive, and impactful career
in regional science. Yet, he did not entirely abandon physics: Thermodynamics ended
up being a motivation and basis for many of his ideas and innovations, including his
signature entropy-based spatial interaction framework.
Over the years, Alan Wilson’s ‘sphere of interest’ has remained relatively focused
on cities and systems of cities and, particularly, the modeling of spatial interaction,
location activity, and urban evolution. In these areas, he has made significant theo-
retical and methodological contributions. He has drawn upon and impacted various
disciplines and subdisciplines, including some outside the conventional walls of
regional science. What is more, Sir Alan Wilson is not just a scientific giant. He has
worn many badges in his lifetime: educator, administrator, philanthropist, planner,
politician, businessman, and entrepreneur, and in all these roles, he has been highly
successful. But, as argued by chapter author Laurie Schintler, Alan Wilson is even
more than that: He is also an artist and a philosopher, making him a Renaissance
man in regional science.

References

Carnap, R. 1945. On inductive logic. Philosophy of Science 12 (3): 72–97.

Isard, W. 1956. Location and space-economy. New York: Wiley.
Isard, W. 1960. Methods of regional analysis. New York: Wiley.
Isard, W. 1969. General theory: Social, political, economic and regional. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.
Isserman, A. 2004. Intellectual leaders of regional science: A half-century citation study. Papers in
Regional Science 83 (1): 91–126.
Antecedents of Regional Science
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering
His Legacy for Regional Science

Roberto Camagni

Adam Smith. Etching created by Cadell and Davies (1811), John Horsburgh (1828), or R.C. Bell
(1872). Photo source Wikimedia Commons1

R. Camagni (B)
Department ABC: Architecture, Built Environment and Construction Engineering, Politecnico di
Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milan, Italy
e-mail: [email protected]
1 “Description: Profile of Adam Smith. The original depiction of Smith was created in 1787 by
James Tassie in the form of an enamel paste medallion. Smith did not usually sit for his portrait, so a
considerable number of engravings and busts of Smith were made not from observation but from the
same enamel medallion produced by Tassie, an artist who could convince Smith to sit” (emphases per

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 13

P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_2
14 R. Camagni

1 Introduction

The intent of this work is to justify the inclusion of Adam Smith among the Great
Minds of Regional Science. This endeavor may seem curious: Smith was never
associated with regional matters, space economy, or geography (as Kant was2 ), not
even as a reference on particular issues.
In fact, his monumental work embracing almost all dimensions of social life,
from political economy to moral philosophy, to astronomy or history of law and
social institutions, quite naturally encompassed, among others, a view on the spatial
dimension of phenomena, to which he added his own capacity for abstraction and
even for “model building” (Campbell and Skinner 1976, p. 4). This effort by Smith,
though, is likely to have remained hidden within his huge and perhaps intimidating
output. I will try to show how far he went in anticipating the conceptualization of
some theoretical tools that are used in regional science and in framing some scientific
issues of great importance for the society of his times, but also, as will be shown, of
present ones.
While working with these goals in mind, I had a sensation of déja vu: all this could
represent a second case of “Adam Smith’s lost legacy” besides the one rightly under-
lined by Brown (1994) and more completely by Kennedy (2005). Their thesis, with
which I agree, is that the macroscopic loss in Smith’s legacy concerns the misleading
view of him as the defender of selfishness in business, the progenitor of capitalism,
and the supporter of laissez-faire policies, very common among economists and polit-
ical commentators throughout the twentieth century.3 This view is based on the false
idea of a clean break between Smith’s two main works, the Theory of Moral Senti-
ments (TMS),4 allegedly theorizing human “benevolence” and “sympathy” within

the original) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AdamSmith.jpg (Last accessed: September

13, 2022).
2 Immanuel Kant was lecturing on physical geography for almost 40 years at the University of

Königsberg since 1756, beginning well before his appointment as full Professor of Logics and
Metaphysics in 1770. He was one of the first professors of geography in history. He thought this
“science” was crucial for the development of a cosmopolitan mentality and a self-ruling, open
citizenship. See Elden and Mendieta (2011).
3 Only in the last 30 years has a growing scholarship by economists and political scientists emerged,

working on primary sources and increasingly on secondary ones, reorienting the interpretation of the
“true” Smith, unfortunately mainly limited, with a few exceptions, to the circle of hyper-specialists.
4 Throughout this chapter, the abbreviations for Smith’s major works and the citation system

employed follow those of: The Glasgow edition of the works and correspondence of Adam Smith
(Oxford University Press 1979). Pursuant to that style, citations to Smith’s published works are
given according to the original divisions, together with paragraph numbers as added in the margins
of the Glasgow edition. For example: TMS, VII.ii.3.18 refers to the Theory of Moral Sentiments,
Part VII, section ii, Chapter 3, paragraph 18; and WN, V.i.f.50, 54–55 refers to the Wealth of Nations,
Part V, chapter i, section f, paragraphs 50 and 54–55.
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 15

society,5 and the Wealth of Nations (WN), justifying individual selfishness in the
economic sphere on the basis of its positive, though unintentional, outcomes.6
This misinterpretation of Smith’s basic message shall be made clear from the
outset. Besides the fact that he never used such words as “capitalism” or “laissez-
faire,” and that he assigned the state crucial tasks in terms of direct actions and gover-
nance, it is justified neither by an analytical inspection of his work nor by the general
consistency and comprehensiveness of his overall vision,7 and it compromises the
full and complex meaning of his thought.8
The second case of a lost legacy concerns, in my mind, Smith’s importance in
shaping not just concepts but entire chapters of the regional science abacus—such
as for example, location rent, or, as he called it, “situation rent”. To my knowledge,
a reading of Smith’s work under the lenses of the spatial dimension has not been
undertaken up to now, with one, not recent but notable exception, covering the period
from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries (Dockès 1969). This case is perhaps less
scientifically detrimental than the former one, but it crucially requires a historical

5 “Sympathy,” an important concept in Smith’s philosophy (following Hume), is about moral judg-
ment, not a motive for behavior (Kennedy 2005, p. 43), while “benevolence,” differently from his
master Francis Hutcheson’s view, is according to Smith “the sole principle of action in the Deity,”
not in “so imperfect a creature as man” (TMS, VII.ii.3.18).
6 This alleged theoretical turnaround (Umschwungstheorie) was upheld by some—inaccurate—

German scholars since the mid-nineteenth century and became Das Adam Smith Problem ever
since. See the rigorous rebuttal by the recent editors of the TMS, Raphael and Macfie (1976,
pp. 20–25). Viner (1927), though sharing the idea of an “irreconcilable divergence” between the
TMS and the WN (p. 207), thinks that “the significance of the natural order in Smith’s economic
doctrine has been grossly exaggerated” (p. 220), as demonstrated by his provision of “ammunition
for several socialist orations … (against its) defects” (p. 215).
7 The TMS (Smith 1759), his first major work, supposedly abandoned by Smith, was also his last,

with its sixth corrected and integrated edition published just before his death in 1790.
8 “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner,

but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity, but to their
self-love” (WN, I.ii.2). This well-known sentence by Smith has to be carefully read and referred to
his entire understanding of economic actions: He speaks about “interest,” normal in the exchange,
and “self-love”—“the regard to our own happiness and interest”, a sentiment that encompasses
“very laudable principles of action (as) the habits of economy, industry, discretion, attention,”
and parsimony (TMS, VII.ii.3.16)—and not about selfishness. Concerning market transactions, he
always had clear in his mind their nature as agreed negotiations: “mercenary exchange(s) of good
offices according to an agreed valuation.” (TMS, II.ii.3.2). Moreover, he was always in favor of
the three impartialities: the impartial spectator, the internal driver of our respect and “sympathy”
towards others in our moral judgment, endowing men “not only with a desire of being approved
of, but with a desire of being what ought to be approved of; or of being what he himself approves
of in other men” (TMS, III.2.7); impartial justice, the guardian of “natural” and “acquired” rights;
impartial competition, the arbiter of fair games and prosecutor of any monopolist attitude, the crucial
precondition for the “invisible hand” to drive towards public interest. More on this in Kennedy
(2005), Rocha and Ghoshal (2006), and in the thorough and passionate Introduction to the TMS by
Amartya Sen, who considers it “one of the truly outstanding books in the intellectual history of the
world” (Sen 2009, p. vii).
16 R. Camagni

and critical compensation, with two main aims: first, when consolidated theories
are concerned, in order to re-establish important scientific authorships and cultural
roots, enriching in many cases the conceptual and philosophical meaning of present
theorizations; second, when lost scientific traditions, wider interpretive models, or
methodological approaches are concerned, in order to relaunch them if any link to
the interpretation of present issues is apparent.
Adam Smith is traditionally considered the Founding Father of economic
science, but also one of the Great Minds of political science, after Machiavelli and
Montesquieu (Weingast 2017; Schliesser 2017), thanks to his works on “the science
of jurisprudence” (Smith 1763a, b), on the history of social conflicts, and on the
long-term evolution of those market-supporting institutions without which “com-
merce” could not flourish. While these dimensions were closely interwoven with
Smith’s analytical economic reasoning, their long neglect by the neoclassical scien-
tific trajectory in economics9 has led to that evident “reductionism” and impoverish-
ment of the interpretive capacity of economic science of which many distinguished
economists have been recently harshly critical. Re-reading Adam Smith in a more
appropriate and comprehensive manner would bring benefits to regional science as
well, naturally affected, particularly in some regional economics traditions, by this
same reductionism.
This double perspective is mirrored by the structure of the present essay. After
an introductory section on Smith’s biography (Sect. 2), Sect. 3 and Sect. 4 are
devoted to fields in which Smith anticipated still existing models, theories, and inter-
pretations, while Sect. 5 concerns themes and theoretical issues that were, for a
long time, overlooked by the mainstream scientific tradition in regional science. In
regard to the first perspective, themes such as the origin of the city and its role, the
city/country economic relationship, and the consequent macroeconomic equilibrium
are inspected in Sect. 3, while land rent—fertility, situation, and ground rent—are
analyzed in Sect. 4. Section 5 deals with four issues: spatial monopoly and income
distribution in space; the role of reciprocity sentiments in public happiness; long-term
growth, innovation, institutions, and policy; social inequality and income distribution
in society.

9 Samuelson (1992) blamed the “systematic undervaluation of Adam Smith in professional circles
… between 1930 and 1990” recalling their “limited interest in and knowledge of the history of
economic analysis” (pp. 1–2). He attributes “major responsibility” for this undervaluation to his
“old master,” Joseph Schumpeter, for his judgment of “mediocrity, lack of originality and excessive
imitativeness” by Smith (ibid.). In fact, his brusque statement that “the Wealth of Nations does not
contain a single analytic idea, principle or method that was entirely new in 1976” (Schumpeter
1954, p. 179, italics in the text), though somehow softened elsewhere, looks rather excessive and
unfair. But the undervaluation of Smith’s work started at least 50 years before, in the last decades
of the nineteenth century, going hand in hand with the banalization and misinterpretation of his
legacy.
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 17

2 Factual Bio-Sketch

Information on Smith’s life is scant, in part, because of his deep sense of privacy. His
life was largely peaceful and devoid of relevant events. He was born in Kirkcaldy,
Scotland, in 1723. While his father died before his birth, he always had a strong bond
with his mother, a devout Christian. His likely personal, socio-psychological portrait
could be the one sketched by Schumpeter:
…first, he was a Scotsman to the core, pure and unadulterated; second, .... his immediate
family background was the Scottish civil service: in order to understand his outlook on
social life and economic activity (very different from what has been often imputed to him),
it is important never to forget the gentility, the intellectuality, the critical attitude to busi-
ness activity, the modest yet adequate means that characterized the environment which
produced him; third, .... he was a professor born and bred, not only while he lectured at Edin-
burgh (1748–51) and Glasgow (1751–63) but always and by virtue of character indelebilis;
fourth—a fact which I cannot help considering relevant, not for his pure economics of course,
but all the more for his understanding of human nature— .... no woman, excepting his mother,
ever played a role in his existence: in this as in other respects the glamours and passions of
life were just literature to him.” (Schumpeter 1954, pp. 176–177)

In 1737, at the early age of 14, he entered Glasgow College, where he studied
moral philosophy under the supervision of Francis Hutcheson, who introduced him to
liberal Christian philosophy. Glasgow and Edinburgh were the brilliant centers of the
Scottish Enlightenment, in a good coexistence with Christian theology (Waterman
2004, Ch. 1 and 2) and in an acceptable relationship with the clerical establishment.10
In 1740, he won a Snell Exhibition to Balliol College, Oxford, implying a solemn
promise to be ordained into the Church of England. He moved to Oxford (on horse-
back), but studying there fell short of his expectations. Later, in the WN, he remarked
that, due to mutual indulgence among professors, lack of incentives, or low salaries,
“in the university of Oxford, the greater part of the publick professors have, for these
many years, given up altogether even the pretence of teaching” (WN, V.I.f.8).
In 1744, he obtained his bachelor’s degree, but subsequently he suffered a deep
crisis, probably due to excessive personal study and a growing antagonism to the
religious rituals of Balliol (where a copy of his friend Hume’s Treatise of Human
Nature was confiscated from him).11 He then renounced his scholarship, breaking
his engagement with the Church, and returned to Kirkcaldy in 1746. Ever thereafter,

10 Smith was always very cautious on religious matters and wisely tried to avoid creating prob-
lems that could distract him from his work. Nevertheless, concerning his public obituary for his
friend David Hume—a skeptical atheist, much less cautious than he was—Smith commented that
it “brought upon me ten times more abuse than the very violent attack I had made upon the
whole commercial system of Great Britain” in the WN! (Smith, “Letter to Strahan,” published
with Hume’s autobiography, My Own Life, Hume 1777/1995). Nowadays, his position on religion
is mostly considered closer to (French) Deism than to (Scottish) Theism of his times (Schliesser
2017, p. 334).
11 In a letter from Oxford College to his cousin William Smith in August 1740, he wrote: “our only

business here (is) to go to prayers twice a day, and to lecture twice a week” (Smith 1976, Letter n.
1, p. 36).
18 R. Camagni

he was very critical of the historical role of the Roman Church and the clergy order12
and of all forms of religious “enthusiasm and superstition” (an expression anticipated
by Hume).
Two years later, he moved to Edinburgh, where he delivered public lectures on
rhetoric, belles lettres, and “the progress of opulence,” sponsored by the local Philo-
sophical Society. During the years at Oxford, thanks to his cousin W. A. Smith, he
established contact with one of the most politically powerful families in Scotland,
that of the 2nd and 3rd Dukes of Argyll, whose “interest” and patronage were crucial,
together with Smith’s genius, in his early career (Kennedy 2005, p. 8).
In 1751, Smith was appointed to the Chair of Logic at Glasgow University, which
turned into his primary interest, the Chair of Moral Philosophy in 1752. In 1759, he
published The Theory of Moral Sentiments and, in 1762, was awarded a Doctorate in
Law. In 1763, he decided to resign his professorship for a lucrative position as tutor
of the young grandson of the 2nd Duke of Argyll, the Duke of Buccleuch, and with
him, he made the famous tour of France and Switzerland (1764–1766). There he met
Enlightenment intellectuals (like Voltaire), Encyclopedists (D’Alembert), and some
representatives of the Physiocratic school whom he greatly respected (Turgot and
Quesnay), introduced by David Hume, at that time secretary of the English Ambas-
sador in Paris.13 Free from academic duties, he turned back home and sometimes
to London (where was elected Fellow of the Royal Society) to work on his master-
piece, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, which was
published in 1776, achieving instant success.
In 1778, Smith was appointed to a post of Commissioner of Customs in Scotland
and went to live in Edinburgh with his mother. From 1787 to 1789, he occupied the
honorary position of Lord Rector of the University of Glasgow. He died in Edinburgh
on July 17, 1790. Only in 1795 were some of his early works published posthumously,
as it was his firm intention: the Essays on Philosophical Subjects together with his
History of Astronomy (Smith 1795a). His Lectures on Jurisprudence, delivered at
the University of Glasgow in 1963, were published by Professor Edwin Cannan in
1896, when Juris Prudence or Notes from the Lectures on Justice, Police, Revenue
and Arms, reported by a Student in 1763 were discovered (Smith 1763a, b/1896).
They present, inter alia, Smith’s main ideas on the history of jurisprudence that he
had long intended to develop and to publish but never did.
A last comment may serve to highlight Smith’s character and his relationship
with other preceding or contemporary authors. He was deeply proud of his ideas and
conscious of the logical strength of his intellectual constructs; he was ready to discuss

12 “The clergy of every established church constitute a great incorporation. They can act in concert,
and pursue their interest upon one plan and with one spirit. (…) Their interest as an incorporated
body is never the same with that of the sovereign, and is sometimes directly opposite to it. Their
great interest is to maintain their authority with the people; and this authority depends upon the
supposed certainty and importance of the whole doctrine which they inculcate” (WN, V.i.g.17).
13 See the Account of the life and writings of Adam Smith presented by his first biographer, Dugald

Stewart, to the Royal Society of Edinburgh three years after his death (Stewart 1793/1980, III.9).
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 19

all matters personally with colleagues or at the club meetings which characterized
the cultural climate and intellectual life in Edinburgh and Glasgow. As a professor,
he was ready to deliver scientific messages and content, allowing students’ notes
to be taken, circulated, and even published locally. He was glad if others used and
relaunched his ideas, but, of course, he expected acknowledgment of his authorship,
especially in regard to leading principles and theories.
In two cases—widely debated in his scholarship—he explicitly manifested his
position on this very issue with “a great deal of honest and indignant warmth.”
The first in 1755, when he presented a short manuscript to “a society of which he
was then a member, in which paper, a pretty long enumeration is given of certain
leading principles, both political and literary, to which he was anxious to establish
his exclusive right; in order to prevent the possibility of some rival claims which
he thought he had reason to apprehend,”14 indicating dates of his first presentation
going back to 1749. In this case, his first biographer, Dugald Stewart, justifies Smith’s
anxiety, in spite of the difficulty of a precise attribution of general principles or basic
concepts widely discussed and often anticipated in some way by other authors: “After
all, the merit of such a work as Mr. Smith’s is to be estimated less from the novelty
of the principles it contains, than from the reasonings employed to support these
principles, and from the scientific manner in which they are unfolded in their proper
order and connection.” (Stewart 1793, IV.26).
The second case happened some years after, in 1767, when his colleague Adam
Ferguson published the Essay on the History of Civil Society, and Smith accused him
of plagiarism, “having borrowed some of his ideas without owning them” (quoted by
Hamovy 1968, p. 249). Those were times in which acknowledgments of quotations
and precedence were scanty—as they were in musical compositions as well—and
Smith himself was not generous in this regard. The issue at stake concerned the
theory of the division of labor. Ferguson indirectly responded that he was innocent,
but maintained he had derived many notions from “a French author, and that Smith
had been there before him” (ibid.). The author was not Montesquieu, as is some-
times hypothesized, but Alexandre Delaire, who wrote for Diderot’s Encyclopédie
the article “Epingle,” published in 1755, from which Smith drew, without acknowl-
edgment, his famous example of the pin factory—already present in his Lectures on
Jurisprudence at the beginning of the 1760s and afterward in the first pages of the
Wealth of Nations (WN, I.i.3).15 Irony of fate!

14 See: Stewart (1793, IV. 25). Stewart continues: “In questions of so complicated a nature as occur
in political economy, the credit of such opinions belongs of right to the author who first established
their solidity, and followed them out of their remote consequences; not to him who, by a fortunate
accident, first stumbled on the truth.” (ibid.). Kennedy adds the possibility that the rumors felt by
Smith could have been fanned by academic jealousies concerning “his rapid progress from student
to Professor” (Kennedy 2005, Appendix, p. 242).
15 The original source of the pin factory example was revealed by Edwin Cannan, the editor of

Smith’s Lectures on Justice, more than a century later (Smith 1896, note 1, p. 164); Smith, however,
added some aspects and numbers from unknown sources (Denis 1971, p. 194).
20 R. Camagni

3 Theoretical Anticipations by Smith in the Fields

of Regional Science

Since the beginning of its “official” life, soon after the end of World War II, regional
science was built on the (right) belief and scientific evidence about the “gross inad-
equacy of existing economic theory: its failure to develop concepts for spatial anal-
ysis” (Isard 1951, p. 181). Instead of continuing on the previous path of a spaceless
wonderland, it was necessary to acknowledge the specularity between the interest
rate (in the time dimension: time-discount) and the transport rate (in a spatial dimen-
sion: space-discount) and to proceed toward a “general theory of location and space
economy” (Isard 1949). Only a few authors were considered as the great fathers of
the new discipline: the German geographers and economists of location theory, and
then Chamberlin, Hotelling, Palander, and Zipf. The methods naturally embraced
were those of the neoclassical and Keynesian schools of the twentieth century; no
authors in preceding centuries were honored by a mention, with the exception of Von
Thünen—and sometimes Ricardo—for their theories of land rent.
On urban economic themes, too, the condition of mainstream economic theory
proved, in the middle of the last century, similarly inconsistent: space was totally
absent, but no search about it was made in the literature of preceding centuries.
By all accounts, the city had appeared such a normal context, or scene on which
economic life performed, as to be worth just a chapter or section in the main books on
principles of economics, leaving the entire field to geographers, historians, political
scientists, and even philosophers (Camagni 1992, Introduction). Only some gleaning
(“spigolature” in Italian: the picking up of single ears or seeds after the main harvest)
seemed possible from the entire preceding development of economic thought in the
eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
This general neglect was not justified, though. In this section, I shall show the
many fields, commonly considered to be constituent parts of regional science, to
which at least Adam Smith contributed with important conceptual and analytical
anticipations with respect to “official” subsequent theorizations mainly developed in
the twentieth century.16
These fields, which will be presented hereafter, concern in order: the birth of
cities and their role in the spatial context; the relationships between the city and the
“country”; the theory of land rent on agricultural activities, based on both “fertility”
and “situation,” anticipating Ricardo and, most importantly, Von Thünen; and the
theory of urban rent, distinguishing between building rent and ground or land rent.

16At least two other (pre-) classical economists are worth recalling and rediscovering, namely:
William Petty for his indication of the similarity between the time discount (which he called “usury”)
and the space discount (which he called “local usury”) and for the first outline of a theory of position
rent (Petty 1662/1899, Ch. V); and Cantillon, for his anticipation of Quesnay’s Tableau économique
(1759/2005) and for an interesting spatial vision, as testified by his three short chapters on Villages,
Market Towns (Bourgs), Cities and Capital Cities (Cantillon 1755). See: Schumpeter (1954, Ch. 2,
Sect. 1–2) and Dockès (1971).
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 21

3.1 The Origin of Cities and Their Role

Great historians have often devoted their intellect to the explanation of the birth
and the role of cities. Some of them, particularly Braudel (1977, 1979) and the
French school of Annales, have considered cities to be the driving forces of historical
development.
Within regional science (and elsewhere), an interesting debate developed in the
1970s concerning the economic conditions for the birth of cities in history. The
dispute originated between the followers of the most traditional theory—locating
the birth of cities in that precise historical period in which the general agricultural
production exceeded the necessities of the rural workers—and the supporters of
a contrary interpretation, inaugurated by Mumford (1961, Ch. 2) and shared by
Jacobs (1969, Ch. 1), which considered the country as dependent upon innovations
in technologies and organization of agricultural production developed by and in the
city. Adam Smith was, to my knowledge, the first economist who proposed the former
economic interpretation, but who, at the same time, was aware of the possibility of
the opposite causal effect, with an acute and inspiring justification.
In Book III of the WN, concerning a long-term analysis of “the natural progress
of opulence,” we read:
The town, in which there neither is nor can be any reproduction of substances, may very
properly be said to gain its whole wealth and subsistence from the country. “It is the surplus
produce of the country only, or what is over and above the maintenance of cultivators, that
constitutes the subsistence of the town”. (WN, III.i,1-2)17

“According to the natural course of things”, therefore, the capital of developing

societies goes first to agriculture, afterward to (urban) manufactures, and then to
commerce. But soon after, Smith also affirms that, following the fall of the Roman
Empire, when cities, infrastructure, and commerce were broken down and agriculture
barely allowed subsistence support of country villages, around the turn of the first
millennium “this natural order of things (…) has, in all the modern states of Europe,
been in many respects entirely inverted. (…). Manufactures and foreign commerce
(of cities) together have given birth to the principal improvements of agriculture.”
(WN, III.i.9).
The increase and riches of commercial and manufacturing towns contributed to the improve-
ment and cultivation of the countries to which they belonged, in three different ways. First
by affording a great and ready market for the rude produce of the country (…). Secondly,
the wealth acquired by the inhabitants of cities was frequently employed in purchasing such
lands as were to be sold, and merchants are commonly ambitious of becoming country
gentlemen, and when they do are generally the best of all improvers. (…). Thirdly, and
lastly, commerce and manufactures gradually introduced order and good government, and

17 Historian Lynn White, Jr. (1962), too, links the intense period of urban growth from the eleventh
to the thirteenth century mainly in Central and Northern Europe to the series of crucial innovations
in agrarian technologies in the previous two centuries—heavy plow, substitution of the ox by the
horse, and crop rotation—generating a notable increase in agrarian productivity and “liberation” of
labor force.
22 R. Camagni

with them the liberty and security of individuals, among the inhabitants of the country. (…).
This, though it has been the least observed, is by far the most important of all their effects.
Mr. Hume18 is the only writer who, so far as I know, has hitherto taken notice of it (WN,
III.iv.1-4; emphases added).

It was thus, that, through the greater part of Europe, the commerce and the manufactures of
cities, instead of being the effect, have been the cause and occasion of the improvement and
cultivation of the country. (WN, III.iv.18)

These passages appear in a special chapter interestingly devoted to “How the

commerce of towns contributed to the improvement of the country” and mention not
just economic elements but also cultural and political ones, in the typical Smithian
approach.19

3.2 The City-Country Relationship: A Spatial Archetype

The two interpretations of the birth of cities converge conceptually in a twofold

manner: First, they highlight the interest of defining two archetypes of socio-
economic organization, holding a deep spatial reference, the city and the country.
Secondly, they lead to the conclusion of a strict complementarity of the two spaces
based on a clear division of labor between them and the consequent huge volume
of mutual exchange. “The gains of both are mutual and reciprocal, and the division
of labour is, in this as in all other cases, advantageous to all the different persons
employed in the various occupations into which it is subdivided”. (WN, III.i.1)
The city-country relationship is interpreted, in this case, as a functional economic
one, which drives the general society toward a condition of mutual advantage.
However, Smith does not speak of “harmony,” as other later classical economists
did (Say, Bastiat, and, before them, Quesnay), having been always aware of the
conflicting interests among social classes (Schumpeter 1968, II.3.c, p. 86), but he
was very clear on the fact that this relationship implies a functional interdependence:
“… the inhabitants of the town, and those of the country, are mutually the servants
of one another” (WM, III.i.4).
As we shall see later in Sect. 5.1, the city-country relationship was also interpreted
by Smith in a conceptually different way, when he adopted a distributive and no
longer productive point of view. His distributive-hierarchical approach was shared
some decades later, in a wider philosophical perspective, by the young Marx, and the
complementarity in the “bourgeois” vision became a “contradiction” between city
and countryside.

18 Hume, D. Essays Moral, Political and Literary.

19 Seventy years later, a well-known representative of the Lombard Enlightenment, Cattaneo
(1847/1939), was able to indicate, along the same lines, the gifts that the city makes to the coun-
tryside: certainty of ownership, savings and consequently capitals, and institutions (particularly
cadaster, easement of aqueduct rights, and a tax system not penalizing improvements, which were
for centuries at the basis of the success of the Lombardy region).
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 23

Continuing his reflections on this theme, in a nonsystematic way, but with a

close consistency within the general interpretative framework of historical spatial
development (WN, Book III), Smith obtains a further result: an abstract sketch of
the early agglomeration processes taking place within the spatial division of labor:
Without the assistance of some artificers, indeed, the cultivation of land cannot be carried on,
but with great inconveniency and continual interruption. Smiths, carpenters, wheel-wrights
and plough-wrights, masons, and bricklayers, tanners, shoemakers, and taylors, are people,
whose service the farmer has frequent occasion for. Such artificers too stand, occasionally,
in need of the assistance of one another; and as their residence is not, like that of the farmer,
necessarily tied down to a precise spot, they (…) naturally settle in the neighbourhood of
one another, and thus form a small town or a village. (…) The butcher, the brewer, and the
baker, soon join them, together with many other artificers and retailers, necessary or useful
for supplying their occasional wants, and who contribute still further to augment the town.
(WN, III.i.4)

This passage anticipates Werner Sombart’s distinction between “basic” activities

of the city (exports, in this case oriented toward the countryside) and “complemen-
tary” or “residential” ones, and it presents in a nutshell the logic of the urban growth
model à la Hoyt. Together with the contextual indication that “the town is a continual
fair or market” (WN, III.i.4), we find here a precise definition of the original roles
of the city: to be the supplier of manufactured goods and the market in the service
of the country.
Moreover, Smith shows that he had a precise idea about what we today call
“agglomeration economies,” linked to pure city size. “That industry which is carried
on in towns is, everywhere in Europe, more advantageous than that which is carried
on in the country, without entering into any nice computations, we may satisfy
ourselves by one very simple and obvious observation” (WN, I.x.c.21). Towns and
cities concentrate manufacture and most of all commerce and banking; greater and
more frequent “fortunes” develop in town than in the country; entrepreneurship is
mainly an urban specificity (“the merchant is commonly a bold, a country gentleman
a timid undertaker,” WN, III.iv.3); “greater stocks” are employed in great towns,
where we find greater profits (but lower profit rates, due to competition) and higher
wages, due to fast-growing demand.20
Concerning the advantages of an urban context beyond those due to pure agglom-
eration, Smith gives us a pearl of theoretical intuition (which, to my knowledge,
has never been quoted in the specialized literature). He speaks in a rather modern
way about the “genius or superior talent” required in some professions, which neces-
sarily need an urban context to develop. When discussing that particular form of trade
called “trade of speculation,” where the merchant “enters into every trade when he
foresees that it is likely to be more than commonly profitable”, he affirms: “this trade
can be carried nowhere but in great towns. It is only in places of the most extensive
commerce and correspondence that the intelligence requisite for it can be had” (WN,

20 “It generally requires a greater stock to carry on any sort of trade in a great town than in a country
village. The great stocks employed in every branch of trade, and the number of rich competitors,
generally reduce the rate of profit in the former below what it is in the latter. But the wages of labour
are generally higher in a great town than in a country village” (WN, I.ix, 7).
24 R. Camagni

I.x.b.38). The terms “commerce and correspondence” refer exactly to what nowa-
days are called communication networks and relational capital that mutually interact
in those interconnection sites like the large or global cities, and the urban selec-
tion process, which follows, is now called sorting. The sentence in (added) italics
is probably the first and only reference to the cognitive role of the city that one can
find among the economists and “philosophers” of Smith’s times and the following
century.
In conceptual terms, the city-country relationship is relevant to the thesis
propounded in this work, as it provides Smith with the rationale for an innova-
tive embedding of the general laws of production, exchange, and distribution in a
consistent spatial framework: an abstract, archetypical, and dichotomic framework,
for sure, although it is imbued with a deep historical and factual meaning.

3.3 The City-Country Relationship and (Spatial) General

Equilibrium

The two archetypes of the spatial structure of society interact with each other, giving
rise to a “natural” equilibrium in terms of production, income distribution, and utiliza-
tion of income between consumption and savings: an intersectoral and macroeco-
nomic equilibrium in today’s language. Smith presents his analytical view concerning
general economic equilibrium in the WN, particularly Book I.vii and also Book II.i-
iii; these sections would be praised by Schumpeter (1954, p. 183) as “by far the
best piece of economic theory turned out by Adam Smith, that points towards Say
and, through the latter work, to Walras. The purely theoretical developments of the
nineteenth century consist to a considerable degree in improvements upon it.” Partic-
ularly relevant is his belief concerning the necessary equilibrium between savings
and investments, or, more precisely, his belief that incomes of the upper classes
are always totally spent either on luxury consumption or investment (“circulating
capital,” namely “anticipations” on salaries and expenses for the maintenance of
“fixed capital”). In fact, all this anticipated Say’s law on macroeconomic equilibrium:
What is annually saved is as regularly consumed as what is annually spent, and nearly in
the same time too (…). That portion which a rich man annually saves, as for the sake of the
profit it is immediately employed as a capital, is consumed in the same manner, and nearly
in the same time too (WN, II.iii.18).21

He realized that the only problem for reaching equilibrium could arise from that
portion of circulating capital represented by money, which could be maintained
as a reserve of value and withdrawn from circulation. Following Quesnay, Smith
maintained: “money is the only part of the circulating capital of the society, of which

21Moreover, savings determine accumulation and growth: “By what a frugal man annually saves,
he (…) affords maintenance to an additional number of productive hands, for that or the ensuing
year” (WN, II.iii.19).
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 25

the maintenance can occasion any diminution in their net revenue” (WN, II.ii.11).22
But soon thereafter, he concluded by excluding this possibility due to the working
of the financial system:
The judicious operations of banking, by substituting paper in the room of a great part of this
gold and silver, enables the country to convert a great part of this dead stock into active and
productive stock; into stock which produces something to the country. (WN, II.ii.86)

The overall picture outlined here is a masterpiece of analytical representation

of the static equilibrium “naturally” achieved by economic quantities.23 Instead of
presenting it in a synthetic, input–output logical format as done by Cantillon (1755)
and later by Quesnay in his Tableau Economique (1759/2005),24 which could have
given Smith the opportunity to pursue his scrutiny of the city-country relationships,
he preferred a more in-depth analytical and aggregate presentation, coining and
defining new economic concepts (as for example, of all forms of capital, from human
to circulating and fixed ones) and their theoretical and practical relationships.
In regard to the theoretical issue of general equilibrium, it is the merit of Thomas
Malthus to have raised, almost 50 years after the Wealth of Nations, the question of the
possibility that an equilibrium demand–supply could not be reached, in opposition to
the main belief of classical economists. His merit consists, in my opinion, in having
put the question no longer in static terms—as did Smith, with whom he substan-
tially agreed on this topic—but in one that we would nowadays call intertemporal
equilibrium, or dynamic equilibrium, in general.
The excess of savings generated by the virtue of frugality and parsimony—much
praised by Smith—which turns into an increase in circulating capital (but also in
demand for unproductive labor) is due to generate an increase of production in the
subsequent year—also thanks to the increased productivity of machinery—which
will require an adequate increase in demand.
What the proportion is between the productive labourers and those engaged in personal
services, which affords the greatest encouragement to the continued increase of wealth,
(…) the resources of political economy are unequal to determine. It must depend upon a
great variety of circumstances, particularly upon the fertility of the soil and the progress of
invention in machinery.” (Malthus 1820/1972, Book II.ix, 399). Therefore, “it is necessary
that a country with great powers of production should possess a body of consumers who are

22 “Money, therefore, the great wheel of circulation, the great instrument of commerce, like all other
instruments of trade, though it makes a part and a very valuable part of the capital, makes no part
of the revenue of the society to which it belongs” (WN, II.ii.23).
23 The consistency of Smith’s analytical picture of a static equilibrium is confirmed by Samuelson

(1977), who reconstructs his general model where “axioms are those of the 1776 Adam Smith,”
while formal elaboration “utilizes 1976 mathematical methods, including convenient duality theory”
(p. 43).
24 Authors that he knew perfectly. In the case of Quesnay and the Physiocrats—for whom he had

profound esteem—he always avoided “entering into the disagreeable discussion of the metaphysical
arguments by which they support their ingenious theory” (WN, V.ii.c.7), namely about the sources
of wealth, residing in their mind only in agricultural land.
26 R. Camagni

not themselves engaged in production” (ibid.), which means the class of landowners and the
class of ‘unproductive’ labourers (“unproductive consumers”).25

Malthus did not respond to his own awkward question on “what proportion” would
be required from time t to t + 1: He did not possess the necessary theoretical and math-
ematical tools. The historical development process of economic thought—130 years
long—was due to pass through the Marxian enlarged-accumulation schemes of Book
III of Das Kapital, Keynes’ liquidity preference theory and the possibility of under-
employment equilibria, and Harrod’s and Domar’s razor-edge model highlighting the
difficulty of maintaining a dynamic equilibrium. But Malthus was (rightly) satisfied
with his own intuition, much—even excessively—praised by Keynes26 and with his
demonstration of the historical necessity and merits of the landowner class: From
them the necessary demand originates in terms of consumption of personal services
and luxury manufactured goods.
It is not (…) that absolutely necessary part of the general surplus produce from the land
(…) without which, in fact, there would be no cities, no military or naval force, no arts, no
learning, none of the finer manufactures, none of the conveniences and luxuries of foreign
countries, and none of that cultivated and polished society, which not only elevates and
dignifies individuals, but which extends its beneficial influence through the whole mass of
the people. (Malthus 1820, Book 1, Chapter III, Section I, p. 148)

What would Smith reply, if he could, to this not untrue but emphatic sentence
by Malthus? He would, of course, recognize the role of “profuse and sumptu-
ous” consumption for his general equilibrium, distinguishing, however, between two
different (historical) forms of expenditure: consumptions addressed to products of
land (“the table”) and personal services (menial servants, attendants to a “multitude
of dogs and horses”) on the one side, or addressed, on the other side, to “durable
commodities” such as “adorning houses and country villas, useful or ornamental
buildings, collecting books, statues, pictures, or things more frivolous as jewels”
(WN, II.iii.39).
The latter form of consumption has three merits. It produces a personal pleasure
in the following days or years, and therefore accumulates wealth and “magnifi-
cence of the person.” It is “frequently both an ornament and honour not only to the
neighbourhood but to the whole country (…). Versailles is an ornament and honour
of France, Stowe and Wilton to England.”27 And lastly, “it is more favourable to

25 Malthus cleverly underlines a logical contradiction in Smith’s doctrine: “It is to found a doctrine
upon the unlimited desire of mankind to consume; then to suppose this desire limited in order to
save capital, and thus completely alter the premises, and yet still to maintain that the doctrine is
true.” (Malthus 1820, II.ix. 402; italics in the original).
26 “If only Malthus, instead of Ricardo, had been the parent stem from which nineteenth century

economics proceeded, what a much wiser and richer place the world would be today!” (Keynes
1933, p. 144).
27 Smith proceeds: “Italy still continues to command some sort of veneration, by the number of

monuments of this kind which it possesses, though the wealth which produced them has decayed,
and though the genius which planned them seems to be extinguished, perhaps for not having the
same employment” (WN, II.iii.39). In fact, nobody these days employs a Michelangelo to design a
square or a building: might Malthus be right?
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 27

private frugality, and consequently to the increase of the public capital, and it main-
tains productive rather than unproductive hands [driving] more than the other to the
growth of public opulence” (WN, II.iii.42). The terms in added italics indicate, to my
mind, that this form of consumption can be more consistent with and complemen-
tary to the frugality of the class of undertakers and manufacturers, partly overcoming
Malthus’ criticism (in footnote 25). In fact, Smith speaks in this paragraph of “men
of fortune” and not of landowners only, as Malthus had in mind.28 Of course, in all
the present discussion, Smith maintains his static approach to general equilibrium.
The second reply by Smith would probably refer to taxation. Within the limits
that he set very clearly on the responsibilities of the state, Smith was in favor of a
“peculiar” taxation on rents in order to finance public investments, as will be shown
later. But for Malthus, this was absolutely out of any reasonable program!29 ,30

3.4 The City-Country Relation and Structural Dynamics:

A Masterly Historical Picture

Having dealt with the complex relationship between city and country, implying not
just economic exchange but huge social and political transformations, Smith set
about writing a masterly and vivid piece of economic and social history, antic-
ipating two broad streams of scientific literature: analyses of the “civilization
matérielle” and common day-to-day life of our contemporary historians31 and a

28 On closer inspection, Malthus’ solution to macroeconomic equilibrium was insufficient, because

the consumption expenditure generated by landlords is limited to their rental incomes and cannot
help overcome a possible overproduction crisis. A further element suggested by Smith that could
be beneficial to equilibrium is an increase in salaries (“liberal wages”) (WN, I.viii.40–44).
29 “Taxation is a stimulus so liable in every way to abuse, and it is so absolutely necessary for the

general interests of society to consider private property as sacred, that no one would think of trusting
to any government the means of making a different distribution of wealth, with a view to the general
good.” (Malthus 1820, II, ix, p. 410). Smith would not agree with this argument, as shown later.
30 A different modern debate on the role of Smith in theoretical economic analysis concerns his

opening the way to Walras’s general microeconomic equilibrium through his ideas on market prices
“gravitating” towards “natural prices,” and on production factors, labor, and capital, seeking their
best utilization and driving towards an equalization of their rewards in different uses (WN, Book
I, Ch. vii and x). Most economists would agree, following Schumpeter’s above-cited favorable
opinion, though underlining the “rudimentary” nature of Smith’s theory (see, e.g., Robbins 1932;
Stigler 1976; Samuelson 1977, 1992). Others, like Kaldor (1972), support the opposite view of the
“irrelevance of equilibrium economics” started by Smith in Ch. I. iv of the WN, driving theoretical
research towards the allocative function of market and away from its much more relevant “creative
functions, as an instrument for transmitting impulse to economic change” (p. 1240)—also present
in Smith’s theory of increasing returns and innovation as effects of the division of labor. A third
interesting view is that of those economists who agree with Smith’s role, but claim that economic
equilibrium was not his priority, being more interested in “disequilibrium” conditions, dynamics,
and structural change in societies (e.g., Chandra 2003). We will return to this last theme in Sect. 5.3.
31 See: WN, Book III, Chapters ii-iv. Schumpeter affirms that such a historical analysis had never

been done until his times (mid-twentieth century) (Schumpeter 1968, Sect. 2.5).
28 R. Camagni

great part of institutional economics and political science (Weingast 2017; Hill 2019,
Introduction).
“In ancient times, almost all rents were paid in kind” (WN, I.xi.e.17). Therefore:
in a country which has neither foreign commerce, nor any of the finer manufactures, a great
proprietor, having nothing for which he can exchange the greater part of the produce of his
lands which is over and above the maintenance of the cultivators, consumes the whole in
rustick hospitality at home. (…) The great Earl of Warwick is said to have entertained every
day at his different manors, thirty thousand people. (WN, III.iv.4)32

But the development of:

commerce and manufactures (…) gradually furnished the great proprietors with something
for which they could exchange the whole surplus produce of their lands, and which they
could consume themselves without sharing it either with tenants or retainers (“diamonds,
jewels, ...”): a method of consuming the whole value of their rents themselves. (WN, III.iv.10)

Very acutely, Smith gives great importance to this historical transformation, which
he does not hesitate to call a “revolution” and that historians label as the “urban
revolution” starting in the eleventh century. Even more interesting is his political
interpretation of this transformation in terms of social classes:
A revolution of the greatest importance to the publick happiness, was … brought about by
two different orders of people, who had not the least intention to serve the publick. To gratify
the most childish vanity was the sole motive of the great proprietors.33 The merchants and
artificers, much less ridiculous, acted merely from a view to their own interest, and in pursuit
of their own pedlar principle of turning a penny wherever a penny was to be got. Neither of
them had either knowledge or foresight of that great revolution which the folly of the one,
and the industry of the other, was gradually bringing about. (WN, III.iv.17)

Thus, for the gratification of the most childish, the meanest and the most sordid of all
vanities, they gradually bartered their whole power and authority.34 What all the violence
of the feudal institutions could never have effected, the silent and insensible operation of
foreign commerce and manufactures gradually brought about. (WN, III.iv.10)35 ,36

32 “He is at all times, therefore, surrounded with a multitude of retainers and dependants, who
(…) must obey him, for the same reason that soldiers must obey the prince who pays them. (…)
The hospitality of the rich and the great, from the sovereign down to the smallest baron, exceeded
everything which in the present times we can easily form a notion of. Westminster-hall was the
dining-room of William Rufus; (…). The great Earl of Warwick is said to have entertained every
day at his different manors, thirty thousand people and though the number here may have been
exaggerated, it must, however, have been very great to admit of such exaggeration.” (WN, III.iv.4).
33 “For a pair of diamond buckles perhaps, or for something as frivolous and useless, they exchanged

the maintenance of a thousand men for a year” (WN, III.iv.10).

34 They were “the judges in peace, and the leaders in war” (thanks to “armies of retainers”) … and

even challenged the king (WN, II.iv.7).

35 “The power of the nobles declined in the feudal governments from the same causes as everywhere

else, viz, from the introduction of arts, commerce, and luxury.” (LJ (A) iv.157).
36 I will return to this issue in Sect. 5.1, when I discuss the power relations in societies according

to Smith’s theory of the four “stages” of historical development.

Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 29

A part of the wealth (and jobs) of the country was gradually transferred to cities:
“a city might in this manner grow up to great wealth and splendor” (WN, III.iv.13).
This process generated a second but not at all trivial effect.
Inhabitants of a city, situated near either the sea-coast or the banks of a navigable river, are not
necessarily confined to derive (their subsistence) from the country in their neighbourhood.
They have a much wider range and may draw them from the most remote corners of the
world (…). The cities of Italy seem to have been the first in Europe which were raised by
commerce to any considerable degree of opulence. (WN, III.iii.13–14)

This passage well interprets a crucial possibility, which has happened in history
in particular periods and is repeating itself in recent times with the development of
information, communication, and transport technologies: the economic emancipa-
tion, or better the enfranchisement, of (large) cities with respect to their surroundings,
their regions, and even their nation countries (Camagni 2020).

4 The Theory of Land Rent

4.1 Fertility Rent

Adam Smith was the first economist in history that clearly and analytically developed
the idea—already outlined by William Petty in a sketchy way37 —of the double source
of land rent: fertility and location (or “situation”). His theory of land rent is, as
usual, a personal, comprehensive, and consistent synthesis of the main approaches
and concepts of his age, a synthesis that with small incremental improvements would
persist for a century, through Ricardo and Mill to Marshall and beyond.38 His own
contribution was enriched by an original and innovative section on urban land rent,
distinguishing between building rent and ground land and including an in-depth
treatment of land rent taxation.
Let us first consider fertility rent and then situation and urban ground rent.
All classical economists (as Cantillon and the Physiocrats had done previously)
believed that land rent derived from the original appropriation of land and of the
“powers of nature.”39 According to Smith:
As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other
men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for its natural produce
(…) which, when land was in common, cost the labourer only the trouble of gathering them
(WN, I.vi.8).

37 Petty (1662/1899), Ch. 5, point 5, p. 48–49.

38 Schumpeter (1968) does not agree with this judgment: He uses the subsequent Ricardian theory
of land rent in order to criticize Smith, and the neoclassical theory in order to destroy Ricardo.
39 “It does not appear that Providence has given the right of the possession of land to one man

preferably to another: the most ancient titles are founded on violence and conquest” (Cantillon
1755, Ch. XI, p. 8).
30 R. Camagni

Therefore, “this rent may be considered as the produce of those powers of Nature,
the use of which the landlord lends to the farmers” (WN, II.v.12), what forty years
later Ricardo called “the original and indestructible powers of the soil” (Ricardo
1821/1971, p. 91).40
The consequence that logically follows is that land rent does not enter in the
price of goods, because land is a costless factor; rent appears only in the distribution
phase, not in the production one. “Rent, it is to be observed, therefore, enters into the
composition of the price of commodities in a different way from wages and profit.
High or low wages, and profit, are the causes of high or low price; high or low rent
is the effect of it.” (WN, I.xi.8).41 Turning to Smith’s definition of fertility rent:
Rent, considered as the price paid for the use of land, is naturally the highest which the
tenant can afford to pay in the actual circumstances of the land. In adjusting the terms of
the lease, the landlord endeavours to leave him no greater share of the produce than what
is sufficient to keep up the stock from which he furnishes the seed, pays the labour, and
purchases and maintains the cattle and other instruments of husbandry, together with the
ordinary profits of farming stock in the neighbourhood. (WN, I.xi.1)

This formulation of the concept seems appropriate and ready to be directly translated
into a formula: the well-known Von Thünen equilibrium equation of bid rents.42
Such parts only of the produce of land can commonly be brought to market of which the
ordinary price is sufficient to replace the stock which must be employed in bringing them
thither, together with its ordinary profits. If the ordinary price is more than this, the surplus
part of it will naturally go to the rent of the land. If it is not more, though the commodity

40 There is no conceptual difference between these two definitions; Von Thünen (1826, Part I, p. 22)
though, more sympathetic with Ricardo’s general theory, opposes Smith’s to Ricardo’s definitions
in favor of the latter. See footnote 42.
41 This statement precedes by forty years the well-known sentence by Ricardo: “Corn is not high

because a rent is paid, but a rent is paid because corn is high” (Ricardo 1821/1971, p. 98).
42 Strangely enough, Von Thünen (1826) did quote Smith (he “taught me political economy”: Part

II, Introduction, p. 225) but only for blaming him for the “conceptual error” of including in land
rents “the interests on the value of the buildings and other equipment” (Part I, Ch. 5a, 14–15,
pp. 18–19). A peculiar criticism, given the extensive analysis that Smith made of “the division of
stock,” of the different “portions” in which fixed and circulating capital are divided (WN, II. i) and
his explicit consideration of the “original expense of improvement” on land (WN, I.xi.b.24): “(t)he
rent of land, it may be thought, is frequently no more than a reasonable profit or interest for the
stock laid out by the landlord upon its improvement. This, no doubt, may be partly the case upon
some occasions; for it can scarce ever be more than partly the case. The landlord demands a rent
even for unimproved land, and the supposed interest or profit upon the expence of improvement is
generally an addition to this original rent. Those improvements, besides, are not always made by
the stock of the landlord, but sometimes by that of the tenant. When the lease comes to be renewed,
however, the landlord commonly demands the same augmentation of rent, as if they had been all
made by his own.” (WN, I.xi.a.2). Von Thünen, a country gentleman and landlord, though a very
industrious, well-educated and smart one, perhaps did not like the portrait of the typical landlord
made by Smith; or, more probably, had the interest to undermine his role in rent theory in his own
favor—given the fact that, as he affirms, “I had not read (Ricardo) when I wrote the first draft of this
work” (Von Thünen 1826, p. 22). As it will be shown later, in the case of the rent of houses, Smith
carefully distinguished building rent (“the interest or profit of the capital expended in building the
house”) and the pure “ground rent.”
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 31

may be brought to market, it can afford no rent to the landlord. Whether the price is, or is
not more, depends upon the demand. (WN, I.xi.6)

This last sentence makes four important theoretical points. First, the surplus after
paying all expenses, including the maintenance of fixed capital stock and the profit
on the circulating capital, represents the “pure” land rent. Secondly, expenses include
transport costs to the market. Thirdly, in the case that, on some lands, the price just
covers all expenses, no rent will be paid: Rent has a differential nature, and, in this
latter case, on that land which was later called “marginal,” the least fertile among
those actually utilized, no rent will appear.43 Fourthly, in all cases, all depends on
demand.
From the analysis that follows, which considers different “parts” or subsectors of
the produce of land, we understand that, as men “naturally multiply in proportion to
the means of subsistence, food is always more or less in demand, (…) and somebody
can always be found who is willing to do something, in order to obtain it.” Therefore
“something always remains for a rent to the landlord” (WN, I.xi.b.1): on “marginal”
land too! This rent on land that produces human food “regulates the rent of the greater
part of other cultivated lands” (WN, I.xi.b.23).44 All this means that Smith had two
complementary concepts of land rent: a concept of differential rent, according to the
different fertility of lands45 (and to their location with respect to markets, as we will
see)—a microeconomic and spatial notion—and a concept of scarcity rent, mainly
macroeconomic, similar to the Marxian “absolute rent.”46 In fact, on this second
concept, he is not very clear,47 but in many passages, he excludes the possibility of a
nil rent, in particular, as already shown, in the production of human food (“corn”).48

43 Thus far, Smith’s theory of land is perfectly similar to Ricardo’s (1821, Ch. 2). But while Ricardo
stopped at this stage, because the zero-marginal rent is totally consistent within his analytical model
of income distribution, Smith, more interested in comparing theory and the real world, continued
to inquire whether this critical conclusion of nil rent could be always perceived in reality, at the risk
of endangering the pure perfection of the theory.
44 Smith was perfectly aware that some types of crops generally require “greater original expenses

of improvement,” “greater annual expenses of cultivation,” and “more attentive and skilful manage-
ment” that therefore imply a superior payment to both landlords and to farmers. “This superiority,
however, will seldom be found to amount to more than a reasonable interest or compensation for
this superior expense” (WN, I.xi.b.24). Concerning the superior payment to landlords, Smith still
called it “rent,” but it is clear that it is due for the “original” expenses: “the advantage which the
landlord derives from such improvements seems at no time to have been greater than what was
sufficient to compensate the original expence of making them.” (WN, I.xi.b.26).
45 “The rent increases according to the goodness of the pasture” (WN, I.xi.b.3).
46 See also, for this conclusion, Napoleoni (1970, p. 83). Marx criticized Ricardo on both theoretical

and empirical grounds concerning the fact that in his model the rent on “the worst cultivated soil”
is equal to zero (Marx 1894/1959, Book III, Ch. 45, p. 555), but failed to explain and justify in
a consistent theoretical way his (correct) conjecture on the existence of an “absolute” rent (See:
Camagni 1992, Ch. 9.4.3).
47 In fact, Ricardo criticized Smith on this point in Ch. XXIV of his Principles.
48 Before Smith, William Petty did not accept a zero rent, but did not give any justification for this

rejection. Marshall did so (1890/1977, p. 351), and more recently also Sraffa (1960), when in his
XI Chapter (“The Land”) he wrote two equations for land rent, the first concerning the Ricardian
32 R. Camagni

In regard to the economic nature of rent, an intriguing sentence by Smith generated

much debate and controversy: “The rent of land, therefore, considered as the price
paid for the use of the land, is naturally a monopoly price.” (WN, I.xi.5). As Malthus
rightly affirmed (Malthus 1820, II.iii. p. 136), and later Schumpeter accepted (1968,
pp. 361–362), this should not be considered an analytical sentence: The case of a
monopoly price would not have been consistent with the general belief of classical
economists that rent does not enter in the definition of prices (while monopoly profit
does). Smith, and the many classical economists that used that expression, likely
meant that the private appropriation of a costless but scarce natural resource deter-
mines effects similar to a monopoly condition.49 This, of course, derives from the
generalized idea—in those times—that land rent is an unearned income, fruit of no
engagement in production by the landlord whatsoever: “They are the only one of the
three orders whose revenue costs them neither labour nor care (…) independent of
any plan or project of their own” (WN, I.xi.p.8).
Curiously, in the same paragraph just quoted in which Smith speaks about the
“indolence,” “ignorance,” and lack of a veritable role within the social production
process of the order of landlords, he says that the “interest” of this order “is strictly and
inseparably connected with the general interest of society” (ibid.). This sentence was
widely debated at the time of Malthus and Ricardo, the former using Adam Smith’s
authority in order to strengthen his position in favor of landlords (Malthus 1820,
I.iii.viii.1) and to challenge Ricardo’s opposite opinion50 ; more recently Schumpeter
has referred to that sentence as “incredible” and inconsistent with respect to Smith’s
“ideological prejudice against landlords” (sic) (Schumpeter 1974, Ch. 3, ii.d., p. 153,
Italian edition). It is my opinion that there is a wide misunderstanding concerning
Smith’s position. By “connected interests” he meant that an opulent and flourishing
society generates major advantages for that class, through the consequent increase
in employment, population, wages, and demand for food products, and not at all the

differential “extensive” rent, and the second concerning rent that emerges in the case of equal
fertility of all lands (which would take differential rent to zero by definition) but of presence of
aggregate scarcity. However, not all economists agree on the concept of absolute rent (in particular,
the pure neoclassical school); in my opinion, the concept is particularly fruitful in urban economics,
implying and encompassing the effects of agglomeration economies on the differential, at the urban
border, between urban and agricultural land (Camagni 1992, Sect. 9.4.3).
49 Marx, too, initially tried to justify his concept of absolute rent with a class monopoly, but he

then changed his mind for similar reasons. J. S. Mill began his presentation of land rent theory, on
Ricardian lines, with the same statement on monopoly; yet this looks only as a formal tribute to
Smith, as he immediately dismissed it: “It is at once evident that rent is the effect of a monopoly.
The reason why landowners are able to require rent for their land is, that it is a commodity which
many want, and which no one can obtain but from them. If all the land of the country belonged to
one person, he could fix the rent at his pleasure. This case, however, is nowhere known to exist; and
the only remaining supposition is that of free competition; the land-owners being supposed to be,
as in fact they are, too numerous to combine” (Mill 1875, II.vi.1. p. 270).
50 “The interest of the landlord is always opposed to that of the consumer and manufacturer”

(Ricardo 1821, p. 332).

Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 33

other way round, so that what is good for the landlord is good for society.51 This
is the logic of the subsequent empirical examples that Smith provides to justify his
sentence, and also the way in which Malthus, and Ricardo, too, read it.
In a dynamic perspective, in fact, with the growth of productivity in agriculture
and greater general opulence, “every improvement in the circumstances of the society
tends, either directly or indirectly, to raise the real rent of land, to increase the real
wealth of the landlord, his power of purchasing the labour or the produce of the
labour” (WN, I.xi.p.1) and also “the proportion of his share to the whole produce”
(WN, I.xi.p.3). Almost all classical economists agreed with this argument.52

4.2 The Theory of Land Rent: “Situation” Rent

As said above, Smith had a perfectly clear idea about the two sources of land rent,
their mutual relationships, and their appropriate analytical definitions:
The rent of land not only varies with its fertility, whatever be its produce, but with its situation,
whatever be its fertility. Land in the neighbourhood of a town, gives a greater rent than land
equally fertile in a distant part of the country. (WN, I.xi.b.4)53

The corn which grows within a mile of the town, sells there for the same price with that
which comes from twenty miles distance. But the price of the latter must generally, not only
pay the expense of raising and bringing it to market, but afford too the ordinary profits of
agriculture to the farmer. The proprietors and cultivators of the town, over and above the
ordinary profits of agriculture, gain, in the price of what they sell, the whole value of the
carriage of the like produce that is brought from more distant parts, and they save, besides,
the whole value of this carriage in the price of what they buy. (WN, III.i.1)

We find here a clear definition of situation or location rent as a saving on transport

costs, together with the full Von Thünen formula of bid rent in spatial equilibrium,
fifty years before him: single price for each product at the town market, whatever the
fertility and location of the land producing it, single rate of profit, and all production
expenses subtracted from revenues. The result is a differential rent concept, equal, in

51 As will be shown later, this causal relationship is even more important and clear in the case of
urban ground land rent.
52 Years later, Mill was of the same opinion: “The ordinary progress of a society which increases

in wealth is at all times tending to augment the incomes of landlords; to give them both a greater
amount and a greater proportion of the wealth of the community” (Mill 1848, V.ii.6). Smith though,
in another passage, confirms the growing real income of landlords in absolute terms but not as a
share of national product (WN, II.iii.9). In this regard, the most interesting modern interpretations
of Smith’s general model of income production and distribution—that of Samuelson (1977) and of
the Sraffian school (O’Donnell 1990)—justify the first interpretation (Freitas 2012).
53 “Though it may cost no more labour to cultivate the one than the other, it must always cost more

to bring the produce of the distant land to market. A greater quantity of labor, therefore, must be
maintained out of it; and the surplus, from which are drawn both the profit of the farmer and the
rent of the landlord, must be diminished. But in remote parts of the country the rate of profit, as
has already been shown, is generally higher than in the neighbourhood of a large town. A smaller
proportion of this (diminished) surplus, therefore, must belong to the landlord.” (WN, I.xi.b.4)
34 R. Camagni

this case to Von Thünen’s one. Rent on the “marginal” land here follows his general
law (equal in general—but not always—to zero).
One cannot find in Smith the full picture of the well-known crop rings modeled by
Von Thünen according to different transport costs and accessibility needs; however,
some intuitions concerning this issue, supported by empirical analysis, are present.
Smith remarks that around a great city the demand for milk and forage for horses
sometimes grows so high that it increases the price of grass and, given its higher
unit transport cost, attracts its production in the vicinity of the city, crowding out the
production of corn, the crucial human food, which is pushed to distant places and
even imported.54 ,55

54 “In the neighbourhood of a great town, the demand for milk and for forage to horses, frequently
contribute, together with the high price of butcher’s meat, to raise the value of grass above what
may be called its natural proportion to that of corn. This local advantage, it is evident, cannot be
communicated to the lands at a distance. Particular circumstances have sometimes rendered some
countries so populous, that the whole territory, like the lands in the neighbourhood of a great town,
has not been sufficient to produce both the grass and the corn necessary for the subsistence of their
inhabitants. Their lands, therefore, have been principally employed in the production of grass, the
more bulky commodity, and which cannot be so easily brought from a great distance; and corn,
the food of the great body of the people, has been chiefly imported from foreign countries.” (WN,
I.xi.b.11–12). In a similar way, Von Thünen finds that “near the town will be grown those products
which are heavy or bulky in relation to their value and hence so expensive to transport” (Von Thünen
1826, Part I, Ch. 2, p. 2).
55 Von Thünen developed his well-known model of “agricultural statics” and its related diagrams

of successive production rings in Part I of The Isolated State. In the following Parts, he moved
much farther along a typical Ricardian analytical program, in search of cross-effects among the
income distribution variables, their endogenous determination, and on the release of the homo-
geneity hypothesis on fertility and k/l ratio throughout the plain. He considered this last hypothesis
logically untenable as a consequence of the different value of grain in the different rings and conse-
quent different incentives to increasing the k-intensity in the form of land improvements and soil
enrichment. In Part II, cleverly working on the Isolated State external frontier, where rent is equal to
zero (and disappears at the margin as an income distribution share) and defining capital as “accumu-
lated labour product” or stored-up past labor, he comes to define what he calls the “natural wage”:
the equilibrium (and “rightful”) level of real wages, independent from the interest rate, that he
calculates as the geometric mean between subsistence needs and workers product (or, as Samuelson
puts it, between worker’s marginal and average productivity). Through differential calculus on
marginal cross-productivities, he demonstrates that his “natural” wage maximizes the revenue of
capital-producers and national revenue. In Part III, published after his death in 1863, he analyzed
the problem of optimal rotation period of pinewood stock in forests as a capital-theoretic dynamic
optimization problem, with revolutionary operational results. In both Parts II and III, he was much
ahead of his times in both theory and analytical methods. Paul Samuelson, having worked on a
Thünen-inspired model, was able to claim in 2009 that an answer was finally possible to Ricardo’s
question about distributive shares, through a production function with heterogeneous (“vectoral”)
capital (Samuelson 2009, p. xiii), a question that previously had triggered a harsh, highly theoretical
“capital controversy among the two Cambridges” (UK and Massachusetts) following the publica-
tion of Sraffa’s book (1960). Von Thünen was aware of the relevance of all these developments,
beyond—but necessarily including—his early definition of crops location and distance rent: “(t)he
problem touches on the relations between the various classes, on the happiness and welfare of the
numerous class of labourers as much as on the obligations of the rich towards the working class; our
discussion therefore reaches far beyond the first conception of the Isolated State. Here, where we
come to deal with man himself, the Isolated State recedes into the background; and if our discussion
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 35

The idea of a natural organization of crops in space in successive rings around

the main markets was already present in the clubs of Scottish economists. In fact,
almost ten years before the publication of the Wealth of Nations, Sir James Steuart—
a landed gentleman (as, later, Von Thünen), who first introduced the term “political
economy”—in his Principles of Political Oeconomy (1767) presented the same idea
of rings or “belts” in a more fully developed way than Smith’s one. Locations at
different distances were based on perishability (e.g., “kitchen garden products …
cannot easily be brought from a distance, in that fresh and luxuriant state which
pleases the eye, and conduces to health”), unit transport costs and volumes produced
(“bulky commodities”) (vol. I, XX, p. 139). His full description of the rings56 and
the importance attributed to transport costs was much praised by Martin Beckmann
(1981) in his tribute to Steuart as “one of the forerunners of urban economics and land
use theory” (p. 1). Honestly speaking, Steuart’s amazing contribution was mainly
confined to a geographical location theory, but it was not complete as it left aside the
dual counterpart of location, namely land rent and land rent theory—fully present in
Smith as shown before.
Another reference to “circles” is made when Smith points out the crucial impor-
tance of accessibility and a good transport infrastructure, because they foster the
development of more peripheral areas and of “the most extensive circle” of the
country.57 “They are advantageous to the town” not just because “they open many
new markets to its produce” but, more importantly, because they “break down the
monopoly of the country in its neighbourhood, (…) a great enemy to good manage-
ment.” (WN, I.xi.b.5). And how strong the power of this monopoly can be is revealed
by the following anecdote: “It is not more than fifty years ago that some of the coun-
ties in the neighbourhood of London, petitioned the parliament against the exten-
sion of the turnpike roads into the remoter counties.” (ibid.). This is indeed a clear
example of the true position taken by Smith in the debate concerning interest conflicts

is still based on the concept of the Isolated State, this is because the problem seems to me to be
soluble – if at all – only with the aid of the approach and the assumptions which form the basis of
this hypothesis.” (von Thünen 1826, Part II, Ch. 5, 24, p. 240). We see in von Thünen’s work some
Smithian theoretical basics and philosophical goals (as it will be shown later), a Ricardian analytical
method, an anticipation of “post-1890 marginal productivity theory,” and use of differential calculus
(Samuelson 2009, p. xiii), a path-breaking indication of a workable general equilibrium model: not
a negligible achievement indeed!
56 “Thus we commonly find agriculture disposed in the following manner. In the center stands the

city surrounded by kitchen gardens; beyond these lie a belt of fine luxuriant pasture or hay fields;
stretch beyond this and you find the beginning of what I call operose farming, plowing and sowing;
beyond this lie grazing farms for the fattening of cattle; and last of all come the mountainous and
large extents of unimproved or ill improved grounds, where animals are bred. This seems the natural
distribution, and such I have found it almost everywhere established, when particular circumstances
do not invert the order.“ (Steuart 1767, vol. I, XX, 139).
57 “Good roads, canals, and navigable rivers, by diminishing the expense of carriage, put the remote

parts of the country more nearly upon a level with those in the neighbourhood of the town. They are
upon that account the greatest of all improvements. They encourage the cultivation of the remote,
which must always be the most extensive circle of the country”. (WN, I.xi.b.5)
36 R. Camagni

among classes, very similar to the subsequent position of Ricardo in his scientific
and parliamentary fight against the corn laws.58
Another example of accessibility advantage with an interesting link with locational
monopoly is provided by the islands of Shetland, where inhabitants, in order to profit
from the abundance of fish—another gift of nature—generally locate on the coasts.
But the landlord’s rent in this case “is in proportion to what he can make both by the
land and the water (…), partly paid in sea fish”. (WN, I.xi.a.4)59 ,60

4.3 Urban Land Rent: Ground and Building Rent

Smith did not devote a chapter of the WN to the role of cities, the reasons for agglom-
eration, and the generation of an urban land rent; yet he had a clear perception and
interpretation of the link among these matters, thanks to his broad historical view, his
deep inductive capacity, and his mastery in the understanding of economic processes.
As seen previously, a reconstruction of his view on this matter requires bringing
together sentences, sudden intuitions, and profound thoughts spread throughout his
entire opus. Since this reconstruction could imply some dose of subjectivity, I quote
here abundantly from Smith. Interestingly enough, his analysis of urban land rent—
the most innovative in his times and closest to fiscal policies—is placed in Book V,
Ch. II, Part II “Of taxes” and not in Book I, Ch. XI “On the rent of land.”
The rent of a house may be distinguished into two parts, of which the one may very properly
be called the building rent; the other is commonly called the ground rent. The building rent
is the interest or profit of the capital expended in building the house.” (WN, V.ii.e.1–2)

The ground rent is the most important concept, the only one referring properly
to rent: its economic sources are the usual ones, situation and demand (under the
hypothesis of some scarcity).
Here, Smith introduces a concept parallel to the one of productive and unproduc-
tive labor:
The rent of houses, though it in some respects resembles the rent of land, is in one respect
essentially different from it. The rent of land is paid for the use of a productive subject. The
land which pays it produces it. The rent of houses is paid for the use of an unproductive
subject. Neither the house nor the ground which it stands upon produce anything. (WN,
V.ii.e.7)

58 “The interest of the landlord is always opposed to that of consumer and manufacturer” (Ricardo
1821/1971, p. 332).
59 “It is one of the very few instances in which rent makes a part of the price of that commodity,”

i.e., fish (WN, I.xi.a.4): evidently, he considers this as a case of locational monopoly, similar to
Marshall’s private appropriation of “public value.”
60 The last case of situation rent refers to another natural resource, mines: “Whether a coal-mine

can afford any rent, depends partly upon its fertility, and partly upon its situation.” (WN, I.xi.e.10).
The ability of products (coal, iron, precious metals, or diamonds) of bearing long-distance carriage
depends on the possibility of separating the ore and on the intrinsic value per ton. When this value
is very high, the value of the mine will almost reside in its fertility.
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 37

This “prejudice,” together with the more “abstract” nature of the service of urban
land, reinforced his idea of a monopolistic nature of urban rent:
There is no city in Europe, I believe, in which house-rent is dearer than in London (…)
The dearness of house-rent in London arises from those causes which render it dear in all
great capitals, (…) above all the dearness of ground-rent, every landlord acting the part of
a monopolist, and frequently exacting a higher rent for a single acre of bad land in a town,
than can be had for a hundred of the best in the country. (WN, I.x.b.52)
This surplus rent is the price which the inhabitant of the house pays for some real or
supposed advantage of the situation. (…) In country villas, in the neighbourhood of some
great town … the peculiar conveniency or beauty of situation is there frequently very well
paid for. Ground rents are generally highest in the capital, and in those particular parts of it
where there happens to be the greatest demand for houses, whatever be the reason of that
demand, whether for trade and business, for pleasure and society, or for mere vanity and
fashion. (WN, V.ii.e.3)

The usual “bid-rent” concept is perfectly focused. “Situation” encompasses not

just accessibility, as in the food market, or closeness to other trade and business oper-
ators (conveniency), but many other subjective elements such as beauty of landscape,
urban amenities and lifestyles—real, supposed, or imposed by fashion. The amount
of unit rent depends on the density and wealth of local demand.61 ,62 A modern theo-
retician of the urban location of economic and residential activities could not have
put it better.
The subsequent paragraphs of the same section of the WN develop, in a normative
and a political economy direction, the basic analytical concepts of the previous ones.
The nature and development of a city owe nothing to the “care” or “project” of
landowners but derive from the action of the State (or public administration). In fact:
Both ground–rents and the ordinary rent of land are a species of revenue which the owner,
in many cases, enjoys without any care or attention of his own. (…) Ground–rents, so far as
they exceed the ordinary rent of land, are altogether owing to the good government of the
sovereign, which, by protecting the industry either of the whole people, or of the inhabitants
of some particular place, enables them to pay so much more than its real value for the ground
which they build their houses upon; or to make to its owner so much more than compensation
for the loss which he might sustain by this use of it. (WN, V.ii.e.10–11)

61 “In country houses, at a distance from any great town, where there is plenty of ground to chuse
upon, the ground rent is … no more than what the ground … would pay if employed in agriculture.
In country villas in the neighbourhood of some great town, it is sometimes a good deal higher;
and the peculiar conveniency or beauty of situation is there frequently very well paid for” (WN,
V.ii.e.3).
62 “The owner of the ground-rent … acts always as a monopolist and exacts the greatest rent which

can be got for the use of his ground. More or less can be got for it according as the competitors
happen to be richer or poorer, or can afford to gratify their fancy for a particular spot of ground at
a greater or smaller expence” (WN, V.ii.e.9).
38 R. Camagni

All this theoretical elaboration on urban land rents—and the consequent sugges-
tions on its taxation—was not present, to my knowledge, in the literature of the eigh-
teenth century.63 Later, it was totally absent in Ricardo64 or Malthus, while it survived
with small refinements for more than one hundred and fifty years—and under many
respects up to the present day—particularly in the works of J.S. Mill, Marx (who
added some specific contributions, not always acceptable), Marshall (1890), Pigou
(1909), the controversial but politically effective Henry George (1879),65 and many
Italian liberal economists of the early twentieth century such as Ulisse Gobbi (1906)
and Luigi Einaudi.
Marshall remained always convinced that land rent, and urban rent in particular,
deserved a theoretical treatment different from the other production factors, capital,
and labor, in opposition to his contemporary neoclassical economists.66 In Chapter xi
of Book V, dedicated to “Urban Values,” Marshall did not mention the monopoly
condition, but shared Smith’s idea that urban “situation value” is “the indirect result
of the general progress of society rather than the direct result of the investment
of capital and labour by individuals for the sake of gain” (Marshall 1890, V.xi.1).
Therefore “the greater part of situation value is ‘public value’” (V.xi.2)—as opposed
to the “private value” that “can be traced to the work and outlay of its individual
holders”—or, using a “precedent term,” is “true rent” (V.x.5).
Smith’s subsequent analysis consistently evolved in the direction of ground land
rent taxation:
Ground-rents seem, in this respect, a more proper subject of peculiar taxation than even the
ordinary rent of land. (…) Nothing can be more reasonable than that a fund which owes its
existence to the good government of the state, should be taxed peculiarly, or should contribute
something more than the greater part of other funds, towards the support of that government.
(V.ii.e.11).

And, continuing along this quite radical path, he wrote:

63 This is well known in the circles of land economists (see Prest 1981; Lichfield and Connellan 1997,
Appendix 1.2). The “single tax” on land rents (impôt unique) proposed by the French Physiocrats
in the same years referred to agricultural rent and derived from a completely different economic
logic.
64 Ricardo’s Principles of Political Economy and Taxation presents a chapter (XIV) concerning

“Taxes on housing,” but it is as short as four pages, full of long citations from Smith and, at the end,
concedes that “(i)t must be admitted that the effects of these taxes would be such as Adam Smith
has described” (Ricardo 1821, p. 215).
65 Henry George (1839–1897), American journalist and political economist, proposed a single tax

on the 100% of land rents and the abolition of taxes on wages and profits. His political challenge
had an important echo in the USA; in the United Kingdom his project was backed in particular by
the Fabian Society and was at the basis of subsequent land-value taxation laws. His most famous
self-published book, Progress and Poverty (1879), sold millions of copies worldwide; he died of a
stroke while campaigning for Mayor of New York City.
66 “The rent of land (…) has peculiarities of its own which are of vital importance from the point

of view of theory as well as of practice” (Marshall 1890, Preface to the first edition).
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 39

A tax upon ground–rents would not raise the rents of houses. It would fall altogether upon
the owner of the ground–rent, who acts always as a monopolist (…). No discouragement
will thereby be given to any sort of industry. (V.ii.e.9–10)67

This is a strong sentence: A tax on urban ground rent does not raise rents, and
therefore, house prices and does not damage the rest of the economy. Mill, Marshall,
and Samuelson, respectively seventy, one hundred, and two hundred years later,
agreed with Smith on these last sentences and their underlying logics. According to
Mill, “the existing land-tax (which in this country unfortunately is very small) ought
not to be regarded as a tax, but as a rent-charge in favour of the public; a portion
of the rent, reserved from the beginning by the State, which has never belonged to
or formed part of the income of the landlords.” (Mill 1848, V.ii.6).68 According to
Marshall, “a tax on the public value of land does not greatly diminish the inducement
to cultivate the land highly, not to erect farm buildings on it. (…) It does not raise the
price of produce” (Marshall 1976, V.x.4).69 Concerning the form of taxation, Mill
and Pigou (1909) preferred taxing increments of land values instead of full values.
In the case of urban ground rent, one can fully appreciate Smith’s strict logic
linking general principles, specific theorization, interpretation of facts, economic
judgment, and consequent policy suggestions. On the strength of this general logical
consistency lies the long fortune of his thought in this field.

5 Some Themes and Theoretical Issues Overlooked

by Regional Science

In the two preceding sections of this work, I have shown the seminal conceptual and
theoretical contributions of Adam Smith by which, in my opinion, he anticipated
some of the recognized Great Minds of regional science. In this section, I shall point

67 This is one of Smith’s intuitions praised by such a great (neoclassical) economist as Samuelson
(1992): “Smith … is right to perceive that land rent is a surplus that can be taxed without affecting
real price ratios” (p. 3). Von Thünen, too, agreed with this analytical proposition (Von Thünen 1826,
Part I, Ch. 38).
68 “The landlords originally held their estates subject to feudal burthens, for which the present land-

tax is an exceedingly small equivalent” (Mill 1848, V.ii.6). The entire Sect. 6 in which the quoted
sentence is located was eliminated from the 1885 abridged New York edition of Mill’s Principles
of Political Economy, “A Textbook for Colleges,” edited by J. L. Laughlin of Harvard University,
and it was substituted for by a longer note about an initiative of Mill’s on land taxation.
69 Marshall was even much stronger than that in the early editions of his Principles of Economics:

“The sudden appropriation of [land] rents and quasi rents by the State would indeed have” huge
political effects, “destroying security and shaking the foundations of society; but” in economic
terms, or “if from the first the State had retained true rents in its own hands, the vigor of industry and
accumulation need not have been impaired” (Marshall 1890, Book VI, ch. 9, Sect. 351). Strangely,
in late authorized editions of Principles since 1900 this passage was deleted. See Camagni (1992),
Ch. 9, footnote 15. As in the case of the previous footnote, the mentioned views might have seemed
too “Georgist” (see footnote 65), a doctrine that was condemned by Pope Leo XIII in his Encyclical
Rerum Novarum in 1891.
40 R. Camagni

out other contributions of his, namely those pertaining to themes and issues of great
importance today, which were—and still are—largely neglected in regional science.
On these issues, he not only directed important attention but added striking intuitions
about how to deal with them in economic terms, including, as usual, institutional and
political science tools. Had regional science not been widely deaf to these issues and
had it followed the pathways indicated by Smith, it would be today much better able
to interpret and tackle problems that are increasingly questioning the social structure
of Western countries and even challenging their political stability.

5.1 Economic Power and Spatial Income Distribution

The first and most important theme that has been overlooked and actually lost by
regional scientists is, in my opinion, that of economic power and its impact on spatial
income distribution (Camagni 2016a, b). Some clarifications on what I specifically
mean are necessary.
Initially, the subject of income distribution and its determinants had at least an
equal weight with respect to the theory of production and exchange in the treatises
of classical economists; for Ricardo, it was the crucial issue of political economy.
With the advent of neoclassical economic theory, the two fields were linked together
by the concept of marginal productivity, i.e., by the hypothesis that the remuneration
of all factors was subject to the same law, under the normal assumption of perfectly
competitive markets. During the twentieth century, the interest in income distribution
diminished, in parallel with the emerging belief that growth, the true economic issue,
would solve any social problem.
Regional science inherited these sentiments and added a habit of measuring spatial
development issues in physical units: inhabitants, jobs, and GDP (at constant prices),
typical of location theory and economic geography. This functional-geographic
approach proved successful and helped to explain wide interregional problems but
left the pricing problem of production factors untouched: trends in remunerations
with a huge spatial bias, consequent relative prices of products and terms of trade
among territories, unequal exchange,70 profits and land rents as distributive shares,
spatial distribution of purchasing power. The question of the global power of large
corporations and its spatial effect was left to the business administration or political
science literature, while that of urban poverty and people’s displacement in large
cities was appropriated by planners, urban sociologists, or urban geographers. The
specificity of an economic viewpoint was largely neglected.71

70 These issues are present, however, in the theory of international trade, in international monetary
economics, and in some economic development theories.
71 Among economists, there are notable exceptions, of course, including Joseph Stiglitz, Angus

Deaton, Amartya Sen, Daron Acemoglu, Anthony Barnes Atkinson, and Thomas Piketty. But, in
spite of three Nobel Prizes between them, they remain in the minority.
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 41

The emerging issue of more recent years, what has been called the geography of
“uncertainty” (Ottaviano 2019) or the “geography of discontent” (Rodriguez-Pose
2017)—affecting areas not experiencing absolute levels of poverty—was initially
apparent in the new political and electoral attitudes that suddenly arose in almost
all advanced countries. Then, it was sufficiently considered in geographic terms but
never really explained. In my view, all this has been due to income-distribution trends
in space: the explosion of land rents in large cities, the increasing control power of
global finance and its headquarters, the fast divergence in the remunerations of work
by tasks and professions, the increasing weakness of the traditional socio-economic
role of the middle class in society (Camagni 2020).72
Interestingly, these processes are closely bound up with space and territories.
They do not just happen on territory, but in and by territory, according to its specific
features. More precisely, they are generated by the old, Smithian relationship between
“town and country.” This relationship has hugely changed since those years, but it
has remained conceptually crucial: It was originally a relation of industry versus agri-
culture; then became a relationship between urban services and footloose industry;
recently, it has turned into the relationship between global cities and small cities, i.e.,
between knowledge, culture, and creativity-intensive professions on the one hand,
and routinized intellectual professions, at risk of automation, on the other.
As shown above, Smith thought that the relationship between town and country
was largely the effect of a functional division of labor, a complementarity bringing
advantages to both parties. But he was also aware of a second nature of that relation-
ship between the two spatial archetypes, of a hierarchical and distributive nature, to
which he devoted much attention in the WN: “what circumstances (…) have given
the trades which are carried on in towns so great an advantage over that which is
carried on in the country (…) I shall endeavour to explain at full length”. (WN,
II.v.37)
Firstly, Smith considered the ancient urban guilds/corporations:
The government of towns corporate was altogether in the hands of traders and artificers; and
it was the manifest interest of every particular class of them, to prevent the market from being
over-stocked, as they commonly express it, with their own particular species of industry;
which is in reality to keep it always under-stocked. (…) In consequence of such regulations,
indeed, each class was obliged to buy the goods they had occasion for from every other
within the town somewhat dearer (and …) none of them were losers by these regulations.
But in their dealings with the country they were all great gainers; and in these latter dealings
consists the whole trade which supports and enriches every town. (I.x.c.18)

72 “The geography of physical assets, activities and distance should merge with a more complicated
geography of control (Alderson and Beckfield, 2004), of ‘command on labour’ (à la Adam Smith),
a geography of global networks of power elites at both the local and the trans-territorial levels. The
traditional ‘territorial capital’ assets—accessibility and infrastructure, private fixed capital stock,
generic human capital and social capital—should be complemented by more relevant assets such
as relational capital (Camagni 2019), headquarter functions and their location, residential locations
of ruling classes, nodes of global networks in the fields of information, culture, education, power,
and control. Furthermore, a renewed in-depth analysis of the cumulative, selective learning role of
places and local milieux becomes crucial.” (Camagni 2020).
42 R. Camagni

In fact, “(t)he inhabitants of a town, being collected into one place, can easily combine
together (…). The inhabitants of the country, dispersed in distant places, cannot easily
combine together. They have not only never been incorporated, but the corporation
spirit never has prevailed among them.” (WN, I.x.c.22–23)
Secondly, Smith referred to other regulations, concerning international trade, with
a similar effect on the unequal exchange between the city and the rest of the economy:
The superiority which the industry of the towns has everywhere in Europe over that of
the country (…) is supported by many other regulations. The high duties upon foreign
manufactures and upon all goods imported by alien merchants, all tend to the same purpose.
Corporation laws enable the inhabitants of towns to raise their prices, without fearing to be
under-sold by the free competition of their own countrymen. Those other regulations secure
them equally against that of foreigners. (WN, I.x.c.25)

Lastly, Smith analyzed the “exclusive privileges” assured to specific professions

and craft occupations concerning restraints in competition and regulations on access
to apprenticeship in towns.73 If we consider the tight controls on entrance and the
power of such modern (urban) corporations as those of taxi-drivers, hotel and restau-
rant owners, and various professional activities and trades that exist in most cities
today, or the resistances and difficulties surrounding the international recognition of
qualifications, we can understand the continuing importance of Smith’s message.
The most important point, though, is his methodological and analytical message:
Monopoly powers enlarge the distributive share of the monopolists on total income,
enhance the wealth of cities with respect to other territories, and reduce the economy’s
growth potential. This unbalanced relationship between city and country was later
taken up by the young Marx in his Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts and in
the German Ideology and interpreted as the historical form of a much more profound
ontological “contradiction,” that between intellectual and manual labor: “The greatest
division of material and mental labour is the separation of town and country. This
antagonism begins with the transition from barbarism to civilisation (…) and runs
through the whole history of civilisation to the present day” (Marx and Engels 1970,
p. 49).
The illustrated unbalanced relationship between incomes in the two spatial
archetypes may also be due to a functional income distribution within the city. The
advantages derived from agglomeration, initially gained as profits and remunerations
of advanced services, may be partly confiscated by the rise in urban land/ground rents
(Camagni 2016a, 2020).
Smith included these reflections on the power distribution in the city/country
relationship, in a wider theory of the historical development “stages” of society—
“hunting, pasture, agriculture, and commerce”74 —in which he established a link

73 The long period of apprenticeship imposed in most European countries that was used by Cantillon
to justify the higher salary of the urban apprentice with respect to the rural young worker (Cantillon
1755, Ch. 7), and therefore the larger share of GDP of towns with respect to their share of population,
is used by Adam Smith, together with other similar regulations, to point out an unjust condition.
74 The third stage is divided in turn into three phases. The first coincides in Western countries with

the years after the collapse of the Roman Empire, when “every great landlord was a sort of Petty
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 43

between the prevailing structure of the economy (and the modes of earning subsis-
tence) and the nature and distribution of power, authority, and subordination among
classes (Campbell and Skinner 1976, pp. 12–16). In the first stage, “universal poverty
establishes universal equity,” and authority is mainly based on age and personal quali-
ties (WN, V.i.b.7). In the second, a greater inequality emerges, linked to the ownership
of land. In the third stage, the power of great landlords is increasingly weakened by
the emergence of urban classes and the transformation of the ways of spending and
realizing land rents—as commented on earlier in Sect. 3.4. In the fourth stage, when
all goods and services command a price, “tradesmen and artificers … are more or
less independent of” the landlords, who lose their political power and authority. He
definitely presents a philosophy of history based on the nature and distribution of
property, and I agree with Mark Blaug that “it is no exaggeration to describe these
men (Smith and other Scottish writers of the time, such as Adam Ferguson, John
Millar, William Robertson, and even David Hume) as forerunners of the Marxist
theory of historical materialism” (Blaug 1996, p. 59).

5.2 “Sympathy” and “Reciprocity” Sentiments in Public

Happiness

In his early and fundamental work on The Theory of Moral Sentiments, while
inquiring into the sources of moral judgments—by means of an empiricist, psycho-
logical, self-inspecting, and social investigation75 —Smith develops an in-depth
theory of human inter-personal and social relationships, which constitute the natural
fabric of human societies.76 Right from the inception, he writes:
How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature,
which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him,
though he derives nothing from it except the pleasure of seeing it. Of this kind is pity or
compassion, the emotion which we feel for the misery of others, when we either see it, or are
made to conceive it in a very lively manner. That we often derive sorrow from the sorrow of
others, is a matter of fact too obvious to require any instances to prove it (…). The greatest
ruffian, the most hardened violator of the laws of society, is not altogether without it. (TMS,
I.i.1.1)77

prince” (WN, III.ii.3); the second with the emergence of a self-governing system in cities within
the feudal system; the third with the development of trade and manufactures in cities.
75 Modern psychologists praise Adam Smith highly for having carefully foreshadowed in his anal-

ysis of human judgment and preferences, “approximately 200 years before Kahneman and Tversky
(1979)” themes and theories of today’s behavioural economics such as loss aversion, myopic
intertemporal choice, and overconfidence (Ashraf et al. 2005, p. 132).
76 The editors of the Glasgow Edition of the TMS go as far as to affirm: “(a)ccording to Smith,

conscience is a product of social relationships” (Raphael and Macfie 1976, p. 15).

77 “It is by the imagination only that we can form any conception of what are the sensations (of our

brother, or) by representing to us what would be our own, if we were in his case.” (TMS, I.i.1.2).
44 R. Camagni

“Sympathy” is the psychological and moral force that ties men together in society,
a force that somehow, in Smith’s thought, parallels the “gravity law” of Newton—the
mind that he most admired.78 Starting from this natural attitude, social relationships
become founding principles of society and sources of social happiness:
It is thus that man, who can subsist only in society, was fitted by nature to that situation
for which he was made. All the members of human society stand in need of each other’s
assistance, and are likewise exposed to mutual injuries. Where the necessary assistance is
reciprocally afforded from love, from gratitude, from friendship, and esteem, the society
flourishes and is happy. All the different members of it are bound together by the agreeable
bands of love and affection, and are, as it were, drawn to one common centre of mutual good
offices. (TMS, II.ii.3.1; author’s italics)

These statements are very important in many respects. Significant moral and social
sentiments are not confined to compassion and pity or pure sociability, but expand
to “fellow-feelings” with the joy and happiness of others, naturally necessary to us,
and to assistance. These basic relational elements require a crucial condition, that
of reciprocity in its different forms (gratitude, friendship, …), in order to generate
concrete actions and make them converge on “mutual good offices” and “assistance”
(what could be called “fraternity” or solidarity). The result is not just social happiness
but also social welfare: “society flourishes.”
This philosophical theorization was developed by Smith amid the thriving climate
of the Scottish Enlightenment, which had important linkages with the French Enlight-
enment and the Physiocratic group and was represented by the already mentioned
thinkers. They all participated in a typical “discovery” of the eighteenth century,
namely that of the civil society, understood as a sphere of inter-individual and social
relationships not controlled by political power.79
Smith’s theorization was also developed in parallel to, but independent from,
another contemporary Enlightenment tradition, the Italian “civil economics,” mainly
developed in Naples (Antonio Genovesi 1765; Gaetano Filangieri 1780–1788;
Lodovico Bianchini 1857).80 On the basis of relationality and reciprocity sentiments,

78 The young Smith wrote in his History of Astronomy: “Philosophy is the science of the connecting
principles of nature” and “(p)hilosophers … look for a chain of invisible objects to join together
two events that occur in an order familiar to all the world” (Smith 1795b, Section II, pp. 11,
49). Newton found that connection in the gravity law; according to Campbell (1975) and with
some greater caution Kennedy (2005, Chap. 3), Smith tried to apply the same method in moral
philosophy, following Hume, with the theory of sympathy. He wrote: “(p)ity and compassion are
words appropriated to signify our fellow-feeling with the sorrow of others. Sympathy, though its
meaning was, perhaps, originally the same, may now, however, without much impropriety, be made
use of to denote our fellow-feeling with any passion whatever.” (TMS, I.i.1.5).
79 Smith uses the term “civil society” only three times in his two major works (TMS, I.ii.4.3;

VII.iv.36; WN, V.i.g.33), and this may appear rather strange. An explanation could be that the
concept was in a sense formally assigned to his colleague Ferguson, who wrote in 1767 an Essay
on the History of Civil Society. As shown in Sect. 2, Smith had reservations in regard to this work
concerning a possible plagiarism, which ended in a formal dispute around 1780 and in the breakdown
of the previous friendship. See: Hamowy (1968).
80 In a similar way to Smith, Genovesi stated: “It is a universal law that no happiness can be made

except by pursuing the happiness of others” (quoted by Bruni and Zamagni 2015, p. 79, translation
by this author).
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 45

Italian Illuministi developed an advanced theory on the generation of a fides publica

(public trust or “confidence”)—different from the simple sum of private fides, namely
individual reputations—and put it at the basis of public happiness. Together with the
development of trade and markets, or general economic well-being, public trust was
indicated as the prime resource for achieving at the same time public happiness and
a part of the wealth of a nation (Bruni and Zamagni 2015, pp. 30–33).
Smith and the Italian civil economists—all of whom owed a great deal to Francis
Hutcheson, Smith’s initial master in Glasgow81 —did not subsequently obtain any
recognition in this field from neoclassical mainstream economics, almost completely
shaped by Bentham’s utilitarianism in the interpretation of human behavior. Only
two hundred years later did the work of these eighteenth-century authors regain
the attention of economists, giving rise to new approaches to demand theory (the so-
called relational goods that are enjoyed and produced only together with other people,
as per Uhlaner 1989) and to the new “economics of happiness” (Sen 1987, 2005;
Bruni and Sugden 2000; Sugden 2005; Bruni and Porta 2005; Bruni and Zamagni
2007).
With his usual pragmatism but also consistency, Smith completed his vision on
assistance, confidence, and public happiness, again in the TMS, by examining the
case of a lack of these sentiments:
But though the necessary assistance should not be afforded from such generous and disin-
terested motives, though among the different members of the society there should be no
mutual love and affection, the society, though less happy and agreeable, will not necessarily
be dissolved. Society may subsist among different men, as among different merchants, from
a sense of its utility, without any mutual love or affection; and though no man in it should owe
any obligation, or be bound in gratitude to any other, it may still be upheld by a mercenary
exchange of good offices according to an agreed valuation. (TMS, II.ii.3.2; author’s italics)

This sentence represents the perfect bridge between the Theory of Moral Sentiments
and The Wealth of Nations:82 “beneficence” is “the ornament which embellishes, not
the foundation which supports (…) the immense fabric of human society” (TMS,

81 A thorough reading of the TMS suggests to me that Smith was ahead of both Hutcheson and the
“civil economics” school for two reasons. First, because his theory no longer made reference to
natural altruism or benevolence of men: Only “an independent and all-perfect Being, who stands
in need of nothing external, and whose happiness is complete in himself can act from (benevo-
lence),” but for sure not “so imperfect a creature as man, the support of whose existence requires
so many things external to him.” (TMS, VII.ii.3., p. 18). Secondly, thanks to that marvelous theo-
retical construct which is his “impartial spectator,” that “great inmate of the breast, the great
judge and arbiter of conduct”: it reflects, as in a “looking glass” the judgment of other men on
our sentiments and behavior, together with our own judgment on ourselves as “well-informed”
imaginary spectators of our sentiments and motivations (see TMS, particularly Part III, Ch. 1 and
III.2.32). This last concept was praised by Kant in his Groundworks to a Metaphysics of Morals
(Kant 1785, first page), and many philosophers (like Rawls and Sen) still wonder how to recon-
cile Kant’s “categorical imperative,” born from an anti-historicist, transcendental idealism, with
Smith’s “impartial spectator,” germinated from an apparently opposite empirical and psychological
historicism. For an in-depth analysis and an interesting interpretation of this apparently unresolved
debate, see Richardson (2017).
82 All the previously quoted passages from Part II of the TMS were present in its early editions, well

before the publication of the WN, unlike Part VI and other passages and chapters that were added
46 R. Camagni

II.ii.3).83 In its absence, society would be less happy, yet would not fall apart, and
the necessary assistance to men would be provided by the market on the basis of fair
negotiations and agreed valuations.84
There is an element worth underlining in all the previous discourse: the interest
manifested by Smith in the happiness and flourishing of society, at an equal level
with its progress and opulence. Society can be more or less agreeable, more or less
happy: these conditions become values and goals for a “philosopher” engaged in the
analysis of the nature and the causes of the wealth of nations, to be reached through
civil and civic virtues, through public trust, sympathy, and reciprocity. This evidence
was clear and appreciated by contemporary and following classical economists but
widely forgotten thereafter and only rediscovered in recent times. The original view
about Smith’s message was well captured by Malthus, in a rarely quoted passage of
his Essay on the Principle of Population:
The professed object of Dr Adam Smith’s inquiry is the nature and causes of the wealth of
nations. There is another inquiry, however, perhaps still more interesting, which he occasion-
ally mixes with it, I mean an inquiry into the causes which affect the happiness of nations or
the happiness and comfort of the lower orders of society, which is the most numerous class
in every nation (Malthus 1798, Ch. 16, p. 96).85

Smith asks himself: “What institution of government could tend so much to

promote the happiness of mankind as the general prevalence of wisdom and virtue?”

in the 6th edition of 1790, the last before Smith’s death, in which he could have tried to remedy the
alleged contradictions between the two books. In my opinion, this is among the most convincing
evidence of the intrinsic overall consistency of Smith’s work, and of the groundlessness of the
so-called Adam Smith Problem, “a pseudo-problem based on ignorance and misunderstanding”
(Raphael and Macfie 1976, p. 20). Taking this counter-interpretation to the extreme and consid-
ering the violence with which Smith depicts the political attitudes of self-interested merchants and
manufacturers in the WN, one might completely reverse the traditional AS Problem by stating,
not wrongly, that “the TMS seems to present a more positive image of self-interest than the WN”
(Paganelli 2008, p. 367).
83 On the following page, Smith illustrates what he believes to be the “main pillar” of society,

namely justice. “If it is removed (…) a man would enter an assembly of men as he enters a den of
lions” (TMS, II.ii.3.4).
84 Smith repeatedly emphasizes the social nature of economic goals, and in particular the goal of

“bettering” individual economic conditions (Campbell and Skinner 1976): “From whence, then,
arises that emulation which runs through all the different ranks of men, and what are the advantages
which we propose by that great purpose of human life which we call bettering our condition? To
be observed, to be attended to, to be taken notice of with sympathy, complacency, and approbation,
are all the advantages which we can propose to derive from it” (TMS, I.iii.2.1). “The pleasures of
wealth and greatness, when considered in this complex view, strike the imagination as something
grand and beautiful and noble, of which the attainment is well worth all the toil and anxiety which
we are so apt to bestow upon it. And it is well that nature imposes upon us in this manner. It is this
deception which rouses and keeps in continual motion the industry of mankind. It is this which first
prompted them to cultivate the ground, to build houses, to found cities and commonwealths, and to
invent and improve all the sciences and arts, which ennoble and embellish human life; which have
entirely changed the whole face of the globe” (TMS, IV.i.1.9–10).
85 This interesting passage is indicated by Schliesser (2017, p. 199), with an inaccurate quotation.
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 47

meaning the necessity of a condition of civil ethics. “All government is but an imper-
fect remedy for the deficiencies of these” (TMS, IV.ii.1). Social happiness is deter-
mined by the “proper balance” and evolution of three systems: a liberal market system
leading to material progress, a non-oppressive system of justice, and a system of civil
values, shared by individuals exercising the (stoic) ethics of “self-government” and
“self-command” on passions.86 ,87
Coming to the present days, the importance of social relationships and senti-
ments like trust and social capital is well known, in economics and in regional
science, at least since the works of Giacomo Becattini on industrial districts (Becat-
tini 1979)—interpreting territory as a “choral subject” (Becattini 2015)—and the
(unconventional) theories of rational trust based on reciprocity and plural or collec-
tive agents (Gilbert 1989; Sugden 1993; Hollis 1998).88 Kenneth Arrow—the same
economist who gave, with Debreu, the first mathematical proof of the Fundamental
Theorem of Welfare Economics—as early as in 1971 warned that “trust, …, norms
of social behaviour, including ethical and moral codes … (may be interpreted as)
reactions of society to compensate for market failures” (Arrow 1971, p. 22), implic-
itly suggesting their crucial role even in conditions of pure competition and denying
their spontaneous endogeneity created by the market.89 Trust itself is understood
today not just as individual reputation and trustworthiness built through self-interest
in market exchanges (and justified by game-theoretic exercises), but also as those
dispositions built through networks of civic engagements, which develop only in
the presence of relationality and reciprocity (Bruni and Sugden 2000) and mutual
recognition of individual identities (Akerlof and Kranton 2000). This kind of trust is
nowadays recognized as a crucial device in:
• the development of collective action and cooperative agreements among private
firms (Williamson 1991)
• the reduction of complexity and, consequently, of transaction costs, especially
in incomplete contracts, “embedding transactions in more protecting governance
structures” (Williamson 2002, p. 439)
• the reduction of dynamic uncertainty in innovation processes through local syner-
gies and collective learning, more easily achieved in those territorial circumstances
called “the innovative milieu” (Camagni 1991).

86 Self-command is “the command of the passions which subjects all the movements of our nature
to what our own dignity and honour, and the propriety of our own conduct require” (TMS, I.i.5.1).
In the case of civil values, “passions” involved are self-love (“the selfish passions”), justice (the
“unsocial passions”), and beneficence (“the social passions”) (TMS, I.ii.3–5).
87 “If a society of free people and free markets is to avoid the Hobbesian abyss, justice must be

enforced not by institutions and police but by self-government—that is, by citizens who share and
adhere to a common, mature standard of civic ethics.” (Evensky 2005, p. 129).
88 What is called “we-rationality”: “the possibility that collectives can be agents in a theory of

rationality” (Bruni and Sugden 2000, p. 7).

89 See also Arrow’s criticism of pure methodological individualism, his belief that “social variables,

not attached to particular individuals, are essential in studying the economy or any other social
system” (Arrow1994) and his position about ethical norms (Cato and Lutz 2018).
48 R. Camagni

Smith’s message concerning reciprocal pleasure in sharing passions with others

outside the family, with “colleagues and partners of trade,” within “neighborhoods”
or other “societies” (TMS, VI.ii.1),90 echoes the role of sense of belonging and of
sharing values and behavioral codes in territorial development91 and is paralleled by
the recent discovery of feelings of mutual “affection” linking people to places and
urban landscapes, central to the hermeneutics of knowledge generation (Cusinato
2016).92
Another recent discovery of processes that need the crucial presence of “sympa-
thy” among men is the wise management of (territorial) collective property goods or
commons. As Elinor Ostrom has shown convincingly (Ostrom 1990, 1998) neither
a private nor a public governance can be effective and able to avoid the well-known
“tragedy of commons”; only a local community with self-organized governance can
do it, on precise conditions:
• a real situation resembling that of “dynamic” or “repeated games,” where learning
can happen, and, consequently, trust among actors can develop93
• actors not deciding separately (as in the prisoner’s dilemma) but discussing and
interacting “personally”
• actors sharing social behavioral norms of reciprocity, leading to a higher
probability of “conditional cooperation” (networks of civic engagement)
• clear and relatively high social moral sanctions (but also actual ones) for breach
of cooperation
• high incentive for each actor to gain a reputation of reliability.

90 “Any state is divided into the different orders (social classes) and societies (…) and the particular
distribution which has been made of their respective powers, privileges and immunities” (TMS,
VI.ii.2.8). Orders and societies are independent political sub-entities or institutions according to
their powers, subordinate to the state to which they owe their security and protection (Schliesser
2017, Ch. VI). In the possible conflict of interest with the state, their “partiality … may not be
useless: it checks the spirit of innovation (and) tends to preserve whatever is the established balance
among the different orders and societies” (TMS, VI.ii.2.10). As an economist and a philosopher of
civil society, Smith was politically a moderate but always in favor of institutions promoting change.
91 Bruni and Sugden (2000) assign Smith “a theory of rational trust which is broadly similar to

the modern theory of reputation” (p. 34), where “reputation and trustworthiness are transmitted
through networks of trading relationships” only originated by self-interest, “without the additional
support provided by non-economic networks of civic engagement,” as in Genovesi (pp. 33–34).
Their analysis, brilliant and convincing in all other respects, understates Smith’s contribution on
social sentiments by looking mainly at the WN rather than the TMR. Of course, Genovesi presents
a more consistent analysis of the social and civic roots and outcomes of trust.
92 In all these cases where a “correspondence of sentiments” develops, as well as in the case of

admiration for the merits or virtues of some men, Smith plainly accepts that there may be some
underlying motive of “utility” or “conveniency of mutual accommodation,” but he is sure that
“the idea of the utility (…) is plainly an afterthought, and not what first recommends them to our
approbation” (TMS, I.i.4). In a similar way, what we call “social capital” was indicated as “a by-
product of a pre-existent fabric of social relationships, oriented towards goals other” than economic
utility (Bagnasco 2002, p. 274).
93 Games of this kind were described for the first time by Smith’s best friend, David Hume, in his

Treatise (1740/1978), a work that Smith knew very well (Bruni and Sugden 2000).
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 49

These conditions are stringent, but—according to Smith—they are not unnatural in

terms of human and societal feelings, and today can be easily found in small, cohesive
local societies in which these “virtues” are—rationally—praised and promoted.
The foregoing discussion should not be misunderstood. It does not mean that
all these modern notions stem from Adam Smith’s work, but only signal which
developments could have been more easily and rapidly realized had his legacy been
understood and followed properly.

5.3 Long-Term Growth: Innovation, Institutions, and Policies

a. Law and government

In his Advertisement for the sixth edition of the TMS published in 1790, a few
months before his death, Adam Smith, looking in retrospect at his magnum opus, the
WN, wrote that he had in mind “to give an account of the general principles of law
and government, and of the different revolutions which they had undergone in the
different ages and periods of society; not only in what concerns justice, but in what
concerns police, revenue and arms,” and that he had “partly executed this promise.”
Previously, in the opening sentence of Book IV of the WN—“Of Systems of
Political Economy”—Smith gave his definition of the goals and content of political
economy as a “science”:
Political economy, considered as a branch of the science of a statesman or legislator, proposes
two distinct objects; first, to provide a plentiful revenue or subsistence for the people, or
more properly to enable them to provide such a revenue or subsistence for themselves; and
secondly, to supply the state or commonwealth with a revenue sufficient for the publick
services. It proposes to enrich both the people and the sovereign. (WN, IV.1)

No doubt, Smith was aware of the logical distinction drawn by David Hume
between factual, descriptive statements and prescriptions, both normative and
ethical,94 or between “positive science” and “normative art,” this latter involving
extra-economic elements and value judgments. He conceived political economy as
inherently concerning economic policy, “the science of the statesman.” He held his
normative part separated in Books IV and V of the WN, but the logical link with, and
reference to, the preceding principles, and the positive, analytical part was always
evident. Like all classical economists, Smith never “really questioned the validity of
value judgements that were based on philosophical grounds and took proper account
of noneconomic as well as the economic elements” (Schumpeter 1954, p. 451).95

94 “One cannot deduce ought from is” (Hume 1740), what was later called “Hume’s guillotine”
(Blaug 1980, p. 130).
95 “To the end of the (classical) period, economists considered their recommendations concerning

policies as scientific results which followed from scientific, though not purely economic, analysis”
(Schumpeter 1954, p. 451). In fact, most of Smith’s work is of a genuinely analytical nature, a
“great analytical achievement” (ibid., p. 38).
50 R. Camagni

In another passage of Book IV, Smith stated his own vision of the general principles
of law and government for his times—what we may call his Enlightenment project:
“allowing every man to pursue his own interest his own way, upon the liberal plan
of equality, liberty and justice” (WN, IV.ix.3). The former part in added italics refers
to the policy style; the latter to the general preconditions for long-term growth that
he envisaged in terms of appropriate institutions and common civil ethics.96
b. Long-term growth
On a purely analytical economic level, did Smith present a theory or a model of
economic growth at all? This question was the focus of many studies and debates
throughout the twentieth century, a debate that crossed also the problem of his
vision on the “gloomy” future of “capitalism” that thrilled the entire classical
political economy of the previous century. On carefully re-reading Smith’s works
while preparing this essay and comparing his words with some of the multiple
interpretations that have been given to them over time, I reached the following
conclusions.
Smith did not develop a fully dynamic model of the economy in the sense that
we attach to the term today, not disposing of the necessary mathematical tools. But
he did understand which were the driving forces of progress at large, their complex
interactions, and their effects on the (intertemporal) equilibrium conditions of the
economy. He consequently elaborated a long-run, historical vision of a developing
society moving slowly from a “rude” primitive condition to agriculture, manufac-
turing, and trade. He did not foresee the industrial revolution, but the entire WN is
a wide fresco on socio-economic transformation, moving equilibria, and long-term
development. Increasing wealth and not a static condition of equilibrium was his
standard object of inquiry and the desirable outcome of economic processes.97 In
his view, the best condition for society is that of progress and growth, not that of
riches or opulence: “it is in the progressive state, while the society is advancing to
the further acquisition, rather than when it has acquired its full complement of riches,
that the condition of the labouring poor, of the great body of the people, seems to be
the happiest and the most comfortable.” (WN, I.viii.43).98
c. Division of labor and innovation
What is the driver of dynamism and change in Adam Smith? As is well known, it
is the division of labor, to which, understood in a broad sense, he attached a central
and crucial role. “Division of labor” means the break-up of complex production

96 On Smith’s “system of natural liberty,” see Hill (2019, Ch. 3).

97 See Blaug (1996): “his own faith in the benefits of the ‘invisible hand’ rested very little on static
considerations of allocative efficiency in circumstances where competition is perfect. A decen-
tralised price system was held to be desirable because of its dynamic effects in widening the scope
of the market and extending the advantages of the division of labour—in short because it was a
powerful engine for promoting the accumulation of capital and the growth of income. (…) Economic
development is in fact the principal subject of his book” (p. 61).
98 “The progressive state is, in reality, the cheerful and the hearty state to all the different orders of

society; the stationary is dull; the declining melancholy” (WN, I.viii.43).

Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 51

processes into a series of simple operations, leading to the invention and use of
specialized machinery,99 to automation (in a modern lexicon), and, therefore, to
“the greatest improvement of the productive power of labour” (WN, I.i.1). Because
all this depends on “the extent of the market,” and any increase in the supply of
a commodity enlarges, potentially, the market for all other commodities, we are
driven—according to Allyn Young’s famous article (Young 1928)—to a theorem of
endogenous technical change and cumulative transformation (Kaldor 1972).
Smith describes, in very modern terms, three processes that lead to innovation—
not sufficiently credited to him by the subsequent and recent literature:
• improvements in operations and in machines themselves deriving from “the inven-
tion of common workmen” and “of those who had occasion to use the machines”
(what nowadays is called “learning by doing and by using”)
• “improvements … made by the ingenuity of the makers of the machines, when to
make them became the business of a peculiar trade” (“process innovation” stricto
sensu)
• some improvements achieved through the ingenuity “of those who are called
philosophers, or men of speculation, whose trade is not to do any thing, but to
observe every thing, and who … are often capable of combining together the
powers of the most distant and dissimilar objects in the progress of society.”
These people represent the “particular class” or the “peculiar tribe” of scientists
and researchers (engaged in radical inventions/innovations). For these people,
“philosophy or speculation becomes … the principal or sole trade and occupation,
… subdivided into a great number of different branches”. (WN, I.i.9)100 ,101
The unresolved problem remains the capacity of aggregate demand to match the
growth of supply (enhanced by all “improvements”) and the consequent reduction of
prices (determined by competition among producers, leading in turn to an increase
in real wages): the old criticism proposed but not solved by Malthus.102 Many recon-
structions of Smith’s growth model converge to a steady state of no growth, where the
combined effects of falling prices of commodities and falling profit rates under the

99 All this was very clear to Smith since the times of his 1763 Lectures: “The division of labour
no doubt first gave occasion to the invention of machines.” (Smith 1763a, b, II.ii.4, p. 167). This
statement is made again and enlarged in WN, I.i.5–8.
100 In the Early Draft of the WN (Smith 1963/1982), probably speaking about his friend and

colleague in Glasgow, James Watt, Smith affirms that “who could invent the fire engine and first
form the idea of producing so great an effect by a power in nature which had never before been
thought of (…) was a real philosopher,” while “to apply in the most advantageous manner those
powers which are already known (…) does not exceed the capacity of an ingenious artist” (ED, par.
19, p. 621). The limit is that he never conceived or foresaw something like a “radical innovation”.
101 This last sentence on the division of labor among “philosophers” was much praised by Pavitt

(1998) as crucial in innovation organization.

102 Allyn Young’s answer (Young 1928) to this problem, namely the assumption of a demand with

price-elasticity higher than one can potentially work for some products but not at the aggregate
level. The “Smith-Young doctrine of increasing returns” cannot do without Keynesian active fiscal
policies (Kaldor 1972).
52 R. Camagni

average risk level drive a fall of the accumulation of capital.103 Samuelson (1977),
with his mathematical-Smithian growth model, adds some very interesting further
conclusions: Smith’s final “dull” stationary state is reached only maintaining the
typically classical demographic hypothesis that population explodes whenever the
real wage is above an unchanged subsistence level and his view about increasing
land scarcity and consequent rise in land rents. With more modern demographic
assumptions (including the possibility explicitly considered by Smith of a rise of
monetary wages beyond subsistence level, much praised by Samuelson) and holding
the hypothesis of no land scarcity or of some land-saving inventions, the model
provides an endogenous long-term rate of growth, with increasing real wages and
population, and a moderate growth rate of profits able to balance savings and capital
accumulation.104
Other authors, underlining the fact that technological change was overlooked in
its effects on productivity and profits—by Smith himself—came to partially different
conclusions.105
Smith authorizes the emergence of a “stationary” state in a distant future. “In a
country which had acquired that full complement of riches which the nature of its soil
and climate, and its situation with respect to other countries allowed it to acquire;
which could, therefore, advance no further, and which was not going backwards,
both the wages of labour and the profits of stock would probably be very low.” (WN,
I.ix.14).106 That sentence, though, is rather abstract and, in a sense, tautological
(see added italics). Smith’s immediate and final judgment is revealingly clear: “But
perhaps no country has ever yet arrived at this degree of opulence.” (WN, I.ix.15).

103 See: Adelman (1961, p. 35); Lowe (1975); Heilbroner (1975), all quoted in Kennedy (2005).
104 “Had Smith been able to write down the full conditions” of his theoretical model, “he would
have anticipated Marx’s expanded-reproduction tableau of Capital Vol. II and would have provided
Harrod and Domar with an endogenous natural rate of growth.” (Samuelson 1977, p. 49). Samuelson
concludes: “hats off to Adam Smith.”
105 See: Peacock (1997, pp. 48–55). In fact, Smith (and also Ricardo) understated technical change

in agriculture, with respect to urban industry and commerce, mainly looking at the indolence of
landowners and at the favor accorded to the sector by the English government (WN, III.iv.20). No
surprise, therefore, if land scarcity and consequent rise in land rents remain, according to Samuelson,
the only possible long-term cause of the fall of profits in Smith’s formalized economic model (as it
happens in Ricardo). This could be an important message for today, referring rents to the urban case:
Important analyses have pointed out the skyrocketing increase in the share of urban ground rents
on the price of houses in all advanced countries since the 1980s, a result underlying the renovated
role of (large) cities in the present technological paradigm. See: Cannari et al. (2016); Knoll et al.
(2018); Camagni (2020).
106 Smith continues: “In a country fully peopled in proportion to what either its territory could

maintain or its stock employ, the competition for employment would necessarily be so great as
to reduce the wages of labour to what was barely sufficient to keep up the number of labourers,
and, the country being already fully peopled, that number could never be augmented. In a country
fully stocked in proportion to all the business it had to transact, as great a quantity of stock would
be employed in every particular branch as the nature and extent of the trade would admit. The
competition, therefore, would everywhere be as great, and consequently the ordinary profit as low
as possible.” (WN, I.ix.14).
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 53

Moreover, Smith indicates all sorts of structural and institutional changes that
could push that final steady state further away: new geographical areas in which
to develop foreign commerce; the conquest of new colonies; improvements in a
list of “laws and institutions,” ranging from those regulating monopolies, internal
trade, and foreign commerce to those concerning security and justice. In the latter
case, he is referring to the crucial supporting institutions and preconditions for an
efficient market to exist: peace, protection of freedom in personal life and industry or
commerce, protection of property rights (“natural liberty”), and enforcement of the
performance of contracts (WN, I.ix.15–16).107 In short, among classical economists,
Smith was probably the one least sympathetic with a steady state forecast.108
In analytical terms, any dynamic model based on the pure expansion of production
factors is bound to encounter some limiting elements that turn cumulative growth
into decline or at least to steady state. What is needed are the incentive effects of
appropriate institutions and favorable context conditions: “industrious nations and
individuals” and “thriving towns,” hosting innovations that shift labor and factor
productivity upward for any given level of the K/L ratio.109
Up to a certain level, the fall in profit rates may not be worrying, because large
capitals may aim at profits width rather than at profit rate. This is what happened
in large cities with respect to smaller ones, with the advantage of consequent lower
interest rates on bank loans.110 Moreover, the lower profit rates accepted by busi-
ness in advanced countries and cities as a consequence of high competition among
producers can make it possible to maintain a sufficient price competitiveness: “In
countries that are fast advancing in riches, the low rate of profit may, in the price of
many commodities, compensate the high wages of labour, and enable those countries
to sell as cheap as their less thriving neighbours, among whom the wages of labour
may be lower” (WN, I.ix.23). For sure, this is an interesting, and not at all pessimistic
thought on innovation (division of labor) in global competition.
In short, it is my opinion that Smith believed in the long-term possibility of
social progress, taking place through a virtuous co-evolution of the economic and

107 Also, endogenous reactions to a potential crisis are considered by Smith: In the case that “the
ordinary rate of clear profit … (and) the usual market rate of interest … would be so low as to render
it impossible for any but the very wealthiest people to live upon the interest of their money, … all
people of small or middling fortunes would be obliged to superintend themselves the employment
of their own stocks. It would be necessary that almost every man should be a man of business, or
engage in some sort of trade.” (WN, I.ix.20).
108 If read carefully, Smith’s sentences concerning the final possible steady state point out, as its final

cause, not really the fall of profit rates—in dealing with which the undertakers, and the legislators,
have multiple options—but the lack of untapped potential business (assumed by definition).
109 “The acquisition of new territory, or of new branches of trade, may sometimes raise the profits

of stock, and with them the interest of money, even in a country which is fast advancing in the
acquisition of riches,” like the new American colonies (WN, I.ix.12).
110 “Private bankers in London give no interest for the money which is deposited with them” (WN,

I.ix.8).
54 R. Camagni

the institutional spheres, supported by appropriate policies in both fields. The deepest
meaning of the epics of mankind that he traced through “the different revolutions
(which human institutions) had undergone in the different ages and periods of soci-
ety” is that of a slow, difficult, but continuous “progress of human mind, unfolded
over many centuries” (Rothschild and Sen 2006, p. 361).
d. The invisible hand, policies, and institutions
The tasks that Smith assigns to the government in the economic sphere, stricto sensu,
are limited—and this has been widely emphasized by free marketers of all times,
in spite of the fact that he never used the term laissez-faire.111 The general political
goal itself of assuring personal liberty refers also strictly to individual choices in
the economic field. “The sovereign is completely discharged from a duty, in the
attempting to perform which he must always be exposed to innumerable delusions
…; the duty of superintending the industry of private people, and of directing it
towards the employments most suitable to the interest of the society” (WN, IV.ix.51).
Smith believes in the action of the market, operating as an “invisible hand” in the
promotion of the interest of society112 —a market, of course, framed and supported
by appropriate institutional rules, as it will be shown hereafter. I do not agree with
those contemporary progressive scholars who try to undermine the metaphor of the
invisible hand:113 It is a flashing and brilliant interpretation of the role and logics of
the market understood as an economic institution, a system of signals and incentives
for the allocation of resources in a dynamic context.114 Perhaps, when citing the

111 See Kennedy (2005, Ch. 32). Viner (1927), though, claimed that Smith used an English equivalent
for laissez-faire, namely “to let (nature) alone … in the course of her operations in human affairs
… and give her fair play in the pursuit of her ends” (p. 200). But in my opinion, this phrase is more
general and refers to the entire “system of natural liberty.” Viner himself, positively speaking about
government’s direct involvement in business, when economically effective, affirms: “The modern
advocate of laissez faire who objects to government participation in business on the ground that it
is an encroachment upon a field reserved by nature for private enterprise cannot find support for
this argument in the Wealth of Nations” (p. 227).
112 “Every individual” employing his capital in economic activities “intends only his own security

… and …. only his own gain,” but, “he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand
to promote an end which was no part of his intention.” (…) “By pursuing his own interest he
frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote
it” (WN, V.ii.9). The indication “as in many other cases” is highly relevant, in my opinion, as it
widens the scope of the metaphor beyond the specific case in which it is used—the choice between
investing onshore or abroad.
113 See: Rothschild (1994), Fleischaker (2004, p. 139), Kennedy (2009), and Boucoyannis (2013),

the most knowledgeable and learned in my opinion.

114 This statement should always be accompanied with important qualifications, in particular when

optimization meanings are assigned to the working of the market as resource allocator: in particular,
the qualification that the market considers only effective demand, determined by the actual income
distribution, implicitly accepted (a “strong” hypothesis, indeed). Not all neoclassical economists
forget this crucial condition for speaking of an “optimal” allocation: Paul Samuelson (1977), in his
formalization of Smith’s static competitive equilibrium, whose outcome is interpretable in terms of
“the planner’s optimality,” adds the condition for this optimality judgment: “there need be nothing
ethically optimal about the specifications (of the different consumptions) and their allocations among
the rich and poor, the healthy and the halt!” (p. 47).
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 55

invisible hand, Smith rhetorically emphasizes the paradoxical positive social outcome
of private egoism (or self-love), but this irony does not limit the importance of the
metaphor as explicitly argued by Emma Rothschild (1994). Nor the fact that he uses
this metaphor in just three occasions in his works115 indicates a minor interest of his
on the concept, as confirmed by multiple out-of-metaphor passages of the WN.116
On the other hand, the relevant point concerning the role of government is that
the first two main duties assigned to it—“duties of great importance, indeed”—
represent to Smith’s mind the crucial preconditions for any market to work properly
and even to exist: defense, external and internal safety (arms and police), on the
one side, and justice, respect of property rights, and enforcement of contracts on the
other.117 Considering also the other two direct duties assigned to government—public
works and education118 (respectively relevant in income production and income
distribution) it is legitimate to state that in the economic sphere lato sensu, the duties
assigned to government are relevant and strong.

115 Smith speaks about an invisible hand in a similar sense—promotion of unintended outcomes—
in the TMS, with reference to the medieval landlord, “proud and unfeeling,” “distributing” food
produced in “his extensive fields” going beyond the “capacity of his stomach,” to all people working
for him, in nearly similar portions. “In spite of their selfishness and rapacity,” landlords “are led by an
invisible hand to make nearly the same distribution of the necessaries of life, which would have been
made, had the earth been divided into equal portions among all its inhabitants” (TMS, IV.i.1.10). In
this case, the role of the invisible hand is different from the one in the WN: not a (microeconomic)
allocative role but a (macroeconomic) distributive role, leading to a kind of peculiar equilibrium
of aggregate supply and demand of food (the rent of landlords—“paid in (perishable) kinds”—
exchanged for the services of “an army of retainers and servants”). In the TMS case, Rothschild
(1994) is right when speaking of a “sardonic” intent by Smith: The economic reasoning of the
invisible hand passage seemingly anticipates Malthus’s favor towards conspicuous consumption of
landed orders, but taking it seriously would mean to contradict the entire message of the WN on
this issue. Moreover, Smith seems to attach more sense to underlining ironically the paradox than
to subscribing to a formal condition of equity and welfare determined only by the approximately
similar size of human stomachs. The third time Smith speaks of an invisible hand—in his History
of Astronomy—does not refer to economic issues but to the credulity of ancient people and to the
mighty hand of Jupiter.
116 Just as an example: “Without any intervention of law, therefore, the private interests and passions

of men naturally lead them to divide and distribute the stock of every society, among all the different
employments carried on in it, as nearly as possible in the proportion which is most agreeable to
the interest of the whole society.” (WN, IV.vii.3.88). This passage complements the one previously
quoted on the duties of the sovereign (WN, IV.ix.51).
117 “According to the system of natural liberty, the sovereign has only three duties to attend to;

three duties of great importance, indeed, but plain and intelligible to common understandings: first,
the duty of protecting the society from the violence and invasion of other independent societies;
secondly, the duty of protecting, as far as possible, every member of the society from the injustice
or oppression of every other member of it, or the duty of establishing an exact administration of
justice; and, thirdly, the duty of erecting and maintaining certain publick works and certain publick
institutions” (WN, IV.ix.51).
118 In both cases, the private market can hardly guarantee production, operation, and maintenance

of the implied assets and services, as “the profit could never repay the expence to any individual
or small number of individuals, though it may frequently do much more than repay it to a great
society.” (WN, IV.ix.51).
56 R. Camagni

Justice, the most important pillar of human society and precondition for the
progress of opulence, is a virtue that has been embedded differently and imper-
fectly in the legal institutions throughout history (TMS, II.ii.2; WN, V.iii.7).119 Very
crudely, Smith admits that “civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security
of property, is in reality instituted for the defence of the rich against the poor, or of
those who have some property against those who have none at all” (WN, V.i.b.12),120
and is ready to accept it for the sake of maintaining order, together with the neces-
sary “authority and subordination among men.” (WN, V.i.b.11). But in his view,
the development of an “impartial justice” and an impartial administration of it is
the difficult but possible route—whose signs were already visible in the English
example—toward a “civil society” where property is protected for all, including the
poor.121 ,122
As the most important institution, the market needs a precise legal framework
and appropriate rules for its proper use, in the same way as other institutions of
democracy like the Parliament need similar attention. Smith refers particularly to
the possibility that the legislative power itself might be “captured” by the vested
interests that it should regulate and control. In sharp and even violent terms—not at
all usual for him—he denounces the practices of private economic interests in the
legislation process (capture of the regulator).123 An often-justified blame is extended
to the entire order of merchants and master manufacturers:

119 “Commerce and manufactures can seldom flourish long in any state which does not enjoy a
regular administration of justice, in which the people do not feel themselves secure in the possession
of their property, in which the faith of contracts is not supported by law, and in which the authority
of the state is not supposed to be regularly employed in enforcing the payment of debts from all
those who are able to pay.” (WN, V.iii.7).
120 This sentence echoes the thought of J.-J. Rousseau, and in particular his Discours sur l’origine

et fondements de l’inégalité entre les hommes (1754), that Smith knew, and he partly translated into
English and presented in his “Letter to the Authors of the Edinburgh Review” in 1756 suggesting
its circulation (Smith 1795a, p. 201). In his letter and in other letters, he shows a high appreciation
of Rousseau, even if he did not follow him, as Hume and most French Enlightenment philosophers,
in his late extreme political positions, exposed in The Social Contract and Emile.
121 See Rothschild and Sen (2006, p. 350).
122 An impartial administration of justice was giving the UK a clear advantage in trade and manu-

facturing over other nations: “that equal and impartial administration of justice which renders the
rights of the meanest British subject respectable to the greatest, and which, by securing to every
man the fruits of his own industry, gives the greatest and most effectual encouragement to every
sort of industry” (WN, IV.vii.c.54).
123 Smith does not believe “that the freedom of trade should ever be entirely restored in Great

Britain”: a hopeless and even “absurd” expectation as “not only the prejudices of the publick, but
what is much more unconquerable, the private interests of many individuals, irresistibly oppose
it. (…) The member of parliament who … opposes (these interests), …, and still more if he has
authority enough to be able to thwart them, neither the most acknowledged probity, nor the highest
rank, nor the greatest publick services can protect him from the most infamous abuse and detraction,
from personal insults, nor sometimes from real danger, arising from the insolent outrage of furious
and disappointed monopolists.” (WN, IV.ii.43). This passage was added in the 1784 edition of the
WN, after Smith had served for five years as Commissioner of Customs in Scotland, witnessing
directly lobbying practices in commerce regulations and behavior.
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 57

The interest of the dealers, …, in any particular branch of trade or manufactures, is always
in some respects different from, and even opposite to, that of the publick.” Therefore, “the
proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order, ought
always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having
been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most
suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same
with that of the publick, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the
publick, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it.
(WN, I.xi.p).124

5.4 Social Inequalities and Income Distribution

Adam Smith, like almost all classical economists, was deeply concerned with the
issue of social inequalities and income distribution, a sphere of the social realm that
was mostly abandoned with the advent of the neoclassical “revolution.”
His interest was different, though, from the traditional interest of regional scien-
tists in spatial inequalities, which he never mentioned in terms of unbalanced endoge-
nous growth capabilities.125 Nor was he ever attracted by the issue of whether the
“invisible hand” of the market was necessarily generating spatial disparities. As said
above, he was aware that the invisible hand was an abstract metaphor, and that the
market which we see in practice is a complex mechanism closely interwoven with a
host of political and social institutions obeying deep, space-time–specific historical
evolutions.126
His interest was to shed light on income distribution, both personal and among
social classes, as a specific economic issue and, in this regard, he indicated many
conceptual pathways that prove relevant to today’s scholars.
At least since the times of his Lectures on Justice, Police, Revenue and Arms at the
University of Glasgow (LJ 1763), he was struck by the asymmetry between growing
opulence and unequal distribution:
It is the division of labour which increases the opulence of a country. In a civilized society,
though there is a division of labour, there is no equal division, for there are a good many who

124 The consequent political conclusion, generated by the analysis of some specific cases but then
generalized, follows naturally: “The government of an exclusive company of merchants is, perhaps,
the worst of all governments for any country whatever” (IV.vii.11).
125 It is a pity that Smith refused to confront himself explicitly with the Principles of Political

Oeconomy by Sir James Steuart (1767). In fact, if “from the analytical point of view Smith had
little to fear from the Principles, from the standpoint of policy” he would have found important
material for coping with the problems of poverty, employment disparities within countries, and
consequent possible “regional policies” (Skinner 1993, p. 37–38).
126 Deborah Boucoyannis, in her article “The equalizing hand” (2013), seems to believe—more in

the title than in its argument—that Smith’s market is progressive and equalizing. I do not agree
that this was a concern of his nor his opinion. In fact, almost all the justifications that Boucoyannis
provides for her thesis refer to normative elements that Smith suggests in order to correct distor-
tions of a political (asymmetries in power and information, exploitation of colonies), institutional
(inheritance laws, anti-trade unions legislations), or economic nature (imperfect markets, monopoly
practices, and privileges): distortions that a left-alone market can easily live with.
58 R. Camagni

work none at all. The division of opulence is not according to the work. The opulence of the
merchant is greater than that of all his clerks, though he works less; and they again have six
times more than an equal number of artisans, who are more employed”, who work harder.
“The artisan …. has far more than the poor labourer … Thus, he who as it were bears the
burden of society, has the fewest advantage. (Smith 1763a, II.ii.3, pp. 162–163)127

This interest on income distribution stems for sure from Smith’s moral egalitari-
anism (Fleischacker 2004, Ch. 4) or his analytical egalitarianism (Schliesser 2017,
Ch. 7):
Servants, labourers and workmen of different kinds make up the far greater part of every
great political society. But what improves the circumstances of the greater part, can never be
regarded as any inconveniency to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy,
of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity… (WN,
I.viii.36).

But more than this, the philosophical source of his engagement against any social
discrimination resides in what can be called his cognitive egalitarianism:
The difference of natural talents in different men is, in reality, much less than we are aware
of (…). The difference between the most dissimilar characters, between a philosopher and
a common street porter, for example, seems to arise not so much from nature, as from habit,
custom, and education. (WN, I.ii.4).

This explains the total absence of any racist attitude in all his works (while it can
be found in Hume), his refusal of slavery, his blame on widespread exploitation of
colonies in his age and by his own country,128 his fight against rents and monopoly
practices. As “a (philosophical) consequentialist in his evaluation of institutions,
(the) role of reason inclines him towards accepting equal consideration of everyone
as a non-negotiable rational constraint” (Schliesser 2017, p. 71).
The logical consequence of his philosophical scheme, closely linked to his long-
term vision of a growing economy, is the issue of what Smith calls the “liberal reward
of labour.”129 Within the dynamic pathway of the economy, “the liberal reward of

127 In his more mature work, the WN, Smith introduced solid justifications for “inequalities arising
from the nature of the employments,” determined by “five … principal circumstances. First, the
agreeableness or disagreeableness of the employments themselves; secondly, the easiness and cheap-
ness, or the difficulty and expense of learning them; thirdly, the constancy or inconstancy of the
employment in them; fourthly, the small or great trust which must be reposed in those who exercise
them; and fifthly, the probability or improbability of success of them” (WN, I.x.b.1). And he did not
forget the “exorbitant rewards of players, opera singers, opera dancers, etc. (…. depending on) the
rarity and the beauty of the talents, and the discredit of employing them in this way … considered as
a sort of prostitution” (WN, I.x.b.25). He supplies similar justifications for the rewards of “different
employments of stock,” where “the ordinary rate of profit varies more or less with the certainty or
uncertainty of the returns” (WN, I.x.b.33). Pure rents, on the other hand, do not imply any of these
circumstances.
128 Commercial policies with colonies, including American ones, and “the regulations by which

each nation endeavours to secure to itself the exclusive trade of its own colonies, are frequently
more hurtful to the countries in favour of which they are established than to those against which
they are established” (WN, IV.vii.c.83).
129 According to Rothschild and Sen (2006), the term “liberal” is to be understood here as “generous”

or “ample.” Recalling Smith’s liberal plan of equality, liberty, and justice, I suspect he attached
also a wider, moral or civic meaning to the term.
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 59

labour … is the effect of increasing wealth,” its “symptom,” and also “the cause of
increasing population” (WN, I.viii.42). This process is continuously self-regulated
(“demand of men … necessarily regulate the production of men”: WN, I.viii.40)
and prevents the market from being either under-stocked or over-stocked with labor.
Smith explicitly wonders: “Is this improvement in the circumstances of the lower
ranks of people to be regarded as an advantage, or as an inconvenience, to the society?
The answer seems at first abundantly plain.” (WN, I.viii.36).
Smith’s opinion on this issue is, beyond any doubt, dictated by moral reasons (“it
is but equity”) but more importantly by economic reasons. In fact, Smith justifies the
liberal reward on various grounds. Firstly, because in single cases, a liberal reward is
already practiced, as shown by the fact that at the same time different levels of wages
are present for the same occupations.130 Secondly, because it “increases the industry
of the common people. (…) Where wages are high, accordingly, we shall always find
the workmen more active, diligent and expeditious” (WN, I.viii.44). Furthermore,
contrary to the complaints of “merchants and master manufacturers (about) the bad
effects of high wages,” Smith recalls that “in reality high profits tend much more to
raise the price of (commodities131 ) than high wages” (WN, I.ix.24).132
Smith would not have wanted to be seen as suggesting the need for directly redis-
tributive policies by governments, that could hit particular “orders” (e.g., landlords or
merchants) and benefit others (laborers)—something that he clearly condemned.133
Nevertheless, he was in favor of indirectly redistributive policies, as in the case of a
progressive taxation of revenues, or of specific taxations on “luxuries and vanities of
life,” favoring the poorer, for moral reasons.134 And he was equally in favor of a “pecu-
liar” taxation justified by what classical economists called an “unearned revenue”:
it is the case of urban ground-rent, as shown in Sect. 4.3, “a species of revenue
which the owner, in many cases, enjoys without any care or attention of his own” and

130 “The price of labour, it must be observed, cannot be ascertained very accurately anywhere,
different prices being often paid at the same place and for the same sort of labour, not only according
to the different abilities of the workman, but according to the easiness or the hardness of the master.”
(WN, I.viii.34).
131 In the text is written “wages,” but from the context, it is clear that it is a mistake by some copier,

not detected by the editors.

132 “In raising the price of commodities, the rise of wages operates in the same manner as simple

interest does in the accumulation of debt. The rise of profits operates like compound interest” (WN,
I.ix.24).
133 “To hurt in any degree the interest of any one order of citizens, for no other purpose but to

promote that of some other, is evidently contrary to that justice and equality of treatment which the
sovereign owes to all the different orders of his subjects.” (WN, IV.viii.30). Boucoyannis (2013)
rightly emphasizes that many purposes for redistributive public actions were otherwise accepted by
Smith (p. 1057), in “an extensive view of the general good” (WN, IV.ii.44).
134 “The necessaries of life occasion the great expence of the poor. (…) The luxuries and vanities

of life occasion the principal expence of the rich; and a magnificent house” too. “A tax upon house–
rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there
would not, perhaps, be any thing very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should
contribute to the publick expence, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than
in that proportion.” (WN, V.ii.e.6).
60 R. Camagni

“which owes its existence to the good government of the state” (WN, V.ii.e.10–11:
see Sect. 4.3 before).
Smith believed, in my opinion, that a virtuous, “progressive” path toward
increasing welfare for the entire society—and in particular for its poorest but largest
part—was possible through the implementation of some equitable and rational poli-
cies and of the most appropriate institutional improvements; an achievement that,
looking at the long-term growth of “real recompense of labour” well beyond the
subsistence level, was in fact evidently taking place in the recent history of his
country.135
In considering the social and political structure, Smith applied the same dynamic
logic used in the economic analysis, implying a continuous (but not too rapid or
revolutionary!) transformation in the direction of assuring less unbalanced initial
conditions for everybody in terms of capabilities and opportunities. Many other
passages confirm this general view of his:
• the emphasis on economic and context conditions being more important than
“nature,” as already shown, in determining personal status and economic success:
“the very different genius which appears to distinguish men of different profes-
sions, when grown up to maturity, is not upon many occasions so much the cause,
as the effect of the division of labour.” It “arise(s) … from habit, custom, and
education.” (WN, I.ii.4), namely from spatial “circumstances”
• his awareness of the negative feedback effects of even his most praised driver of
economic development, i.e., the division of labor, on the development of mind and
personality of the workers, something that he expresses in impassioned and even
violent terms (workers becoming “as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a
human creature to become”),136 anticipating Marx’s theory of workers alienation
• his consequent insistence on the role of education, a crucial task assigned to the
government. He is strongly in favor of a universal schooling system, whereby
the “public can facilitate, can encourage, and can even impose upon almost the
whole body of the people … the essential parts of education,” reading, writing,
counting, and even some principles of philosophy and science (WN, V.i.f.50, 54–
55; V.i.d.6). All this is crucial in order to improve the general condition of the
“great body of the people” and to counter the perverse effects of the division of
labor137

135 “The real recompense of labour, the real quantity of the necessaries and conveniences of life
which it can procure to the labourer, has, during the course of the present century, increased perhaps
in a still greater proportion than its money price” (WN, I.viii.35).
136 “In the progress of the division of labour, (…) the man whose whole life is spent in performing a

few simple operations, of which the effect too are, perhaps, always nearly the same, has no occasion
to exert his understanding, or to exercise his invention in finding out expedients for removing
difficulties which never occur. He naturally loses, therefore, the habit of such exertion, and generally
becomes as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to become. The torpor of
his mind renders him incapable … of conceiving any generous, noble, or tender sentiment, and
consequently of forming any just judgment” (WN, V.i.d.50).
137 Rothschild and Sen (2006) rightly underline that Smith’s justification for this extensive educa-

tional system has nothing to do with a goal of improving skills or diligence. Rather, its purpose is
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 61

• his concern about social inequalities, not necessarily generated by the market
mechanism but by an abuse of political power138 or of economic power,139 by
insufficient or accommodating regulations on labor market negotiations140 or
by presence of evident asymmetries in incentives and information among social
“orders”141
• his strenuous opposition to all privileges assigned to monopolist companies in
foreign and internal trade, justified on economic grounds (see his criticism of the
entire mercantilist ideology on which these privileges were built, in Book IV of
WN) but also on political grounds, in terms of excessive power in society.
When discussing wages, kept at the subsistence level by the higher bargaining
power of masters and land tenants, and consequently defining “necessaries” (and
deprivation of necessaries, as a condition of poverty), Smith gives a last sign of
his sophisticated analytical capacity. “By necessaries I understand, not only the
commodities which are indispensably necessary for the support of life, but what-
ever the custom of the country renders it indecent for creditable people, even of the
lowest order, to be without.” And linking his fine socio-psychological analysis to
political economy reasoning, he continues with a famous passage: “a creditable day-
labourer would be ashamed to appear in publick without a linen shirt” or “leather
shoes” (WN, V.ii.k.3).
Necessaries, poverty, and economic deprivation are not defined in absolute terms
but in relative ones with respect to the minimum standards of consumption in society.
This intuition, according to Amartya Sen, has proved to be “extremely rewarding” in
its implications for present socio-economic analyses and crucial for his own concept
of capabilities.142 Furthermore, it bridges the gap between a concept of (absolute)

to increase dispositions to “make disinterested and reflective judgements about the government’s
own conduct” (p. 352), that is, in order for people to become better citizens. This interpretation
is corroborated by the following passage of Smith’s at the end of Book I: The “condition (of the
labourer) leaves him no time to receive the necessary information, and his education and habits are
commonly such as to render him unfit to judge, even though he was fully informed. In the public
deliberations therefore his voice is little heard” (WN, I.xi.9).
138 “All for ourselves and nothing to other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been

the vile maxim of the masters of mankind” (WN, III.iv.10).

139 “In every different branch, the oppression of the poor must establish the monopoly of the rich,

who, by engrossing the whole trade to themselves, will be able to make very large profits” (WN,
I.ix.15). “In all other countries (different from the new American colonies), rent and profit eat up
wages, and the two superior orders of people oppress the inferior one” (WN, IV.vii.b.3).
140 “The masters, being fewer in number, can combine much more easily; and the law, besides,

authorises, or at least does not prohibit their combinations, while it prohibits those of the workmen”
(WN, I.viii.12).
141 See Boucoyannis (2013), a paper particularly effective on the subject of asymmetries. Smith

concludes: “When the regulation (…) is in favour of the workmen, it is always just and equitable;
but it is sometimes otherwise when in favour of the masters.” (I.x.c.61). Any asymmetry generates
a rent and consequently rent-seeking behavior; Paganelli (2011, Sect. 3.1) reminds us that “Smith
spends most of Book IV (of the WN) explaining the damages of rent-seeking.”
142 See: Rothschild and Sen (2006, p. 359).
62 R. Camagni

poverty and of (relative) inequality, dear to regional scientists. The current debate on
the disease of the middle class in Europe owes a great deal to this approach.
At this stage, given all this evidence of the complexity but also the transparency
of Adam Smith’s political vision, the question naturally arises about how that vision
could have been interpreted in such a misleading way for so long, and not just in the
common view but also in knowledgeable circles. Emma Rothschild (1992) provided
an interesting historical reconstruction on how Smith’s complex vision could have
been condensed into a simple lesson—“all trade should be free”—and his portrait
become that of a “hero of commerce” and capitalism. His ideas on the “liberal plan
of equality, liberty and justice” were well known in his country and were associ-
ated with those of the French Enlightenment. He died when the French Revolution
had just started, but when it entered its more sanguinary phase, a strong reaction
against progressive ideas spread through Great Britain. In fact, his biographer, Dugald
Stewart (1793), in his writings and presentations of Smith’s legacy, blurred his more
radical views and delivered a truncated message on economic freedom that could be
acceptable by authorities and the general public. This treatment opened the way to a
“right” and a “left” Smithian perspective. Most classical economists mainly followed
the latter one, but everything changed with the advent of a new approach to economic
theory in the late nineteenth century.

6 Conclusions

My direct encounter with the work of Smith happened while I was looking for possible
theoretical intuitions on spatial matters in classical political economy during the
drafting of the introduction to my textbook on urban economics (Camagni 1992). In
that case, I discovered how important, to Smith’s mind, was the relationship between
the urban and the rural realms, or between the “town” and the “country,” in the
interpretation of crucial economic structures and historical transitions: the economic
conditions for the birth of the city (when an agricultural surplus emerged due to
“the improvements of the productive power of labour”) and the advantages that the
country received from the city in terms not only of technologies but also of “order
and good government” and “liberty and security.”
I was particularly struck by Smith’s analytical intuition that this relationship
between town and country does not only concern a functional dimension, deriving
from a natural complementarity in the respective specializations; it also involves
a hierarchical and distributive dimension, firstly because of the greater capacity to
“combine together” typical of urban lobbies of master manufacturers and tradesmen,
resolving in a monopoly pricing in the exchanges between the town and the country;
and secondly because of the brilliant perception of the spatial monopoly of the
city in those high-level “trades” for which the “intelligence requisite can be had
… only in places of the most extensive commerce and correspondence,” namely, in
today’s lexicon, in the presence of communication networks and relational capital.
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 63

“These trades can be carried nowhere but in great towns”: This was probably the first
reference to the cognitive role of large cities in the history of spatial thought.
My second discovery at that time concerned Smith’s perfect awareness and theo-
rization of a “situation rent” linked to distance from markets, besides the traditional
“fertility rent.” What I could not realize then—and what I have discovered during my
current further, deeper, and more complete reading of all Smith’s works—was his
analytical and even modeling capacity. Inter alia, he demonstrated this in dictating
the formula of locational bid rent à la Von Thünen, and in his analysis of urban
building and ground rents (for the first time in history, to my knowledge), detached
from any reference to agricultural production. Ground rent derives from a demand
for “some real or supposed advantage of the situation (…) whatever the reason for
that demand, whether for trade and business, for pleasure and society, or for mere
vanity and fashion.”
In regard to the first theme, the town-country relationship, I have realized how
crucial this relationship was for Smith’s interpretation of the structure and, most
of all, of the evolution of human society, to the point of making it the evolving
spatial archetype of the sequence of economic and institutional “revolutions” which
took place in the different ages and periods of society after the fall of the Roman
Empire. The evolution of material conditions (like the transition from rents-paid-in-
kind to rents accumulated in gold and jewels) merges with the evolution of production
systems, of governance institutions, and also of power relationships among social
classes (“orders”) in a masterly picture of historical transformations, highly praised
by today’s political scientists.
Besides the possible discovery of analytical anticipations by Smith, an expecta-
tion that I had when engaged in this work concerned the superior complexity and
consistency of the approach and the vision of a classical political economist with
respect to that of a modern neoclassical economist. This expectation was widely
confirmed, in many cases, and particularly in the treatment of land rent. The pres-
ence of some interpretive principles on the sources of rent, such as the exploitation
of “the powers of nature” or, in the case of urban rent, the exploitation of locational
advantages generated by the “good government of the sovereign”; the importance
of the institution of private ownership of land; the analysis of the interest conflict
between landlords and the rest of society; the consequent normative indications—
taken separately from the analytical part, but totally consistent with it—such as that
land rent is naturally liable to a “peculiar taxation”: all this converged in a consis-
tent vision in which value judgments based on philosophical grounds were never
questioned. The general normative conclusions of Smith were followed by classical
economists for more than a century, particularly by J.S. Mill, and later until Alfred
Marshall, Arthur Pigou, and some highly respected economists of the present times
like Paul Samuelson.
For a widely normative discipline like regional economics (and regional science)
deeply involved in the themes of spatial inequalities in development potential and
consequent policies, the greatest appreciation of the grandeur of Smith’s vision should
be given to his interpretation of the respective roles of the state and the market.
Far from relying on the virtues of the “invisible hand” of the market—his own
64 R. Camagni

perceptive but abstract metaphor of the “invisible hand” which drives the decisions
of the individual pursuing his own interest toward that of the society, “an end which
was no part of his intention” (WN, IV.ii.9)—Smith’s main concern was with real and
factual “market imperfections” and with the institutional and political conditions by
which the market could properly function. Fulfillment of these conditions, assigned as
duties to the state (limited but “very important duties, indeed”) consists in individual
and social security and liberty; in the impartiality of justice, and, in particular, the
autonomy of judges; in impartial competition, freed from the presence of institutional
monopolies and from the overwhelming power of vested interests, naturally able to
force the hand of the political and legislative milieu; in public education in order
to guarantee not just a relative equality in abilities and an appropriate and efficient
human capital, but also a civic capacity to judge the actions of “the sovereign” and
the public administration; in the supply by the state of appropriate public works and
services due to an evident market failure but also avoiding likely government failures
through the partial financing by users.143
The richness and depth of Smith’s thought, arising from a political economy
approach, strongly contrasts with the “reductionist” character of much of the modern
analytical work in economics and space economy, developed amid the host of limiting
conditions for its validity—made explicit but often only implicit. Moreover, it seems
less ideological than the truncated analytical and stylized synthesis of the invisible
hand in Walras’s general equilibrium model.
As regards long-term perspectives, Smith identifies the main driver of the produc-
tion system in the enlargement of markets which allows the widening of the division
of labor and the consequent increase of productivity. The sources of these increases
consist of both microeconomic and macro-territorial processes: on the one hand, of
new operational and technical arrangements through “the invention of common work-
ers”, improvements introduced by “the ingenuity of the makers of the machines”,
and inventions of “philosophers or men of speculation …. combining together the
powers of the most distant and dissimilar objects”; on the other hand, of such favor-
able context conditions as “industrious nations and individuals” and “thriving towns”
(once again!). The modernity of this vision is clear and so, too, is the role of education
and good institutions. The only missing element was consciousness of the potential
of new “technological paradigms”, like the one which at the turn of the century was
about to generate the industrial revolution that Smith, and also the early classical
economists in general, were unable to anticipate.
The beneficial effects of technical innovations, together with the potential inno-
vations in socio-economic institutions, were so clear to Smith that they induced
him—this is my firm opinion—to adopt an optimistic view of future prospects. In
fact, despite a well-known phrase on a possible future dismal or “dull” steady state
of low wages and profits once “the full complement of riches” has been acquired by

143 In modern “governance” terms: “(t)he hallmark of an ‘advanced’ developed society is a govern-
ment that exhibits the attributes of good governance: transparency, effectiveness, rule of law, lack
of corruption, voice and participation. From Adam Smith on down, economists have recognized
the importance of these attributes.” (Rodrik 2008, p. 17).
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 65

countries “which could therefore advance no further”—an evident tautology, which

Smith himself immediately discarded—his enlightenment spirit suggested to him the
possibility of society evolving, albeit slowly and with difficulty, upon what he calls
“the liberal plan of equality, liberty and justice.”
Returning to Smith’s analytical and modeling capacity—a talent much praised
by modern scientific style and taste—I wish here to underline again the clarity and
precision of his masterly reflection on the complex interaction among economic,
socio-psychological, and institutional variables in a long-term perspective, and how
it was able, once expressed in modern mathematical terms by a master of today’s
economic theory, Paul Samuelson, to generate a consistent system of dynamic
equilibrium conditions, anticipating “Marx’s expanded-reproduction model and
(providing) Harrod and Domar with an endogenous natural rate of growth.” Inter-
estingly, the results show that the only potential threat to growth could come from a
rise of rents, i.e., from an income-distribution dimension, a theme rather neglected
by today’s economic literature in spite of its manifest factual significance.
Equity was the principle that prompted him to approve a trend of—carefully—
increasing real wages (a “liberal reward of labour”), a trigger to push manufacturers
toward increasing productivity; to underline some significant negative effects of (his
beloved) division of labor, namely a crystallization of the unequal distribution of
abilities among classes and the risk of workers’ alienation due to the repetitiveness
of operations, anticipating Marx; and to strongly oppose any sort of privilege. Inter-
estingly, in regard to poverty and deprivation, Smith introduced a definition in relative
terms, with respect to the standards of society, and not in absolute ones, an intuition
“extremely rewarding” in scientific analysis according to Amartya Sen.
Finally, let me recall the theory about human nature and social relationships that
Smith developed in his first (and also last) opus, the Theory of Moral Sentiments,
which warranted a better reading and a better understanding during the following
two centuries, particularly by economists. Far from being totally separate from, and
even antithetical to, the WN, it furnishes an empiricist psychological analysis of the
natural sentiment of “sympathy” and “fellow-feeling” of men with any passion of
others, both happiness and sorrow, generating, when reciprocated, social cohesion
and happiness. “It is thus that man, who can subsist only in society, was fitted by
nature to that situation for which he was made. All the members of human society
stand in need of each other’s assistance, and are likewise exposed to mutual injuries.
Where the necessary assistance is reciprocally afforded from love, from gratitude,
from friendship, and esteem, the society flourishes and is happy.” (TMS, III.ii.3.1).
By saying this, I do not wish to imply that Smith anticipated modern theories
on inter-personal trust, cooperation, public happiness, or on collective action in the
maintenance of commons. I only suggest that his personal interpretation of homo
socialis could have been inspirational for an earlier development of these theories,
in the same way as Smith’s entire work could have been for the recent developments
of the new institutional economics.
Regional science, too, due to its interdisciplinarity in the sphere of society and
territory and its attention to institutions, would draw important suggestions and deep
inspiration from a more profound understanding of Smith’s work, which could prove
crucial for its further development and renewal.
66 R. Camagni

References

Adelman, I. 1961. Theories of economic growth and development. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Akerlof, G., and R. Kranton. 2000. Economics and identity. Quarterly Journal of Economics 115
(3): 715–753.
Alderson, A.S., and J. Beckfield. 2004. Power and position in the world city system. American
Journal of Sociology 109 (4): 811–851.
Arrow, K. 1971. Political and economic evaluation of social effects and externalities. In Frontiers
in quantitative economics, ed. M.D. Intrilligator. Amsterdam: North Holland.
Arrow, K. 1994. Methodological individualism and social knowledge. American Economic Review
84 (2): 1–9.
Ashraf, N., C.F. Camerer, and G. Loewenstein. 2005. Adam Smith, behavioral economist. Journal
of Economic Perspectives 19 (3): 131–145.
Bagnasco, A. 2002. Il capitale sociale nel capitalismo che cambia. Stato e Mercato 65 (2): 271–303.
Becattini, G. 1979. Dal settore industriale al distretto industriale. Alcune considerazioni sull’unità
di indagine dell’economia industriale, Rivista di Economia e Politica Industriale 5 (1).
Becattini, G. 2015. La coscienza dei luoghi: Il territorio come soggetto corale. Roma: Donzelli.
Bianchini, L. 1857. Della scienza del ben-vivere sociale e della economia pubblica e degli stati.
Napoli: Stamperia Reale.
Blaug, M. 1980. The Methodology of Economics. Cambridge: Press Syndicate of the University of
Cambridge.
Blaug, M. 1996. Economic theory in retrospect, 5th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boucoyannis, D. 2013. The equalizing hand: Why Adam Smith thought the market should produce
wealth without steep inequality. Perspectives on Politics 11 (4): 1051–1070.
Braudel, F. 1977. Afterthoughts on material civilization and capitalism. Baltimore, MD: Johns
Hopkins University Press.
Braudel, F. 1979. Civilisation matérielle, économie et capitalisme. Paris: Armand Collin.
Brown, V. 1994. Adam Smith’s discourse: Canonicity, commerce and conscience. London:
Routledge.
Bruni, L., and P.L. Porta. 2005. Economics and happiness: Framing the analysis. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Bruni, L., and R. Sugden. 2000. Moral canals: Trust and social capital in the work of Hume Smith
and Genovesi. Economics and Philosophy 16: 21–45.
Bruni, L., and S. Zamagni. 2007. Civil economics: Efficiency, equity and public happiness. Bern:
Peter Lang.
Bruni, L., and S. Zamagni. 2015. L’Economia civile. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Camagni, R. 1991. Local milieu, uncertainty and innovation networks: Towards a dynamic theory
of economic space. In Innovation networks: Spatial perspectives, ed. R. Camagni, 121–144.
Belhaven-London: Pinter.
Camagni, R. 1992. Economia urbana: Principi e modelli teorici. Roma: La Nuova Italia–
Carocci. (French edition: R. Camagni. 1995. Principes et modèles de l’economie urbaine. Paris:
Economica).
Camagni, R. 2016a. Afterthoughts on urban economic theory. Regional Research—Investigaciones
Regionales, Special issue on: New frontiers of regional and urban analysis, 36: 87–106.
Camagni, R. 2016b. Urban development and control on urban land rents. The Annals of Regional
Science 56 (3): 597–615.
Camagni, R. 2019. Territorial capital and regional development: Theoretical insights and appropriate
policies. In Handbook of regional growth and development theories, 2nd ed., eds. Capello, R.,
and P. Nijkamp, 124–148. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Camagni, R. 2020. Space, land rent and income distribution. Scienze Regionali—Italian Journal of
Regional Science 19 (3): 343–372.
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 67

Campbell, T.D. 1975. Scientific explanation and ethical justification in the theory of moral senti-
ments. In Essays on Adam Smith, eds. A.S. Skinner and T. Wilson, 68–82. Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Campbell, R.H., and A.S. Skinner. 1976. General introduction. In Adam Smith: An inquiry into
the nature and causes of the Wealth of Nations, eds. R.H. Campbell and A.S. Skinner, 1–60.
Indianapolis: Liberty Classics.
Cannari, L., G. D’Alessio, and G. Vecchi. 2016. House prices in Italy 1927–2012. Rivista Di Storia
Economica 32: 381–402.
Cantillon, R. 1755/1955. Essai sur la nature du commerce en général (Italian Edition). Torino:
Einaudi.
Cato, S., and A. Lutz. 2018. Kenneth Arrow, moral obligations and public policies, Working Paper
1841, Université de Lyon Saint-Etienne, Gate.
Cattaneo, C. 1847/1975. Di alcune istituzioni agrarie dell’Alta Italia applicabili al sollievo
dell’Irlanda—Lettere a Robert Campbell, royal vice consul in Milan. In Saggi di economia rurale,
ed. C. Cattaneo, 81–145. Torino: Einaudi.
Chandra, R. 2003. Adam Smith and competitive equilibrium. Discussion Papers in Economics,
03–11, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow.
Cusinato, A. 2016. A hermeneutic approach to the knowledge economy. In Knowledge-
creating milieus in Europe: Firms, cities, territories, eds. A. Cusinato and A. Philippopoulos-
Mihalopoulos, 97–136. Berlin: Springer.
Denis, H. 1971. Histoire de la pensée économique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Dockès, P. 1969. L’éspace dans la pensée économique du XVIème au XVIIIème siècle. Paris: Flam-
marion. Italian edition: Lo spazio nel pensiero economico dal XVI al XVIII secolo. Milano:
Feltrinelli, 1971.
Elden, S., and E. Mendieta (eds.). 2011. Reading Kant’s Geography. Albany, NY: State University
of New York Press.
Evensky, J.M. 2005. Adam Smith’s Theory of moral sentiments: On morals and why they matter
to a liberal society of free people and free markets. Journal of Economic Perspectives 19 (3):
109–130.
Filangieri, G. 1780–1788/2008. La scienza della legislazione. Napoli: Laterza, Bari.
Fleischacker, S. 2004. On Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations: A philosophical companion. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Freitas, A.L. 2012. Understanding Smith’s theory of distribution: The determination of land rent as
a residual magnitude. Paper presented at the First Young Researchers Workshop of Theoretical
and Applied Studies in Classical Political Economy, Centro di Ricerche e Documentazione Piero
Sraffa, Università di Roma 3.
Fry, M. (ed.). 1992. Adam Smith’s legacy. His place in the development of modern economics. New
York: Routledge.
Genovesi, A. 1765/2013. Lezioni di economia civile. Napoli e Milano: Vita e Pensiero.
George, H. 1879/1912. Progress and poverty—The remedy (25th anniversary edition). New York:
Doubleday Page and Co., Garden City.
Gilbert, M. 1989. On social facts. New York: Routledge.
Gobbi, U. 1906. Riforme nella proprietà fondiaria urbana in relazione all’aumento di valore delle
aree fabbricabili. V Congresso Nazionale delle Società Economiche - Atti, pp. 1–11, Milano.
Hamowy, R. 1968. Adam Smith, Adam Ferguson, and the Division of Labour. Economica, New
Series 35 (139): 249–259.
Heilbroner, R.L. 1975. The paradox of progress: Decline and decay in The Wealth of Nations. In
Essays on Adam Smith, eds. A.S. Skinner and T. Wilson, 524–539. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Hill, L.H. 2019. Adam Smith’s pragmatic liberalism. Cham (Switzerland): Springer Nature, Palgrave
Macmillan.
Hollis, M. 1998. Trust within reason. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Hume, D. 1740/1978. Treatise of human nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hume, D. 1777/1995. The life of David Hume, Esq. written by himself . James Fieser, utm.edu.
68 R. Camagni

Isard, W. 1949. The general theory of location and space economy. The Quarterly Journal of
Economics 63: 476–506.
Isard, W. 1951. Distance inputs and the space-economy—Part 1: The conceptual framework. The
Quarterly Journal of Economics 65 (2): 181–198.
Jacobs, J. 1969. The economy of cities. New York: Random House.
Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky. 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk.
Econometrica 47 (2): 263–291.
Kaldor, N. 1972. The irrelevance of equilibrium economics. Economic Journal 82 (328): 1237–
1255.
Kennedy, G. 2005. Adam Smith’s lost legacy. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kennedy, G. 2009. Adam Smith and the invisible hand: From metaphor to myth. Economic Journal
Watch 6 (2): 239–263.
Keynes, J.M. 1933. Essays in biography. London: Macmillan.
Knoll, K., M. Schularick, and T. Steger. 2018. No price like home: Global house prices, 1870–2012.
American Economic Review 107 (2): 331–353.
Lichfield, N., and O. Connellan. 1997. Land value taxation in Britain for the benefit of the community.
Report 18253.9. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute for Land Policies.
Lowe, A. 1975. Adam Smith’s system of equilibrium growth. In Essays on Adam Smith, eds. A.S.
Skinner and T. Wilson, 415–425. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Malthus, T.R. 1798/1998. An essay on the principle of population. London: J. Johnson, and Elec-
tronic Scholarly Publishing Project, http://www.esp.org/books/malthus/population/malthus.pdf.
Last accessed 19 April 2022.
Malthus, T.R. 1820/1972. Principles of political economy. London: William Pickering.
Marshall, A. 1890/1977. Principles of economics. London: Macmillan.
Marx, K. 1894/1959. Capital—A critique of political economy, Vol. III: The process of capitalist
production as a whole. Edited by F. Engels. New York: International Publishers Co. https://www.
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-Volume-III.pdf. Last accessed 19 April
2022.
Marx, K., and F. Engels. 1867/1970. The German ideology. New York: International Publishers
Co. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Marx_The_German_Ideology.pdf.
Last accessed 19 April 2022.
Mill, J.S. 1848. Principles of political economy. London: John W. Parker.
Mumford, L. 1961. The city in history. New York: Harcourt Brace.
O’Donnell, R. 1990. Adam Smith’s theory of value and distribution: A reappraisal. New York: St.
Martin’s Press.
Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ostrom, E. 1998. A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action. The
American Political Science Review 92 (1): 1–22.
Ottaviano, G. 2019. Geografia economica dell’Europa sovranista. Bari: Laterza.
Paganelli, M.P. 2008. The Adam Smith problem in reverse: Self-interest in the Wealth of Nations
and in The Theory of Moral Sentiments. History of Political Economy 40 (2): 365–382.
Paganelli, M.P. 2011. Economies in transition and in development: A possible warning from Adam
Smith. The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 19 (2): 149–163.
Pavitt, K. 1998. Technologies, products and organization in the innovating firms: What Adam Smith
tells us and Joseph Schumpeter doesn’t. Industrial and Corporate Change 7 (3): 433–452.
Peacock, A. 1997. The political economy of economic freedom. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Petty, W. 1662/1899. Treatise of taxes and contributions. In The economic writings of Sir William
Petty, Vol. I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pigou, A.C. 1909. The policy of land taxation. New York: Longmans Green.
Prest, A.R. 1981. The taxation of urban land. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Adam Smith (1723–1790): Uncovering His Legacy … 69

Quesnay, F. 1759/2005. Tableau economique et Explication du tableau économique. In Œuvres

économiques complètes et autres textes. Paris: Éditions de l’Institut national d’études démo-
graphiques.
Raphael, D.D., and A.L. Macfie. 1976. Introduction. In The theory of moral sentiments, The Glasgow
edition of the works and correspondence of Adam Smith, Vol. I. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
and Indianapolis: Liberty Fund Inc., 1984.
Ricardo, D. 1821/1971. The principles of political economy and taxation (3rd edition).
Harmondsworth: J. Murray Penguin Books.
Richardson, G. 2017. Adam Smith in Immanuel Kant’s moral philosophy. Ph.D. Thesis, University
of Adelaide.
Robbins, L.C. 1932. An essay on the nature and significance of economic science. London:
Macmillan.
Rocha, H.O., and S. Ghoshal. 2006. Beyond self-interest revisited. Journal of Management Studies
43 (3): 585–619.
Rodriguez-Pose, A. 2017. The revenge of places that don’t matter (and what to do about it).
Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 11 (1): 3–16.
Rodrik, D. 2008. Thinking about governance. In Governance, growth and development decision-
making, eds. D. North, D. Acemoglu, F. Fukuyama, and D. Rodrik, 17–25. Washington DC: The
World Bank.
Rothschild, E. 1992. Adam Smith and conservative economics. Economic History Review 45 (1):
74–96.
Rothschild, E. 1994. Adam Smith and the invisible hand. American Economic Review 84 (2):
319–322.
Rothschild, E., and A. Sen. 2006. Adam Smith’s economics. In The Cambridge Companion to Adam
Smith, ed. K. Haakonssen, 319–365. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Samuelson, P.A. 1977. A modern theorist’s vindication of Adam Smith. American Economic Review
67 (1): 42–49.
Samuelson, P.A. 1992. The overdue recovery of Adam Smith’s reputation as an economic theorist.
In Adam Smith’s Legacy. His place in the development of modern economics, ed. M. Fry, 1–15.
New York: Routledge.
Samuelson, P.A. 2009. Preface. In The isolated state in its relation to agriculture and national
economy—Part III, Principles for determination of rent, the most advantageous rotation period
and the value of stands of varying ages in pinewoods, ed. J.H. Von Thünen, xii–xiv. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Schliesser, E. 2017. Adam Smith: Systematic philosopher and public thinker. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Schumpeter, J.A. 1954. History of economic analysis (ed. from m.s. by E.B. Schumpeter). New
York: Oxford University Press. Abridged Italian edition, 1968, Torino: Boringhieri.
Sen, A. 1987. On ethics and economics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sen, A. 2005. Testing theories of happiness. In Economics and happiness: Framing the analysis,
eds. L. Bruni and P.L. Porta, 116–146. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sen, A. 2009. Introduction. In A. Smith, The theory of moral sentiments. New York: Penguin.
Sen, A. 2011. Uses and abuses of Adam Smith. History of Political Economy 43 (2): 257–271.
Skinner, A.S., and T. Wilson (eds.). 1975. Essays on Adam Smith. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Smith, A. 1759–90/2009. The theory of moral sentiments, 6th original edition. New York: Penguin.
Smith, A. 1763a/1896. Lectures on jurisprudence (1763a title: Lectures on Justice, Police, Revenues
and Arms), ed. E. Cannan. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Smith, A. 1763b/1982. Early draft of parts of the Wealth of Nations. In Lectures on jurisprudence,
The Glasgow edition of the works and correspondence of Adam Smith, Vol. V, eds. Meek, R.L.,
D. Raphael, and P.G. Stein. Oxford: Oxford University Press and Indianapolis: Liberty Fund Inc.
Smith, A. 1776/1976. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, The Glasgow
edition of the works and correspondence of Adam Smith, Vol. II. Oxford: Oxford University
Press and Indianapolis: Liberty Fund Inc. 1981.
70 R. Camagni

Smith, A. 1795a/1980. Essays on philosophical subjects, The Glasgow edition of the works and
correspondence of Adam Smith, Vol. III. Oxford: Oxford University Press and Indianapolis:
Liberty Fund Inc. 2004.
Smith, A. 1795b/1980. The principles that lead and direct phylosophical enquiries; Illustrated by
the history of astronomy. In Smith, A., 1795a/1980, Essays on philosophical subjects, 38–102.
Oxford: Oxford University Press and Indianapolis: Liberty Fund Inc. 2004.
Smith, A. 1976. The correspondence of Adam Smith, The Glasgow edition of the works and corre-
spondence of Adam Smith, Vol. VI. Oxford: Oxford University Press and Indianapolis: Liberty
Fund Inc. 1987.
Sraffa, P. 1960. Production of commodities by means of commodities: Prelude to a critique of
economic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Steuart, J. 1767. An inquiry into the principles of political oeconomy. London: A. Miller and T.
Cadell.
Stewart, D. 1793/1980. Account of the life and writings of Adam Smith. In A. Smith, 1795a/1980,
Essays on philosophical subjects, The Glasgow edition of the works and correspondence of Adam
Smith. Oxford: Oxford University Press and Indianapolis: Liberty Fund Inc. 2004.
Stigler, G.J. 1976. The successes and failures of Prof Smith. Journal of Political Economy 84 (6):
1199–1213.
Sugden, R. 1993. Thinking as a team: Towards an explanation of nonselfish behavior. Social
Philosophy and Policy 10 (1): 69–89.
Sugden, R. 2005. Correspondence of sentiments: An exploration of the pleasure of social interaction.
In Economics and happiness: Framing the analysis, eds. L. Bruni and P.L. Porta, 91–115. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Von Thünen, J.H. 1826/1966. Der Isolierte Staat in Beziehung auf Landwirtschaft und Nation-
alökonomie. Hamburg: Puthes. The Isolated State, Oxford: Pergamon.
Von Thünen, J.H. 1863/2009. The isolated state in its relation to agriculture and national economy—
Part III, Principles for determination of rent, the most advantageous rotation period and the value
of stands of varying ages in pinewoods. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Uhlaner, C.J. 1989. “Relational goods” and participation: Incorporating sociability into a theory of
rational action. Public Choice 62: 253–285.
Viner, J. 1927. Adam Smith and laissez-faire. Journal of Political Economy 35 (2): 98–232.
Waterman A.M.C. 2004. Political Economy and Christian Theology since the Enlightenment—
Essays in Intellectual History. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Weingast, B. 2017. An introduction to my Adam Smith webpage: Adam Smith’s ‘Jurisprudence’:
The surprising scope and depth of his theories of law, government and politics. Department of
Political Science, Stanford University, https://web.stanford.edu/group/mcnollgast/cgi-bin/wordpr
ess/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/NewIntro.researchgate-version.17.0217.pdf. Last accessed 19
April 2022.
White, L., Jr. 1962. Medieval technology and social change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Williamson, O.E. 1991. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press.
Williamson, O.E. 2002. The lens of contract: Private ordering. American Economic Review 92 (2):
438–453.
Young, A.A. 1928. Increasing returns and economic progress. Economic Journal 38 (152): 527–542.
Johann Heinrich Von Thünen
(1783–1850): A Systemic View of Human
Interaction Within Space

Tomás Ponce Dentinho

Johann Heinrich Von Thünen. Photo source Alchetron.com

We must always have the strength to forget what we know, in order to better understand and
assimilate a truth contrary to our personal prejudices (Von Thünen 1826)

T. P. Dentinho (B)
Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of the Azores, Angra do
Heroismo, Portugal
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 71

P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_3
72 T. P. Dentinho

1 Introduction

Johann Heinrich Von Thünen is a Great Mind of regional science for three main
reasons. First, because he was one of the pioneers who explicitly considered space in
the study of human interaction, secondly because the Von Thünen general equilibrium
model of urban rings is still used and useful to understand how land use depends
on land suitability, technology, land property rights, and the size and distance to the
market, and finally, because his book, The Isolated State, has still many ideas to
explore, such as the fair rent complementing the fair wage; the productive space,
beyond space as distance; and the income multiplier effects of the value of natural
resources expressed on land rents.

2 A Consistent Thinker in a Changing Germany

Johann Heinrich Von Thünen was born in 1783 in Kanarienhaussen, in the parish
of Waddewarden, in the Jeverland district close to the German North Sea, eighty
kilometers from The Netherlands and eighty kilometers from Bremen Haven (Hall
1966). He began an apprenticeship in agriculture in Gerrietshausen, Jeverland, in
1799, where he observed the agricultural conditions of the time. In 1802, he went to
an agriculture school near Hamburg, where he came under the influence of the Baron
Von Voght on social issues and, in a Summer Course in Celle, he was introduced to
the thinking of Albrecht Von Thaer (1752–1828) on agriculture systems. The seminal
ideas of his future research were already vivid by then when he wrote:
When one assumes a land of 40 miles diameter with a large city in the center; and assumes that
this land could sell its products only to this central city; and that the agriculture of the area had
the highest development. Then one could expect that the economic system around this city
would divide itself into different agricultural systems. (as quoted in Schumacher-Zarchlin
1868; Schneider 1934; and Peterson 1944)

This perspective was contrary to Albrecht Von Thaer’s thesis that the condition of
each soil determined the respective suitability. Baumont and Huriot (1996) noted that
Von Thünen demonstrates a real scientific spirit: intuitive, abstract, and deductive.
In 1803, he registered at the University of Gottingen for a year’s study that allowed
him to reinforce his liberal and social ideas without losing his roots in agricultural
science. In a study visit to Mecklenburg, he got to know one of the sisters of a
colleague and married two years later. In 1810, he bought an estate in Tellow, in
Mecklenburg-Schwerin, forty kilometers from Rostock and two hundred from Berlin,
where he devoted most of his time to developing his farm and his research (see Fig. 1).
Von Thünen did not have a university career. Instead, his preference was to manage
a farm that also served his innovative applied research. Nevertheless, due to the
success of the first version of The Isolated State (Von Thünen 1826), the philosophical
faculty of the University of Rostock conferred on him an honorary doctorate in 1830,
and the city of Teterow, near his farm in Tellow, declared him a freeman of the city.
Johann Heinrich Von Thünen (1783–1850) … 73

Farm Manager
Rubkow

Born
Waddewarden Farm Manager
Apprenticeship Tellow
Gerrietshausen Agriculture school
Hamburg
Summer school
Celle

University
Gottingen

Fig. 1 Places where Von Thünen lived during his life Photo source Google Maps

During the period of the unification process of Germany, in 1848, he declined a seat
in the National Assembly of Frankfurt am Main due to health problems. He died in
1850 (Frambach 2012).
The various versions of The Isolated State include most of his scientific work. The
first edition (Von Thünen 1826) contains Part I: “Derisolierte Statt in Belziehung auf
Landwirtschaft und National ökonomie” (The isolated place in dependence on agri-
culture and national economy). The second partial and revised edition appeared in
1842 (Von Thünen 1842). The last edition still supervised by the author was published
in 1850, and included Sect. 1 of Part II, titled “Der naturgemäbe Arbeitslohn und
dessen Verhältnis zum Zinsfubund zur Landrente” (The natural wage and its relation
to the interest base to the land rent) (Von Thünen 1850a). Section 2 of Part II and
Part III were published after his death, with Part III bearing the title, “Grundsätze zur
Bestimmung der Bodenrente, der vorteilhalftesten Umtriebszeit und des Wertes de
Holzbestände von verschiedenem Alter für kieferwaldungen” (Principles for deter-
mining the land rent, the most advantageous rotation time and the value of wood
stocks of different ages for pine groves) (Von Thünen 1863).

2.1 Major Contributions

Johann Heinrich Von Thünen created a formidable knowledge of agronomy rein-

forced by rigorous farm accounts, and, synthesized in the three parts of his formu-
lation of the “Isolated State,” he built up a critical scientific approach to economics,
creating a systemic perspective of human interaction within space, that is akin to
what we now refer to as regional science (Kourtit et al. 2016). The French edition of
his book (Von Thünen 1850b) extends to more than 100,000 words, organized into
74 T. P. Dentinho

38 topics and 3 sections. The first section, with 26 topics, develops the creation of
the “Isolated State” with a description and explanation of six circles of land use that
surround the state’s main city. In the second section, with seven topics, the author
confronts the conceptual framework with reality. The third section of the book focuses
on the impact of taxes on agriculture.
Beyond the modeling of land use and land value, the final edition of The Isolated
State (Von Thünen 1863) also includes an analysis of the natural wage. And, as
reported by Fujita (2000), Von Thünen sets out the fundamental principles of spatial
agglomeration. Von Thünen’s ideas were a precursor to marginal analysis, providing
a scientific background to the principles of kameralism (Justi 1764), a mercantilist
doctrine focused on the efficiency of public expenditures that argued that the expected
tax revenue should finance the expenditure generating it. Furthermore, the framework
of the “Isolated State” highlights the constraints of space and time on land use, wages,
and property values, which were very much disturbed by the process of economic
development in the nineteenth century in Germany, where traditional self-sufficient
farms and market-oriented farms nearby major towns were becoming in conflict
(Ponsard 1983; Albergaria 2009).

2.2 Land Use

2.2.1 The Isolated State—Hypothesis and Research Problem

Regarding land use, the research question put forward by Von Thünen (1826) is the
following:
Imagine a very large city in the middle of a plain susceptible to cultivation, which is not
crossed by any navigable channel or river. Let this plain be formed by an identical terrain
everywhere in nature. That this plain is finally, at a great distance from the city, limited by an
arid desert that separates it entirely from the rest of the living world. There is no other city
beyond this one. With these conditions in place, we can infer that the central city must supply
the countryside with all the manufactured products it needs, whereas, on the other hand, it
is obliged to obtain from these same fields all its food products and all essential materials.
Suppose, furthermore, that the mines and salt plants responsible for delivering the necessary
metals and salt to the city center are in its vicinity. This city, being the one and only in the
middle of the supposed plain, will be called simply: The City of the Isolated State. What
has just been said naturally leads to the following question: How will agriculture behave in
these circumstances? In what and how this agriculture, rationally realized, will change with
the greater or lesser distance from the City?

To analyze this question in Sect. 1 of his book, Von Thünen selects two farms—
one in Tellow five miles from the market and the other close to the market—both
selling rye to the city. The cost of producing rye is the same on both farms; land
costs are proportional to the extent of the land; and capital costs are in relation to
the amount of production. Thus, the only factor that differentiates the production
conditions of the two farms and affects the cost proportional to land is the cost of
transporting rye to the city, which is higher the greater the distance to the market.
Johann Heinrich Von Thünen (1783–1850) … 75

Therefore, the farm near the city has a higher rent per area than the farm located
farther away. Based on those two observation points, Von Thünen derives the value
of land rent for any distance from the city center until land rent becomes zero and
there is no agricultural land use 50 miles from the city center.
Von Thünen demonstrates that land use results from the confrontation between the
proprietor, who supplies land to whomever offers the highest value, and the farmer,
who demands the land and has the possibility to choose the land use that maximizes
land rent. Then, the farmer that offers the higher rent uses the proprietor’s land and
gets a good income for his labor and capital. In farms close to the market, the option
of intensifying the crop is advantageous even with decreasing marginal productivity
of labor because the production costs of these farms, added to the transport costs
to the market, will, up to a certain limit of production, be lower than the product’s
selling price in the city. Farms far away from the city adopt extensive farming systems
because the advantage of intensification is very small.
According to Von Thünen, and in line with Ricardo (1817), land rent is not what
is left after the costs of capital and labor, as assumed by Adam Smith (1776) and
Say (1803), nor is it the only source of value, as assumed by Quesnay (1766). Land
rent is the income from the natural resource of land and its respective location,
separable from labor and capital income, and very much influenced by distance to
the market. Also, contrary to what his contemporary agronomists thought (Von Thaer
1809–1812), Von Thünen demonstrates that rotation of land uses, linked to labor and
capital intensity, is not defined for each type of soil but depends strongly on the
distance to the market.

2.2.2 The Model

Based on the model of the “Isolated State” and on agronomic knowledge that assumes
complementary connections—learned from agricultural statistics—within each agri-
cultural system, including soil depreciation, fertilization, climate, and livestock, Von
Thünen derives the influence of exogenous variables on a set of endogenous vari-
ables. Exogenous are: the price of grains, associated with the price of livestock and
influenced by the size of the market; soil fertility; the transport cost to the market,
influenced by the type of transportation; taxes; and distance to the farmhouse, depen-
dent on the form of the farm and on the initial location of the farmhouse close to water
and to roads. Endogenous are: labor distribution, land use, land rent, and land value.
In other words, grain prices, defined by demand and supply in the market; transport
costs of products and factors; environmental conditions; and technological comple-
mentarities of agricultural systems among crops, livestock, and soil features together
define land use, land rent, land value, and the spatial distribution labor (Fig. 2).
Land rent per unit of land (Rdi) of land use (i), located at a distance (d) from
the city center, depends on the weighted price of the products of each land use (i)
converted into the price of grain in the city center (Ui *) that changes with the market
76 T. P. Dentinho

Exogenous Variables Endogenous Variables

Market Dimension, Grain Price(U*) Land Rent (Rd)

Transport Costs per distance (c) Von Thünen Land Use (di*)
Land Use
Environmental conditions (e) Model Land Value (Vd)

Agronomic Complementarities (a) Labor distribution (nd)

Fig. 2 Von Thünen’s land use model

dimension. Land rent per unit of land (Rdi) of land use (i) depends also on the cost
of production (Ci ), the productivity per unit of land per environmental conditions
(Qei), and the cost of transportation per unit of distance to the city center (ti ):

Rdi = [Ui∗ − Ci − ti (d)] Qei

Each land use (i) involves all of the complementary products associated with
it (including firewood, hunting, fruits, and mushrooms from the forest; beef from
pasture and forages) and with all its crop rotations (identified in Holstein: fallow,
barley, oat, pasture, pasture, pasture; in Mecklenburg: fallow, rye, barley, oat, pasture,
pasture, pasture; and in Marche: potatoes, rye, oat, pasture, pasture, pasture, fallow).
All these complementary products are technologically and economically linked to
the rye and its price in the city center. Land use (i) at distance (d), (id), is selected
to maximize the land rent (Rdi) {di* = Max [Rdi] for all possible land uses (i) at
distance d}.
Finally, linked to the theory of natural wage explained below, land value equals
the maximum land rent (Rd) divided by the interest rate (z), and labor distribution at
distance d (nd) depends on the number of workers (n) per land use (i).

2.2.3 The Six Land Use Circles

The maximization of land rent associated with the distance to the main city defines
six land use rings of agricultural systems.
The first ring is for labor-intensive crops, without fallow: crops that do not support
long-distance transportation, such as fresh vegetables based on fertilizers bought in
the city center or produced within the farm, and fresh milk coming from cows fed by
forages brought from far away. It extends 4 miles from the city center, where land
rent is high. The same applies to land value, but it is potentially capable of expanding
with economic development.
Forestry for energy occupies the second ring, providing wood for combustion,
construction, and coal production. According to Von Thünen, this ring extends out
to 8 miles from the city center because, beyond there, the cost of transportation
Johann Heinrich Von Thünen (1783–1850) … 77

of wood does not compensate the price paid in the city center. Forestry competes
with potatoes that are viable up to 9.3 miles from the city center, according to the
estimates and evidence revealed by Von Thünen. Interestingly, his idea that a forest,
very much along the lines explained two centuries later in forest economics (Pearse
1990), is like a long-term bank deposit, the management costs of which involve not
only the plantation, maintenance, and recollection cost, but also the opportunity cost
of capital.
Along the third, fourth, and fifth rings, from 9.3 to 31.5 miles from the city center,
the choice is between two alternative rotation systems. On the one hand, there is
pastoral rotation with oats, fallow, barley, cereals, and five years of pasture. On the
other hand, there is a three-year rotation system with rye, barley, and fallow combined
with manure. The choice between one and the other depends only on the price of grain,
with high grain prices inducing pastoral rotation and low grain prices stimulating the
adoption of a three-year rotation. In the third ring, the choice is between rotations; in
the fourth ring, pastoral rotation is predominant; and in the fifth ring, the three-year
rotation becomes the main agricultural system. Changes in rotational agricultural
systems not only occur in space, but also take place in time, with the appearance of
more intensive systems in more developed regions.
Livestock production is very sparse on the outskirts of the city but increases in
direct proportion to distance, reaching its maximum at 31.5 miles. From that point
on, the land rent falls, but by so little that it still remains high at 50 miles. Since
livestock has so many advantages 50 miles from the city, it is not at that distance that
it will reach its limits; in fact, it can expand even more into nomadic land uses.1
The presentation made by Von Thünen follows the framework of an integer linear
programming model2 with n (land uses) × m (rings) variables, with an objective
function equal to the sum of the gross margins per land use/ring that decrease with
the transport costs from the city center for each specific land use/ring. It is an integer
model, because each variable takes only the value of 1, if the surface unit in that ring
(j from m) is occupied by land use (i from n) or 0 otherwise. There is a deterministic
process for rings 1, 2, 6, and beyond, but it is foreseeably a stochastic process in rings
3, 4, and 5 where different types of rotations can occur. Von Thünen does not describe
all the integer linear programming model, but highlights its implicit structure in the
choices of land uses between consecutive rings with a careful estimation of the gross
margins associated to the complementary products linked to each land use.

1 Huriot (1989) argues that none of Von Thünen’s rent functions are linear, and, therefore, the
original model is unable to assure that rents are decreasing with distance to the center. Nevertheless,
Von Thünen focuses on the changes between rings and assumes the freedom of places through
farmers to maximize the rent of the place even if the profile of the rent is not linear in all the rent
functions and only along the border of the various rings.
2 As detailed in, e.g., Hillier and Lieberman (2014).
78 T. P. Dentinho

2.2.4 Confronting Reality and the Impact of Taxes on Land Use

Von Thünen also explains how prices in small cities relate to prices in the main
central city, and he shows how different agro-industrial products like cognac, wool,
rapeseed; tobacco chicory; clover for seeds; and linen also fit into the Isolated State.
Finally, he demonstrates that all taxes reflect on land rents that generate inefficiencies.
It is difficult to estimate because small price changes in the city center can have major
impacts on land use, land rents, and land values.

2.3 Natural Wage

2.3.1 Income Distribution between Labor and Capital and Migration

Classical economists regarded labor as a commodity—with wages necessary to

enable workers to subsist and perpetuate—and not dependent on productivity
(Ricardo 1817). Von Thünen assumed that workers have freedom to establish them-
selves as producers; that all laborers are of the same class and equal in strength,
skills, and intelligence; and that wages depend on productivity, divided into means
of subsistence (a) and surplus above the means of subsistence (y) (Von Thünen 1863).
According to Moore (1895), the Von Thünen Natural Wage Theory explains the
interest rate (z), the surplus
√ above the means of subsistence (y), and the optimal
natural wage [(a + y) = ap] as a function of the product of labor (p), the units of
capital per labor (q), and the subsistence income of labor (a) (Fig. 3).
The land use model (Fig. 2) fixes land rent, but the connection with the wage
model occurs in the periphery of the Isolated State where the rent is zero. In the
periphery, wages cannot grow because land rent would be negative, production would
be abandoned, and workers would migrate to the center, thereby lowering the wages
there. Therefore, in the periphery, wages (a + y) can grow only if the interest on
capital decreases.
The amount of capital, Q, divided by the year’s wage, a + y, leads to the number
of units of capital, nq, where n is the number of workers and q the unit of capital per
worker. On the other hand, n laborers that generate np product receive n(a + y) in

Exogenous Variables Endogenous Variables

Product of Labor (m) Von Thünen Interest rate (z)

Model of
Units of Capital per Labor (q) Natural Wage above Subsistence (y)
Wages
Subsistence Income of Labor (a) Natural Wage (a+y) = √ap

Fig. 3 Von Thünen model of natural wages

Johann Heinrich Von Thünen (1783–1850) … 79

wages and generate a margin for the capitalist of p − (a + y). This margin divided
by the capital employed, Q = np(a + y)], results in the rate of interest of capital, z,
that is a function of the product of labor, m, the units of capital per labor, q, and the
subsistence income of labor, a, as shown in Eq. 13 :

z = [ p − (a + y)]/[q(a + y)] (1)

2.3.2 Marginal Freedom and Optimal Income Distribution

Equation 1 has three exogenous variables (a, p, and q) and two endogenous vari-
ables (y and z). To solve the problem, Von Thünen had to assume that producers in
the periphery choose between being autonomous farmers receiving their margin or
workers receiving the interest of the wage surplus. Therefore, the income generated
by an autonomous entrepreneur in relation to the capital employed, [p − (a + y)]/[q(a
+ y)]y, has to be equal to the interest received from the surplus income, T = yz. So
long as there is freedom to invest and to move, “the wage of farmers at each distance
from the Town is to be endogenously determined such that the utility of farmers,
who consume crops grown in the field, as well as goods manufactured at the Town,
is the same everywhere” (Fujita 2000).
The maximization of this interest of the surplus income, T = [p − (a + y)]/[q(a
+ y)]y, on the total wage, √
a + y, leads to the formula that Von Thünen asked to put
in his graveyard, a + y = ap, which is equivalent to:
√
y= ap−a

This also allows estimation not only of the outcome of increased productivity on the
wage surplus but also the rise in profits linked to a productivity increase:

r = p−(y + a)

Figure 4 shows that if labor productivity is lower than the wage subsistence level,
both the wage surplus and profit are negative, and there is no activity. On the other
hand, there is a productivity premium for both the worker and the investor.

3 This is only possible if labor, n, does not depend on the interest, z, on capital, q, and the only
adjustment is for capital, q, which can be secured with a Cobb–Douglas Production Function with
constant increases on scale, fixed subsistence wage, a, fixed labor, n = 1, and an adjustable interest
rate, z, per unit of capital, q.
80 T. P. Dentinho

√
Fig. 4 Von Thünen’s natural wage surplus, y = (ap) − a, and profit, r = P − (y + a), as a function
of labor productivity for any location and land rent within the Isolated State

3 Quesnaysian Multipliers in Von Thünen’s Model: The

Path to a General Theory of Location

Assume that the entire agriculture production concentrates on grain, as used by Von
Thünen to establish the technological and economic connections with all the land
uses. The rent profile, Rd, maximizes all possible land uses for each distance from
the center, d, according to the transport costs, t, the productivity of land, Q, and the
price of territorial products, U, net of production costs, C: Rd = [U − C − t(d)]Q.
Rd = 0, when (U − C)/t = dl, where dl is the radius of the isolated city area, and
the total rent, TR, comes to TR = (1/3)[π (U − C)3 ]/t 2 .
If territorial owners are located in the city center, the amount of production and
consumption from the territory would be given by Dl = π [(U − C)/t)2 Q]. On the
other hand, through a Quesnaysian multiplier effect, m, of the land rent, TR, it is
possible to generate the total product of the isolated city, Y. Using a base-model
framework, the multiplier effect, m, varies with the inverse of the activity rate, Ω,
the proportion, ρ, of territorial production, Dl, in the total product, Y, a constant, k,
of other services related to product and m = Ω/[1 − Ω(ρ + k)], the multiplier effect
of the land rent, TR. Therefore, product, Y, comes to:

Y = Ω/[1 − Ω(ρ + k)][(1/3)π(U − C)3 /t 2 ]

The territorial production, Dl, will be:

Dl = ρY = π [(U − C)/t]2 Q
= ρΩ/[1 − Ω(ρ + k)][(1/3)π(U − C)3 /t 2 ]
Johann Heinrich Von Thünen (1783–1850) … 81

The margin, U–C, will increase with production per unit of land, Q:

U − C = 3Q/{ρΩ/[1 − Ω(ρ + k)]}

The same happens with the dimension of the city, dl, that increases with the production
per unit of land but restrained by the transport costs, t:

dl = 3Q/{ρ[Ω/[1 − Ω(ρ + k)]}t

The way to safeguard and reward land is through the payment of land rents to
owners. Yet, the spatial distribution of those rents influences the spatial profile of
economic performance influenced by land productivity, Q, the multiplier effect, m,
with all its components—Ω, the inverse of the activity rate; ρ, demand for land
products; and k, demand for non-land goods—and the restraining cost of distance, t.
This is the link to Quesnay, avoided by Von Thünen, but implicit in his Isolated
State, where land rents that capture the value of land, sun, and rain in the produc-
tion process should go somewhere. From this perspective and following François
Quesnay’s thoughts, land rents go to the city center, generating demand for land and
non-land products through multiplier effects, and increased land productivity leads
to the expansion of the city.
The relevance of this relates to the missing links of Von Thünen’s thinking, the
ones that could explain the initial location of the city center. It is clear that the places
surrounded by more productive areas and lower transport costs would be larger, with
higher centripetal forces and lower centrifugal forces.

4 Scientific Recognition in the Literature

Among the personages included in Fig. 5, François Quesnay (1694–1774) was a

medical doctor able to understand the working of the human body and capable of
devising a revealing analogy with the functioning of the economy. Von Thünen was
eventually the first and the last territorial ‘doctor,’ capable of understanding human
interaction within space and with sufficient proximity not only to comprehend land
use but also to promote land use management. There is no great use of the work of
François Quesnay in the works of Von Thünen. Nevertheless, the idea of an isolated
city, where the proprietor receives and spends the rent of the farm with implicit
multiplier effects that, in their turn, feed the demand for agricultural, commercial,
and industrial goods and services, accords very well with the reasoning of François
Quesnay’s (1766) Economic Table.
Another author who influenced Von Thünen is Johann Justi (1717–1771) and the
kameralist accounting system (Justi 1764; Backhaus 2009) taught at the University
of Gottingen, the marginal principle of which is that “those who receive the benefit
82 T. P. Dentinho

Friedrich von Soden (1754–1831)

Adam Smith (1723–1790)
Alfred Marshal (1848–1924)
Luidwig von Jacob (1759–1827)
David Ricardo (1772–1823)
Harold Hotelling (1895–1973)
Karl Rau (1792–1870)
Jean Baptiste Say (1767–1832)
Paul Samuelson (1915–2009)
Friedrich von Hermann (1795–1868)

Hans von Mangoldt (1824–1868)

Albert Lösh (1854–1952)

Johann Walter Christaller (1893–1969)

François Quesnay (1694–1774)
Heinrich
Von Thünen William Alonso (1933–1999)
Johann Justi (1717–1771) (1783–1850)

Masahisa Fujita (1943–)

Paul Krugman (1953–)

Albrecht Von Thaer (1752–1870)

Georg S. Freiherr (1765–1828) Karl R.-Jagetzow (1805–1875) Michael Chisholm- (1931–)

Georg Hegel (1770–1831)

Friedrich List (1789–1846)
Immanuel Kant (1724–1804)

Lorenz von Stein (1815–1890) François Perroux (1903–1987)

Sismode de Sismondi(1773–1842) Pierre Proudhon (1809–1865) Celso Furtado (1920–2004)

Karl Marx (1818–1883) Raúl Prebisch (1901–1986)

Fig. 5 Von Thünen in the literature of philosophers, sociologists, economists, agronomists, and
regional scientists

from each extra public infrastructure must pay its costs.” This fits quite well with the
marginal concepts of economics and the decaying profile of land rents.
Related to agriculture or land use, the influence of Professor Albrecht Von Thaer
(1752–1870) was relevant to the understanding and critical analysis of agricultural
systems and land use (see Von Thaer 1809–1812). We might even think that it was
Von Thaer’s aim to educate capable directors for large estates who could enhance
the value of the land entrusted to them according to the circumstances. It was thus
that Von Thünen justified his main activity throughout his life as a farm manager.
Georg Sartorious Freiherr (1765–1828),4 professor at the University of Gottingen,
introduced Von Thünen to the works of the classics. The works of Adam Smith (1723–
1790), David Ricardo (1772–1823), and Jean Baptist Say (1767–1832) all contributed

4Georg Freiherr was a translator and popularizer of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations; his major
work is Geschichte des Hanseatischen Bundes. (History of the Hanseatic League) published in three
volumes 1802–1808.
Johann Heinrich Von Thünen (1783–1850) … 83

importantly to Von Thünen’s theoretical framing of the Isolated State, where, respec-
tively, the role of the market, the understanding of rents, and the importance of
production margin in the generation of demand play a crucial role.
The work of Johann Heinrich Von Thünen compiled by Schumacher-Zarchlin
in his (1875) bibliography represents a systemic view on human interaction within
space involving not only an environmental perspective represented by land use and
an economic view shown in the rents, but also a social consideration in the analysis of
the natural wage. This social perspective is rooted in the works of romantic thinkers
represented by Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) who, beyond his moral and epistemol-
ogist thoughts, also wrote textbook notes on geography, highlighting the role of the
discipline in the understanding of phenomena, and Georg Hegel (1770–1831), with
his mature statements of legal, moral, social, and political philosophy. Unavoidably,
some socialist writers also had a strong influence on Von Thünen, such as Simonde de
Sismondi (1773–1842), who, similarly to the natural wages of Von Thünen, presents
the seminal idea that all value comes from labor because it adds value to a product.
Nevertheless, neither was Von Thünen a rationalist in the tradition of Smith,
Ricardo, and Say, and as followed by such contemporary classic German thinkers
as Friedrich Von Soden (1754–1831), Luidwig Von Jacob (1759–1827), Karl Rau
(1792–1870),5 and Friedrich von Hermann (1795–1868), nor was he a romantic
protectionist like Friedrich List (1789–1846), or the social-anarchist represented by
Pierre Proudhon (1809–1865). His stated positioning is “the interest of the individual
associated with the welfare of the whole” (Von Thünen 1966): owing much to the
precepts of Kant to “behave in a way, which will be of benefit for you if all the
others that were to behave in exactly the same way, and be willing to sacrifice the
performance of this principle when others disobey.”
Von Thünen’s rediscovery is mainly due to Lösch (1954), and after him to Alonso
(1964), even if other authors, including Paul Samuelson (1983), went some way
toward recognizing his seminal works on marginalism and general equilibrium, the
twin bedrocks of neoclassical economics, or Masahisa Fujita (2000), who gives credit
to Von Thünen for the concepts of comparative advantage and the Leontief input–
output model. According to Robert Walker (2022), Von Thünen’s ideas also serve
historians like William Cronon (2009) to help explain the centrality of Chicago in
US westward expansion.
Masahisa Fujita (2000) analyzes Von Thünen’s thinking on urban networks and
agglomeration economies. His argument is that the work of Von Thünen already took
into consideration the existence of various urban locations in space, anticipating the
model of Walter Christaller (1933). The central city produces backwash net effects
in the peripheral ones due to centripetal and centrifugal forces, and the development
of transport networks, such as railways, reinforce that process, in line with the New
Economic Geography (Krugman 1991; Parr et al. 2002).
The Von Thünen centrifugal forces are the high prices of agricultural products
and land rents in more central places. Centripetal forces involve: (1) the costs of

5 See Rau (1823).

84 T. P. Dentinho

machinery and the minimal number of costumers to allow the dimension break-
even; (2) people skills, which require a minimum market dimension to promote
specialization according to their skills; (3) the better adjustment between demand
and supply, with the reduction of transaction costs in cities; (4) the technological links
between sectors; and (5) technical innovation. Fujita remarks that Von Thünen makes
no reference to knowledge spillovers associated with agglomeration economies, as
referred to in the concept of industrial districts of Alfred Marshall (1892), but they
are not explicit in the work of Paul Krugman.
Beyond the great initial disagreement with Von Thünen’s theory of natural wage,
Komorzynski (1894), quoted by Moore (1895), acknowledges Von Thünen’s thoughts
on ‘Dependency Theory.’ The works from François Perroux (1950), on underdevel-
opment by Furtado (1962), and unequal trade by Raúl Prebisch (1949) are interesting
cases of Von Thünen’s impact on the dependency school.
There are many works that cite the Isolated State of Von Thünen, but there are
many more citations of the books of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, or even Jean
Baptiste Say. What is comparable is the rate of change (see Fig. 6). Regarding this
indicator, the recent growth of citations of Von Thünen’s thoughts is interesting.
Examining articles published in 2020 and 2021 that cite the work of Von Thünen,
more than 27% are in German, 60% are on agro-environmental issues, and very
few are concerned with urban and regional economic issues. Interestingly, there is
one that refers to urban sustainability, raising questions about urban scaling and the
benefits of living in cities (Sugara and Kennedy 2021).

16%
Annual Change in Citations per Author

14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
-2%1850 1900 1950 2000
-4%
Year
Von Thünen David Ricardo
Adam Smith Jean Baptiste Say

Fig. 6 Change in Google Scholar citations per year

Johann Heinrich Von Thünen (1783–1850) … 85

5 Policy and Societal Impact of Von Thünen’s Studies

Economists, geographers, agronomists, and regional scientists mainly recall Von

Thünen from a historical perspective, with much of that body of literature consisting
of academic explanation of the Von Thünen rings, as presented in the first part of his
book. Nevertheless, there are not many works that treat space neither as a continuum
nor as a productive space as Von Thünen did.
On the other hand, the operational treatment of complementarities within the
rotation system analysis emerged a long time before the work on input–output tables
proposed by Wassily Leontief (1986) and his followers, including Walter Isard and
Thomas Langford (1971).
Regarding agglomeration economies, it is clear that the ideas of Von Thünen
clarified how cities grow, but there was no development of the question of where
cities grow, why some cities grow more than others, and why diversity is more
absent in peripheral areas than in central ones, this last, a matter confirmed by Paul
Krugman (1991) and others, although using a discrete space of two cities.
Even in the field of spatial justice, the arguments of Von Thünen were mainly used
to associate spatial justice with social justice (Harvey 1992), rather than to explore
the seminal separation of spatial justice (not analyzed by Von Thünen) from matters
of social justice carefully analyzed in his works on the natural wage.
Summing up, Von Thünen was ignored by many and simplistically destroyed by
others; he seemed to have unfinished work, and the formula of the natural wage in
his tomb may be an indication of that. Most probably, the assumption that land rent
will not affect the trade-off between wages and profits could be relaxed to open the
analysis of the optimal distribution of land rent, taking into account its multiplier
effects in the central city or in the peripheral cities. One may only agree with Masahisa
Fujita (2000) that there is much still to explore in Von Thünen’s thoughts.

References

Albergaria, H., J.C. Ribeiro, J.F. Santos, F. Carballo-Cruz, J.P. Pontes, O. Figueiredo, and P.
Guimarães. 2009. A teoria da localização. In Compêndio de economia regional, eds. J. Costa
and P. Nijkamp. Lisboa, Portugal: Principia.
Alonso, W. 1964. Location and land use. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Backhaus, U. 2009. Johann Heinrich Gottlob von Justi (1717–1771): Health as part of a state’s capital
endowment. In The beginnings of political economy: The European heritage in economics and
the social sciences, ed. J.G. Backhaus, 171–195. Boston, MA: Springer.
Baumont, C., and J.M. Huriot, 1996. De von Thünen à Fujita: continuité ou rupture? [Rapport
de recherche]. Dijon, France: Laboratoire d’analyse et de techniques économiques (LATEC),
Université de Bourgogne.
Christaller, W. 1933. Die zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland. (The Central Place Theory in Southern
Germany). Jena: Gustav Fischer.
Cronon, W. 2009. Nature’s metropolis: Chicago and the Great West. New York: W. W. Norton.
86 T. P. Dentinho

Frambach, H. 2012. Johann Heinrich Von Thünen: A founder of modern economics. In Handbook
of the history of economic thought: Insights on the founders of modern economics, ed. J.G.
Backhaus, 299–322. Berlin: Springer.
Fujita, M. 2000. Thünen and the new economic geography. KIER Discussion Paper 521. Kyoto,
Japan: Kyoto University.
Furtado, C. 1962. A pré-revolução brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Fundo de Cultura.
Hall, P. (ed.) 1966. Von Thünen’s isolated state. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Harvey, D. 1992. Social justice, postmodernism and the city. International Journal of Urban and
Regional Research 16 (4): 588–601.
Hillier, F.S., and G.J. Lieberman. 2014. Introduction to operations research. New York: McGraw
Hill.
Huriot, J.M. 1989. La rente de Thünen retrouvée (quelques réflexions en histoire de la pensée
spatiale). [Rapport de recherche]. Dijon, France: Laboratoire d’analyse et de techniques
économiques (LATEC), Université de Bourgogne.
Isard, W., and T.W. Langford. 1971. Regional input–output study: Recollections, reflections, and
diverse notes on the Philadelphia experience. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Justi, J. 1764. Gesammelte politische und Finanzschriften. (Collected political and financial publi-
cations 3 volumes, I + II (1761), III). Cameralism was a technique applied by practitioners to
the different branches of the state and the economy.
Komorzynski, J.V. 1894. Thünen’s naturgemässer Arbeitslohn (Thünen’s natural wages). Zeitschrift
Für Volkswirtschaft, Socialpolitik Und Verwaltung 3 (1): 27–62.
Kourtit, K., V. Royuela, T.P. Dentinho, and P. Nijkamp. 2016. Envisioning experiments on regional
science frontiers. Investigaciones Regionales – Journal of Regional Research 36: 35–61.
Krugman, P.R. 1991. Geography and trade. Leuven: Leuven University Press.
Leontief, W. 1986. Input–output economics, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lösch, A. 1954. The economics of location. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. English
translation of Die Raümliche Ordnung der Wirtschaft, Jena: G. Fisher (1940).
Marshall, A. 1892. The economics of industry. London: Macmillan.
Moore, H.L. 1895. Von Thünen theory of natural wages. Quarterly Journal of Economics 9 (3/4):
291–304.
Parr, J.B., G.J.D. Hewings, and J. Sohn. 2002. Agglomeration and trade: Some additional
perspectives. Regional Studies 36 (6): 675–684.
Pearse, P.H. 1990. Introduction to forestry economics. Vancouver: University of British Columbia
Press.
Perroux, F. 1950. Economic spaces: Theory and applications. Quarterly Journal of Economics 64
(1): 90–97.
Peterson, A. 1944. Thunen’s Isolierter Staat. Die Landwirtschaft als Glied der Volkswirtschaft.
Berlin: Paul Parey.
Ponsard C. 1983. Johann-Heinrich von Thunen. In History of spatial economic theory, au. C.
Ponsard, 13–18. Berlin: Springer.
Prebisch, R. 1949. O desenvolvimento da América Latina e seus principais problemas. Revista
Brasileira de Economia, ano 3, no. 3, Rio de Janeiro: Fundação Getúlio Vargas, setembro de
1949.
Quesnay, F. 1766. Analyse de la formule arithmétique du tableau économique de la distribution
des dépenses annuelles d’une Nation agricole. Journal de l’Agriculture, du Commerce et des
Finances 2 (3): 11–41.
Rau, K. 1823. Ubber die Kameralwissenschaft: Entwicklung ihres Wesens und ihrer Theile.
Heidelberg: Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung.
Ricardo, D. 1817. On the principles of political economy and taxation. London: John Murray.
Translated into Portuguese as: Princípios de Economia Política e Tributação. Fundação Calouste
Gulbenkian (2015).
Samuelson, P.A. 1983. Thünen at two hundred. Journal of Economic Literature 15: 1468–1488.
Johann Heinrich Von Thünen (1783–1850) … 87

Say, J.-B. 1803. Traité d’economie politique. A treatise on political economy or the production,
distribution, and consumption of wealth. Kitchener, ON, Canada: Batoche Books (2001).
Schneider, E. 1934. Johann Heinrich Von Thünen. Econometrica 2 (1): 1–12.
Schumacher-Zarchlin, H. 1868. Johann Heinrich von Thünen, Ein Forcherleben. Rostock: Leopold.
Smith, A. 1776. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. University of Chicago
Press 1977. ISBN 0-226-76374-9.
Sugara, L., and C. Kennedy. 2021. Urban scaling and the benefits of living in cities. Sustainable
Cities and Society 66: Article 102617.
Von Thaer, A.D. 1809–1812. Grundsätze der rationellen Landwirthschaft. Translated into English
in 1844. In The principles of agriculture, eds. W. Shaw and Cuthbert W. Johnson.
Von Thünen, J.H. 1826. Derisolierte Statt in Belziehung auf Landwirtschaft und National ökonomie.
Part I. Hamburg: Pethers.
Von Thünen, J.H. 1842. Derisolierte Statt in Belziehung auf Landwirtschaft und National ökonomie.
(Edited and commented by Hermann Lebmann and Lutz Werner in 1990, based on the outlines
of 1818/1819 and editions of 1826 and 1842, Berlin, Akademie.)
Von Thünen, J.H. 1850a. Derisolierte Statt in Belziehung auf Landwirtschaft und National
ökonomie. (Part I and Section 1 of Part II, Edited by Aalen, Scientia in 1990, University of
Toronto.)
Von Thünen, J.H. 1850b. Derisolierte Statt in Belziehung auf Landwirtschaft und National
ökonomie. Part I and Section 1 of Part II. In The Isolated State, eds. H. Waentig in 1910, and
1921, by Jena, Fischer in 1930, by Stuttgart, Fischer in 1966 and by Aalen, Scientia in 1990.
Von Thünen, J.H. 1863. Der isolirte Staat in Beziehung auf Landwirthschaft und Nationalökonomie.
Rostock: G.B. Leopold.
Walker, R.T. 2021. Geography, Von Thünen and Tobler’s first law: Tracing the evolution of the
concept. Geographical Review 111: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00167428.2021.1906670.
Walker, R.T. 2022. Geography, Von Thünen, and Tobler’s first law: Tracing the evolution of a
concept. Geographical Review 112 (4): 591–607. https://doi.org/10.1080/00167428.2021.190
6670.
Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father
of Industrial Location Theory
and Supply-Chain Design

Richard L. Church

Alfred Weber. Photo source Heidelberg University

R. L. Church (B)
Department of Geography, University of California, Santa Barbara, 1632 Ellison Hall, Santa
Barbara, CA 93106-4060, USA
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 89

P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_4
90 R. L. Church

1 Introduction

In 1909, Weber published his classic book, Über den standort der Industrien,
a book that describes many first principles of economic production and loca-
tion (Weber 1909). This book is his only major work in the field of economic geog-
raphy. Most textbooks in location science, economic geography, and regional science
describe his theory as a simple triangular construct of three points in geographical
space, two that represent needed localized raw materials and one that represents a
market. The central problem is that of locating the most efficient point of production
of a good, using the raw materials that are transported to the factory, and shipping
the product to the market. Weber suggests that all else held constant, the optimal
location of the factory would be the location at which the sum of the three transport
costs is a minimum.
This problem representation was also described in earlier work by Launhardt
(1872). A geometrically derived solution to this problem is often attributed to Georg
Pick, which is given in an appendix of Weber’s book, even though Launhardt and
others (e.g., Simpson 1750) had developed methods for determining the optimal solu-
tion many years and even centuries before Weber. Because of more recent recognition
of Launhardt and, perhaps, a more appropriate attribution to some of these earlier
developments, the importance of Weber’s construct seems to have diminished, and
many have stated that Weber has been given undue prominence for his classic work.
The goal of this chapter is to set the record straight. Simply put, Weber was,
and should be considered, henceforth, an early giant in the field of regional science,
primarily due to the more nuanced constructs that are described in his seminal book,
but which have, for the most part, been overlooked. It will be shown that his location
theory was extensive, reaching far beyond a simple “triangular figure,” and relevant
to many of the problems faced by industries today, including the design of supply
chains.
This chapter is organized as follows. Section 2 provides a short biography of
Alfred Weber. Section 3 presents the emerging consensus of Weber’s contributions
with respect to location theory. Section 4 discusses, in detail, the locational triangle
with its relationship to the emerging location literature. Section 5 returns the focus to
specific elements of Weber’s paradigm that have been overlooked and are even more
relevant today to regional scientists, industrial engineers, and economic geographers.
Section 6 presents a final appraisal, along with a summary of some of the impacts of
Weber’s work.

2 Short Biography

Alfred Weber was born in 1868 in Prussia. His father, Max Weber, Sr., was quite
educated and held a doctorate of law. Max, Sr., served in a number of positions that
included governmental posts and leadership in political groups. Among these was a
Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father of Industrial Location … 91

stint as a city magistrate in Berlin. He also served as a leader in the National Liberal
Party. During much of Alfred’s formative years, his father served in the Prussian
House of Representatives and was a member of the German Empire Reichstag. Many
notable scholars and politicians were regular visitors at Alfred’s family home due to
the prominence of his father. This certainly was a fertile environment for a young
budding scholar in the late 1800s. Alfred was one of eight children, although two
died at an early age. His older brother, Maximillian (Max), also became a notable
scholar.
To understand Alfred fully, one also has to understand Max. Max started his studies
at the University of Heidelberg and eventually moved to the University of Berlin. He
worked as a junior lawyer, passed an examination to practice law, and, as well, earned
a doctorate of laws. This was followed by the completion of a habilitationsschrift on
Roman agrarian history and its significance to the law. Shortly after, Max joined the
faculty of the University of Berlin. Max is considered to be one of the founders of
modern sociology. His early writings had a profound effect on this field, and they no
doubt had a significant influence on Alfred. Alfred followed Max into an academic
career as well. He started his university studies at the University of Berlin, where
Max had finished his studies, completed a doctorate in 1895, and, in 1899, started
teaching there, just as his brother Max had. Alfred left Berlin in 1904 for a short
stint at the University of Prague. In 1907, he joined the faculty at the University of
Heidelberg, just as Max had done in 1896. Alfred remained at Heidelberg for the
rest of his academic career. Two years after he joined the University of Heidelberg,
he published his classic book on the Theory of the Location of Industries. Although
he retired in 1933, he remained active in his writings until he died, at the age of 90,
in 1958.
Alfred Weber is known both as an economist and a sociologist. His main contri-
bution to economics is Theory of the Location of Industries, which was published in
German in 1909. Carl Friedrich translated Weber’s book into English in 1929, which
was published by the University of Chicago. It is this English version of Weber’s
work that brought his work to prominence. But Alfred was highly influenced by his
brother’s work in sociology, as well as by his father’s political perspective. Alfred
is best known in the field of sociology for his work Kulturgeschichte als Kultur-
soziologie, published in 1935, which explores the relationship between knowledge
and culture. From the 1920s on, Weber was so enmeshed in the studies of history,
philosophy, and culture that his early work in economics appears to be but a footnote
in his academic career. However, his book on the theory of industrial location was
an early view on industrial development and clearly influenced regional scientists
and economists, including Palander (1935), Hoover (1937), Isard (1949), and Moses
(1958). It is interesting to note that scholars either know about Alfred Weber for his
location book or for his works on culture and history, but not for both. From what
I know from discussions I had with Walter Isard, I suspect he was quite aware of
Alfred’s accomplishments in cultural sociology. But Isard was definitely influenced
by Weber’s industrial location book and covered elements of this work in his book,
Location and Space-Economy, as well as in many papers.
92 R. L. Church

3 An Emerging Perspective on Weber’s Work on Industrial

Location

It seems that every regional scientist knows something about Alfred Weber and his
industrial location model that involves the optimal location of a factory that produces
a product, requires two localized raw materials, and serves one market center, where
the objective is to minimize the costs of transportation of the raw materials and the
finished product. If you hold demand, prices, and labor costs to be constants, then it
is an easy task to design a production plant to efficiently produce enough product to
meet demand. Weber divides raw materials into two classes: ubiquitous and localized.
If all materials are ubiquitous, then it would make sense to locate the factory at the
place of consumption or market. But, if some of the raw materials are localized,
then they must be transported to the place of production. What is left is to locate the
facility in such a manner that the sum of all transportation costs is minimized.
The problem is typically depicted as a location triangle, as given in Fig. 1a. All
diagrams in this chapter that represent some form of a Weber problem involve trian-
gles to represent localized raw material sources, circles to represent demand/markets,
and squares to represent the factory location. The fact that this locational triangle is

Fig. 1 Depiction of the classical locational figure of Weber showing its similarity to the triangular
problem of Fermat to find the interior point minimizing the sum of the distance to the vertices.
Weber’s figure is usually called the “locational triangle,” but Weber viewed this as a simple form
of a more complex diagram, simple enough to convey that the industrial activity will be placed
somewhere within the region of points defining the geography of the problem. Here, in Weber’s
figure and in subsequent diagrams, circles represent points of demand, triangles represent raw
material locations, and squares represent factory location(s). Source Drawn by the author
Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father of Industrial Location … 93

a universally understood view among geographers, economists, and regional scien-

tists is due to widescale coverage of this model in introductory courses in economic
geography, location science, industrial engineering, and production and operations
management.
Weber in his classic book also made several important observations about produc-
tion orientation and agglomeration. Depending upon the product being made and the
relative amounts of raw materials being used, Weber described the pull in locating
a plant toward a resource or close to a market: toward a resource when most of the
weight of the resource is being consumed in the production of the product and close to
the market when the weights of ubiquitous materials make up a considerable portion
of the final product. In fact, Weber goes into great detail about the role of relative
weights of materials in factory location. He also suggested that certain elements of
the landscape fabric would evolve with the introduction of an industry. This includes
the rise of a specialized labor force, and even infrastructure that would support certain
types of industries. Such an emerging infrastructure may include specialized educa-
tional programs, transportation elements like rail sidings, and supporting industries
(making the screws and other products that may be needed in an assembled product
of some other firm). Weber stated that these evolving elements supported an agglom-
eration of associated functions. That said, is this the total sum of Weber’s book? Do
we need to look any further than what we have read in introductory texts on Weber,
or did Weber actually create a much richer theory of industrial location? That is, have
most of us overlooked something in his book or maybe never read it? Besides, today,
many have changed their focus to understanding the factors and policies which give
rise to an industry in a region rather than the process of location selection.
Before digging deeper into Weber’s classic, I would be completely remiss if I did
not recognize the discussions of Weber by Pinto (1977) and Perreur (1998). Pinto
(1977) was the first to raise questions concerning the importance of Weber when he
stated that the industrial location triangle was actually proposed by Launhardt in the
1870s, nearly forty years before Weber’s book. In fact, Launhardt’s construct was
more nuanced than Weber’s, as Launhardt was interested in the construction of the
underlying transport infrastructure as well. This lack of long overdue attribution is
due to the fact that Launhardt’s work was never translated from German and, for the
most part, remained in relatively obscure manuscripts. Perreur (1998) also discussed
Weber in light of Launhardt and even asked the question: “Should we forget about
Weber?” To be accurate here, it should be noted that Perreur answered this question
by stating that Weber’s discussion of specialized labor and agglomeration tendencies
were, in fact, groundbreaking critical observations, but, like Pinto, he credited the
location triangle to Launhardt (1872). Others (e.g., Laporte et al. 2015) have since
followed this line of criticism and have begun to give principal credit to Launhardt
and not to Weber.
Another undercurrent in the discussion of the location triangle is that the “triangle
problem” arose in the mathematical literature several hundred years earlier (see for a
detailed explanation Wesolowsky 1993). It is stated that Fermat posed the following
mathematical puzzle: Given three points, what is the location of a fourth point that
minimizes the distances to the other three points? Note that this puzzle was a purely
94 R. L. Church

geometrical one and was not related to anything that was economic or practical
for that matter (it is depicted in Fig. 1b). Wesolowsky was not acquainted with
Launhardt, but he was with the developments of Calverli, Torricelli, Steiner, and
Simpson. He concluded in his review of the Weber problem that the naming of this
problem was due to the “imperialistic control of the economists.” To be perfectly
clear, the problem posed by Fermat was purely a puzzle, whereas the one proposed by
Launhardt and Weber described a problem that deals with the efficient location of an
economic activity. Furthermore, the problem proposed by Fermat was but a special
case of what was described by Launhardt and Weber. This is because Launhardt
and Weber required hauling various weights of materials to the factory as well as
hauling the finished product to the market. Even though the costs of shipping were a
function of distance, they varied depending upon the amounts needed from a given
source, amounts of product supplied to the demand, the attributes of the materials
and products (bulky, dense, breakable, etc.), and the transport mode. The assumption
in the Fermat problem is that the distances to the three points are just distances alone,
making it an unweighted sum of distances problem. Since Fermat’s problem is just
a special case of Launhardt’s and Weber’s, it is quite presumptuous of Wesolowsky
to call the naming an imperialistic move on the part of economists!
Altogether, past reviews and discussion in the regional science literature (e.g.,
Pinto 1977; Perreur 1998) and location science literature (Laporte et al. 2015;
Wesolowsky 1993) have intimated or even outright suggested that Launhardt be
credited with this problem. Such conclusions reflect a lack of understanding of what
Weber proposed. I hold the view that this is probably due to the fact that most if
not all of the current researchers in our field have not read Weber’s book but only
derivative works in textbooks and review papers. Without a full understanding of
Weber, beyond the aspect of agglomeration and deagglomeration, one could easily
ask the same question that Perreur (1998) did: Should we forget Weber? The main
goal of this chapter is to put Weber’s work into perspective, describe the richness of
Weber’s paradigm, and demonstrate without a doubt that Weber was way beyond his
time, contributed a fundamental understanding to efficient resource allocation and
industrial location, and belongs among the group of luminaries such as Koopmans,
Beckmann,1 and Kantorovich (Koopmans 1951; Koopmans and Beckmann 1957;
Kantorovich 1939).

4 Understanding the Details and History of the Locational

Triangle

To fully understand how recent scholars have touted the work of Launhardt over
Weber, it is first instructive to present Launhardt’s model. The problem is basically
the same as what is depicted in Fig. 1a, except there is an additional element: The

1For a discussion of Martin Beckmann’s contributions, which place him in the pantheon of Great
Minds in Regional Science, see Mulligan (2020).
Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father of Industrial Location … 95

costs of developing the transport links are also included rather than just the haulage
costs. For the sake of brevity, consider that the raw material sources are numbered
and indexed by i, the markets or demands are indexed by j, and let the location of
the factory be defined as point (x , y). Consider the following notation:
V: the annual interest and principal cost and the yearly cost of maintenance cost
per kilometer, associated with the building of a conveyance system (road or
rail)
C: the transportation cost per ton per kilometer
ti : the distance from point i to location at (x, y) where i represents a raw material
location.
d j : the distance from the location at (x, y) to point j where j represents the
location of market j = 1
wiR : the volume (tons) of annual traffic needed to be hauled from source where
i = 1 or 2.
wM j : the volume (tons) of annual traffic needed in supplying the market j = 1.

Using this notation, we can pose the following transportation investment and
location problem: Find the point (x, y) which minimizes Z, where:
     
Z = V + cw1S t1 + V + cw2S t2 + V + cw1M d1 (1)

Equation (1) represents the essence of Launhardt’s model. It involves locating the
factory in order to minimize the sum of transport costs as well as the investment costs
of the underlying infrastructure needed to convey the raw materials to the factory
and the finished product to the market. Launhardt assumed that all distances were
calculated as Euclidean, as did Weber and Fermat. If we let V = 0 (no infrastructure
investment), then the model is that of Weber. If we let V = 0 and all of the cw
terms = 1 (nothing is transported, only distances count), then we have essentially the
Fermat problem. Thus, the Fermat problem is a special case of the Weber problem,
and the Weber problem is a special case of the Launhardt problem. So, if this is all
there is, one can easily view Launhardt’s model as being superior to that of Weber.
But, to hold this view, one needs to ignore most of Weber’s book.
It is worth noting that Simpson (1750) proposed a weighted version of the Fermat
problem and developed a method to optimally solve it. So, technically, Simpson
had developed a solution method for Weber’s construct of three points more than
150 years before Weber’s book. I am unaware of any early literature that suggests a
practical application to this problem until Launhardt (1872). Launhardt also devel-
oped a solution method for Problem (1), which has since been used in forestry
(Greulich 1995) and recently described in Laporte et al. (2015) as an overlooked
development. Consequently, the method developed by Pick to solve the three-point
problem of Weber (given in the appendix of Weber’s book) was not really necessary
as it had been formally solved twice before.
Given the emerging view that Weber’s construct was not new and that there already
existed methods for its solution, you can perhaps understand how Weber’s work has
96 R. L. Church

been discounted today. But before I attempt to set the record straight, let me quickly
review a few key model and solution developments that followed the work of Weber.
Later, it will be clear that these developments have tended to nibble at the edges of
Weber’s paradigm rather than tackle the key problems described by Weber.
Andres Vasonyi, working under the pseudonym of Weiszfeld, published an article
in a Japanese journal that was written in French (Weiszfeld 1937). This article
presented an algorithm for solving an n-point Weber problem. That is, he solved
a weighted n-point problem involving Euclidean distance. Some refer to this as a
minisum problem on a plane, where the term “minisum” represents minimizing
the sum of weighted distances to a number of points. Although there is one issue
of convergence that was neglected by Vasonyi, this article went unnoticed in the
English literature until many years later. In the 1960s, Cooper (1963), Kuhn and
Kuenne (1962), and Vergin and Rogers (1967) each independently developed a Weis-
feld style of algorithm for the weighted n-point problem. Vergin and Rogers (1967)
also proposed a simple procedure for solving this problem optimally when using a
Manhattan or grid metric. Wersan et al. (1962) proposed a liner programming model
for this same problem for Manhattan or grid distances as an approach for locating
an incinerator within a city. Kuhn and Kuenne and Cooper called their problem an
extension of the Weber problem, that is, a generalized Weber problem due to that
fact that their problems involved more than three points.
Within the regional science literature, Isard (1956) described several location
problems and used isocost contour lines (isodapanes) to describe the composite costs
across a landscape for the location of a facility. He correctly attributed this approach
to Weber, who first suggested the construction of isotims and isodapanes. Such cost
terrains are easily calculated today using tools such as MATLAB, which did not exist
a century ago. That is, Weber proposed a solution/visualization methodology that can
be used to identify the optimal (lowest cost) point as well as easily find all solutions
which are within a given percentage of optimality. Cooper (1964) also proposed a
multi-facility form of the Euclidean minisum problem, where the objective is to find
the optimal location of p facilities, where each of the n points is assigned to their
closest located facility, and where the total weighted distance of all n assignments
is minimized. Cooper (1964) considered this problem a generalization of Weber’s
because he addressed a multi-facility location problem and assumed that Weber did
not. This research work is followed by a number of articles that improve on the basic
solution algorithm, propose methods to handle cases of negative weights (Drezner
and Wesolowsky 1991), address problems where distances are asymmetric (Drezner
and Wesolowsky 1989), deal with the existence of linear or polygonal barriers (Katz
and Cooper 1981; Klamroth 2001), as well as other elements. But these developments
never really address the central problems raised by Weber, because Weber is viewed
through the lens of a location triangle and not his complete paradigm.
In the next section, I describe a number of major issues that most of the research
literature has pretty much ignored, and that are why, in my opinion, these develop-
ments have tended to nibble at the edges of Weber’s paradigm rather than to tackle
the key problems described by Weber.
Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father of Industrial Location … 97

5 Back to Weber: A More Complete Picture of His

Paradigm

I use the term paradigm here to suggest a larger and more complete framework of
location problems instead of the term location triangle, a terminology never used by
Weber: He called it a “locational figure.” That is, Weber has been pigeonholed with a
problem consisting of three points, whereas his book describes a richer and far more
complex view of factory location. This will quickly be apparent in this section.
Weber used a three-point construct to convey the spatial properties of the location
problem, but he never stated that the key problem was relegated to three points. His
view was that the central problem could involve a number of different raw materials
that were sourced locally and possibly many markets. When Kuhn and Kuenne
(1962) suggested a solution method for an n-point location problem, they called it
the generalized Weber problem because they erroneously viewed Weber’s construct
as consisting of three points only. Figure 2a depicts the problem viewed by Kuhn
and Kuenne as a generalized Weber problem, which is comprised of a number of
points all being served by a central facility. The problem as described by Kuhn and
Kuenne is to minimize the total weighted distance of serving all demand. Figure 2b
depicts a slightly more complex version of the classic form of Weber’s locational
figure. The depiction in Fig. 2b is based on text given in the English translation of
Weber (1929). Figure 2b contains a simple location problem where there are more
than three localized raw materials (see Weber 1929, p. 64) and more than one market
where the product may be distributed “for all other places of consumption for which it
gives better transportation costs…” in all directions (Weber 1929, p. 71). The major
distinction between Fig. 2a, b is not in the number of points, but in recognizing that
there is a difference in the direction of raw materials and product flows, where raw
materials are brought to the facility and products are taken to market areas. At first,
one might consider this to be such a slight distinction, and that it is hardly worth
mentioning. However, this distinction is a key to understanding Weber’s paradigm.
When locating one facility where there is a set of fixed and limited raw material
location sources (one source for each needed raw material) and one or more markets,
the transportation costs are not dependent on the direction of the material and product
transport. Consequently, such a simple construct can be solved by the methodology
proposed by Weiszfeld (1937) or any of the later developments. This approach does
not handle all of the components of the problem described by Weber when stating
that the locational figure represents the closest sources of each needed raw material.
This means that, as a factory position is moved across a landscape, its sources of
allocated raw materials will change. Thus, the location of the factory will, in part,
be determined by which given raw material source is closer or has least overall cost,
as well as by which markets are to be served. When there is more than one source
of a given raw material, then the optimal factory location will be controlled, in part,
by raw material resource allocations.
Looking beyond a locational figure that is distilled to three points, the actual
problem landscape envisioned by Weber is more like that given in Fig. 3 (see Weber
98 R. L. Church

Fig. 2 Depiction of Kuhn and Kuenne’s problem along with a depiction of one form of Weber’
paradigm. Kuhn and Kuenne (1962) locate a facility to serve a number of demands, while Weber
locates a facility that considers supply flows (from needed localized raw material sources) and
product flows (to demands) simultaneously. Source Drawn by the author

1929, p. 68, where he describes competing locations of the same type of raw material).
Figure 3 depicts several options for sourcing two different raw materials, while
serving one market. (Fig. 3a depicts a possible location at position A, and Fig. 3b
depicts a possible factory location at position B.) The closest sources of raw material
2 change depending upon the factory location. Weber summarized this by stating:
“Naturally that deposit will be chosen whose use entails the smallest transportation

Fig. 3 Depiction of a problem described by Weber in which multiple sources of a given type of
localized raw material exist. a Depicts the raw material allocations made when factory is positioned
at location A, and b depicts the allocations made when the factory is positioned at location B. Thus,
the mathematical formulation of this problem must contain allocation variables. Source Drawn by
the author
Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father of Industrial Location … 99

costs” (Weber 1929, p. 70). He even demonstrated that the closest source of a raw
material to a given market may not be the one used in the product that is shipped to that
market (Weber 1929, p. 68). To model this, we need to introduce allocation variables
for each of the raw materials and their sources, a fact that has been overlooked for over
100 years. A formulation of this problem, which involves alternate sources for each
needed raw material along with source allocation variables, has recently appeared
in Church (2019), and details for solving this problem can be found in Murray et al.
(2020).
Weber stated:
…it can and will happen that the normal output of the natural deposits of the most favorable
[raw material] may not be sufficient to supply the demand of the place of consumption. In
this case, less favorable … material deposits will come into play. (Weber 1929, p. 70)

Technically speaking, Weber is describing the case where several sources of a given
raw material may need to be used.
Taking the same example presented in Fig. 3, Fig. 4 depicts the case where two
sources of raw material 2 need to be used in order to meet the requirements for
making enough product to meet the demand for the market.
If all raw material sources are large enough to satisfy all demand for each needed
material at a given factory, then there is no need to go beyond the closest raw material
source for a specific factory location. But, if sources do not have the capacity to fully
satisfy the needs of a factory, then the issue is to purchase from multiple sources
the needs while minimizing transport costs. Weber in his construct clearly assumed
that the market price for a given raw material was the same at every location and
was based upon taking ownership at the location of the source. To include this in a

Fig. 4 Weber’s envisioned case where raw material sources may have a maximum capacity to
provide a given material, and additional sources of the same raw material may need to be used.
Here, the factory requires raw material 2 from source 2 and source 3. The allocations and factory
placement represent that point at which the sum of all weighted distances is minimized. Source
Drawn by the author
100 R. L. Church

model, one needs to introduce variables that represent the amounts of material that
are acquired at each raw material source. In addition, constraints must be included
to ensure that the right amount of each raw material is shipped to the factory and
ensure that raw material allocations do not exceed the capacity of any source (see
Church 2019).
One of the issues that I believe is misunderstood is the definition of what a raw
material represents. Although many texts describe the locational figure using primary
materials like iron ore and coal, Weber’s view of needed materials included products
from other factories. That is, most texts suggest that the factory produced a product
from primary materials, whereas Weber clearly states that this is not necessarily the
case. For example, if a company makes a product that requires sheet metal, screws,
and paint, then either the company considers these components to be raw materials,
or it makes these materials as well from primary sourced materials. Weber stated that
some of these needed materials might be produced by the same firm in a system of
supply that may easily involve multiple locations. He described this in the following
excerpt:
Let us suppose that an industry is influenced only by the cost of transportation, and let us
neglect all of the deviating influence of labor and agglomeration. What, given such assump-
tions, does it mean that the production process does need to be entirely performed at one
location, but split into a number of parts which may be completed at different locations? The
only cause which could lead to a resultant transfer of the parts to different locations would
obviously be that some ton-miles would be saved in the process… (Weber 1929, p. 174)

What Weber described is a somewhat complex industrial system, where some

components may be produced at a given location and then be shipped to a second
factory where other items may be fabricated and assembled, including the items
produced at the first factory (see Fig. 5 as an example). That is, such systems involved
staged production, where several stages of production are to be located. Suggesting
such a problem clearly places Weber as having not only an understanding of a possible

Fig. 5 Depiction of a
two-stage production system,
with different
resources/materials needed
at each stage. Source Drawn
by the author
Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father of Industrial Location … 101

supply chain, but as having proposed a problem of locating a set of coordinated

facilities that at the final stage results in a finished product that is shipped to market
centers.
Such systems are not relegated to complex production systems, but even simple
ones as well. For example, Church (2019) discusses coffee production as a staged
system that fits exactly the issues raised by Weber in staged production. Coffee is
usually grown on small farms, picked as coffee cherries, and is brought to local buying
centers, where the crop is partially dried. The process of drying reduces the weight
as well as the costs of transport to a central production facility. At the plant, the beans
are extracted from the cherries and dried again. Then, the remaining beans are graded
and shipped for export. The major goal in accomplishing these processes as close to
the farm areas as possible is to minimize shipping costs, for the bean itself is only
20% of the weight of the cherry. The beans are then exported, and final processing,
like roasting, grinding, and packaging, takes place near the final market. Thus, this is
a split production system: one, which takes place near the farms, and a second, which
takes place near the markets. Weber summarized his comments on split production
systems by stating: “single location of production will be the exception and a split
of production into several locations will be the rule for productive processes which
can be technically split” (Weber 1929, p. 178).
One of the least understood elements in Weber’s text is his perspective on several
industrial plants that make the same product. The answer to this is a bit hidden
and scattered among several sections of his book. But, this is unquestionably within
the scope of Weber’s original work, as he broached the issue of multiple facilities
when describing that the “locational figures will always be individual or specific
for a particular plant. These weight figures are general, applying to all plants of the
same kind of production” (Weber 1929, p. 55). His vision appears to be that of a
landscape with a number of industrial plants of the same type. Each plant would
require resources for the production of the product, and each plant would serve a
set of markets (see Fig. 6 for an example). For each production plant, one can draw
a locational figure, which includes raw material sources supplying the plant and
markets served by the plant. A simple locational figure would involve a market and
one or more material sources. More complex ones would involve a host of material
sources and markets. Figure 6 depicts two production plants, along with what we
might call their unique resource and service sheds (analogous to watersheds). Each
resource and service shed represents a locational figure and represents a locational
problem.
From Weber’s perspective, each factory needs to be optimally placed within its
given resource and service shed, a strategy taken by Maranzana (1964) and Schultz
(1969) in early examples of solving a multiple facility location problem. Clearly,
Weber was interested in the placement of each factory at the optimal position within
its resource and service shed, but what Weber didn’t discuss was how the landscape
of service regions would be defined. He also didn’t state that this was the result of
one company making multiple location decisions or the result of the decisions of a
number of independent companies. Whatever the case, we shouldn’t view this as a
shortcoming, but rather a formalism that was emerging long before the techniques
102 R. L. Church

Fig. 6 Depiction of a multiple facility location problem. The numbers in the triangles signify the
type of raw material available at that location. Note that all demand is served by the two facilities,
and the raw material source 1 in the center of the diagram is shared by both production facilities.
Source Drawn by the author

of optimal resource allocation and mathematical programming had been formally

proposed. That is, before the Nobel Prize-winning work of Koopmans (1951) and
Kantorovich (1939).
There probably is a lingering question that you might have: Does this paradigm
actually fit the types of conditions that we see today? For example, China became
a powerhouse in manufacturing because of its cheap labor as compared to Europe
and North America. This was aided, of course, by significant government investment
and lax environmental policies. It would seem that a focus entirely on transport costs
would entirely miss moving production to such a distant location from the USA
or Europe to take advantage of low-cost labor and reduced costs of environmental
control. Before the era of containerized cargo, ships were loaded and unloaded by
longshoremen. This was a time-consuming and costly process, and ships often spent
more time in a port than at sea (a truly inefficient use of a transport vehicle). With the
exception of bulk cargo such as grain, coal, and iron ore, transport costs at sea were
high enough to hinder global trade except for products that were not manufactured
everywhere. In the late 1950s, Malcolm McLean experimented with shipping loaded
truck trailers between ports in the Gulf of Mexico and the east coast of the USA in
order to reduce trucking costs. This was so successful that he started to experiment
with using containers instead of trailers, which were easier to load on a ship and
could be stacked efficiently. By the mid-1960s, a great transition was made from
relying on costly hand loading of ships to using cargo containers. This led to a
substantial decrease in the per mile shipping costs for ocean transport. Weber stated
that different modes of transport could come into play, but his main focus in his
book was to describe those industries where transport costs played a major role in
Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father of Industrial Location … 103

deciding where a factory would be located. So, in this instance, how would China
be competitive as a manufacturing location when transport costs would be increased
substantially by moving a plant to China? That is, it seems that a global search for
cheap labor doesn’t fit into Weber’s paradigm. But, just like a number of complexities,
including split production, Weber raises what he calls “realities.” Cheap labor is such
a reality! Weber describes this issue in the following way:
Every change of location away from the point of minimum transportation costs to a favor-
able labor location means, in terms of transportation, a “deviation,” which lengthens the
transportation routes and raises transportation costs above those prevailing under the most
advantageous conditions. The changes of location can therefore take place only if the rise
in cost per ton of product which it causes is compensated, or more than compensated, by
savings of labor costs. (Weber 1929, p. 103)

Weber summarizes this reality issue in saying:

…a location can be moved from a point of minimum transportation costs…. only if the
savings in the cost of labor which this new place makes possible are larger than the additional
costs of transportation which it involves. (Weber 1929, p. 103)

Thus, Weber’s paradigm addresses this reality of today.

It is important to briefly discuss the notions of agglomeration and deagglomeration
in Weber’s theory. Weber raises the notion of agglomeration when discussing an
evolving industry or sector of industry. As an example, a specialized labor force
may emerge with the location of a factory. This could include workers that operate
equipment in a factory or even those who are trained to repair the equipment. Other
companies may want to take advantage of this trained labor force in locating a nearby
plant. Other forces of agglomeration, like an improved transport system, a water
system, streets, gasworks, etc., may also attract new unrelated industries. Industries
also might locate close to other companies when those companies produce products
that are required as raw materials in their products. Altogether, Weber describes a
number of issues associated with agglomeration and what he terms the accumulation
or distribution of industry. Weber notes that agglomeration may result in increased
expenses. For example, agglomeration will increase the demand for land, which will
result in a rise of land values. A rise in land values in one location will make other
locations more attractive (by comparison), which will lead to a deagglomeration or
the location of production at other locations. Weber states that: “all deagglomeration
tendencies start from the increase in economic rent (ground rent)” (Weber 1929,
p. 132). This leads to a weakening of agglomerative forces.
Finally, Weber discusses the notion of industrial strata, the links between indus-
tries, and the impacts that they have on location. Industries may be linked by their use
of materials, products, and labor. For example, one industry may need the products
of another industry to assemble their product. A specific case of this would be a
company that may not make screws, sheet metal, and paint, but may need all these
products to make bread boxes. That is, their manufacture is related to other compa-
nies’ products and where those companies’ production takes place. Consequently,
there is a whole fabric of production that evolves, and each new entrant is, in part,
controlled by previous developments on the landscape.
104 R. L. Church

6 Concluding Comments

Weber was instrumental in describing a theory of industrial location that has, for
the most part, been underappreciated. Although best known for his locational figure
in the simple form of a triangle and his theory of agglomeration, the key elements
of his locational construct have remained hidden in his text as most have relied on
derivative works for discussion of his work. It is clear that Launhardt developed
a location triangle before Weber, which was more complete in that it dealt with
both the transport of the materials and product, but also the investment in the mode
of transport. Launhardt’s construct clearly represented his engineering interests in
transport infrastructure investment. When removing the elements of the infrastruc-
ture investment from Launhardt’s model, the three-point problem of Launhardt is
equivalent to Weber’s three-point locational figure. However, Weber’s construct was
not really a three-point figure as it could involve many points of localized raw mate-
rials and market locations. Further, Weber envisioned a landscape where specific raw
materials did not exist at unique locations but were possibly quite numerous. This
factor requires the notion of resource allocation, a formalism beyond that of Laun-
hardt. Further, Weber clearly understood that production could be split into stages
at a series of production facilities, each located so as to minimize total transport
costs, where each facility is supplied by its nearest and least cost sources of needed
raw materials. This problem element alone places Weber as one of the originators of
supply-chain design. Finally, Weber’s perspective was not constrained to the location
of a single production plant for a given product, rather he conceived of a landscape of
plants, each serving their own set of nearby markets. If such a production system is
not reliant on localized raw materials, then this multi-plant location problem is equiv-
alent to the p-median problem, that is, a model designed to minimize transport costs
of weighted distances of serving all demand, where each demand or market is served
by its closest facility. Without a doubt, the details in Weber’s book describe a set of
problems which form the basis for, e.g., the p-median problem, supply-chain design,
and efficient resource allocation. Although Launhardt’s theory was a breakthrough,
Weber’s was a complex paradigm on a higher level.
While many texts in production and operations management describe the Weber
model as useful in factory location (or assign a Weber problem in homework exer-
cises), it is usually described as locating a factory to serve a set of customers. This
literature simply ignores the shipment of needed raw materials when describing the
Weber model. Geography and regional science texts present only the simplest of
depictions—that of the location triangle—when Weber himself described a rich and
complex set of problems. Although research dealing with the Weber problem has
addressed interesting facets of Weber’s original work, most nibble at the underlying
assumptions, rather than tackling the hard and complex problems that he posed.
Such works include solving a problem on a planar surface with polygonal barriers
to travel, linear barriers to travel, optimal placement of bridges across barriers, and
distance metrics other than Euclidean, but they have not addressed key issues such
Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father of Industrial Location … 105

as resources that are capacitated, staged production, and the inherent differences
between raw material resources and demand.
Most today would think that the level of production is not fixed to meet a specific
level of demand, but rather demand itself is a function of price, where price is
dictated by production, profit margins, inventory and sales costs, land costs, and
delivery costs. Therefore, the Weber paradigm is simple compared to what might be
viewed as a complete production and location problem. In addition, Weber did not
consider possible competition with other companies, or even the influence of product
differentiation. It took nearly fifty years for many of these factors to be addressed in
detail (see, for example, Isard 1956; Moses 1958; Koopmans and Beckmann 1957;
Alonso 1960).
It is my opinion that Weber was constrained by what was known in the mathe-
matical sciences of the day. Sure, the elements of calculus and classical constrained
optimization were known by the time Weber wrote his book. This even included the
concept of a Lagrangian function that was developed in the 1780s. But Karush–Kuhn–
Tucker conditions had not yet appeared (Karush 1939; Kuhn and Tucker 1951), nor
had the works of Kantorovich (1939), Koopmans (1951), and Koopmans and Beck-
mann (1957). These notable developments, along with the development of linear and
integer programming algorithms by Dantzig beginning in the late 1940s, helped form
a new field now called operations research (OR). The tools of OR have been instru-
mental in the formulation of many factory location and transport-flow problems that
have had wide application in industrial development (see, for example, Breitman and
Lucas 1987). My point is that Weber lacked the developments of OR, which could
have allowed him to translate his verbal statements of problem issues into formal
models.
Ackoff (1956) describes operations research as a science. He describes the process
of OR in six steps: (1) describing the problem, (2) constructing a mathematical
formulation of the problem, (3) deriving a solution for the model, (4) testing the
model and the solution derived from it, (5) determining the conditions under which
the solution may need to be modified, and (6) implementing the solution. In most
OR applications, many people may be involved: some describing the essence of a
problem, others formulating the appropriate mathematical model, and even others
solving the model and implementing the solution. In a more recent work, I have
argued that Weber had defined many different problems of industrial location and
resource allocation that clearly fit within the scope of step 1 of Ackoff’s description
of OR (Church 2019). What Weber couldn’t do was to use the tools that we have at
our fingertips today to formulate and solve such problems. That is, Weber knew the
essence of many problems faced by industry, described these functions, and looked
closely at specific instances when land costs, labor costs, and prices were held fixed.
With such a set of assumptions, he distilled the essence down to that of location based
upon minimizing transportation costs (raw materials and products). He recognized
that labor specialties may not be available everywhere and that other costs (e.g.,
land) may not be constant, but the modeling tools of the day constrained him in
bringing such problems to subsequent stages, like model formulation and solution.
Today, many of the problems suggested by Weber exist in network-based facility
106 R. L. Church

location models. However, with the notable exception of the recent work of Murray
et al. (2020), most of his problem constructs have not been solved with respect to a
continuous space domain.

References

Ackoff, R.L. 1956. The development of operations research as a science. Operations Research 4
(3): 265–295.
Alonso, W. 1960. A theory of the urban land market. Papers in Regional Science 6 (1): 149–157.
Breitman, R.L., and J.M. Lucas. 1987. PLANETS: A modeling system for business planning.
Interfaces 17 (1): 94–106.
Church, R.L. 2019. Understanding the Weber location paradigm. In Contributions to location
analysis, eds. H.A. Eiselt and V. Marianov, 69–88. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Cooper, L. 1963. Location-allocation problems. Operations Research 11 (3): 331–343.
Cooper, L. 1964. Heuristic methods for location-allocation problems. SIAM Review 6 (1): 37–53.
Drezner, Z., and G.O. Wesolowsky. 1989. The asymmetric distance location problem. Transporta-
tion Science 23 (3): 201–207.
Drezner, Z., and G.O. Wesolowsky. 1991. The Weber problem on the plane with some negative
weights. INFOR: Information Systems and Operational Research 29 (2): 87–99.
Greulich, F.E. 1995. Road network design: Optimal economic connection of three horizontal control
points on flat, uniform terrain. Journal of Forest Engineering 7 (1): 73–82.
Hoover, E.M. 1937. Location theory and the shoe and leather industries. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Isard, W. 1949. The general theory of location and space-economy. The Quarterly Journal of
Economics 63 (4): 476–506.
Isard, W. 1956. Location and space-economy. New York: Wiley.
Kantorovich, L.V. 1939. Mathematical methods of organizing and planning production. Manage-
ment Science 6: 366–422.
Karush, W. 1939. Minima of functions of several variables with inequalities as side constraints.
M.Sc. thesis, Department of Mathematics, University of Chicago.
Katz, I.N., and L. Cooper. 1981. Facility location in the presence of forbidden regions, I: Formulation
and the case of Euclidean distance with one forbidden circle. European Journal of Operational
Research 6 (2): 166–173.
Klamroth, K. 2001. Planar Weber location problems with line barriers. Optimization 49 (5/6):
517–527.
Koopmans, T.C. 1951. Analysis of production as an efficient combination of activities. In
Activity analysis of production and allocation, Cowles Commission for Research in Economics,
Monograph No. 13, ed. T.C. Koopmans, 33–97. New York: Wiley.
Koopmans, T.C., and M. Beckmann. 1957. Assignment problems and the location of economic
activities. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society 25 (1): 53–76.
Kuhn, H.W., and R.E. Kuenne. 1962. An efficient algorithm for the numerical solution of the
generalized Weber problem in spatial economics. Journal of Regional Science 4 (2): 21–33.
Kuhn, H.W., and A.W. Tucker. 1951. Nonlinear programming. In Proceedings of 2nd Berkeley
Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, ed. J. Newman, 481–492. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Laporte, G., S. Nickel, and F.S. da Gama (eds.). 2015. Location science, vol. 528. Berlin: Springer.
Launhardt, W. 1872. Kommercielle Tracirung der Verkehrswege. Zeitschrift Des Hannoverschen
Architekten Und Ingenieurvereins 515–534: 540.
Maranzana, F.E. 1964. On the location of supply points to minimize transport costs. Journal of the
Operational Research Society 15 (3): 261–270.
Alfred Weber (1868–1958): The Father of Industrial Location … 107

Moses, L.N. 1958. Location and the theory of production. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 72
(2): 259–272.
Mulligan, G.F. 2020. Martin Beckmann (1924–2017): Polymath theorist. In Great minds in regional
science, vol. 1, eds. P. Batey and D. Plane, 137–152. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature.
Murray, A.T., R.L. Church, and X. Feng. 2020. Single facility siting involving allocation decisions.
European Journal of Operational Research 284 (3): 834–846.
Palander, T. 1935. Beiträge zur standortstheorie. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.
Perreur, J. 1998. Industrial location theory in German thought—Launhardt and Weber. Recherches
Économiques De Louvain/louvain Economic Review 64 (1): 75–96.
Pinto, J.V. 1977. Launhardt and location theory: Rediscovery of a neglected book. Journal of
Regional Science 17 (1): 17–29.
Schultz, G.P. 1969. Facility planning for a public service system: Domestic solid waste collection.
Journal of Regional Science 9 (2): 291–307.
Simpson, T. 1750. The doctrine and application of fluxions. London: J. Nourse.
Vergin, R.C., and J.D. Rogers. 1967. An algorithm and computational procedure for locating
economic facilities. Management Science 13 (6): B-240.
Weber, A. 1909. Über den Standort der Industrien. Tübingen, Germany: J.C.B. Mohr.
Weber, A. 1929. Theory of the location of industries. Translated into English by C. Friedrich.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Weiszfeld, E. 1937. Sur le point pour lequel la somme des distances de n points donnés est minimum.
Tohoku Mathematical Journal, First Series 43: 355–386.
Wersan, S.J., J. Quon, and A. Charnes. 1962. Systems analysis of refuse collection and disposal
practices. In American public works association yearbook. American Public Works Association.
Wesolowsky, G.O. 1993. The Weber problem: History and perspectives. Location Science 1: 5–24
(now a part of Computers & Operations Research).
Corrado Gini (1884–1965): Versatile
Originator of Measures of Variability

Peter Rogerson

Corrado Gini. Photo source https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Corrado_Gini.jpg (last

accessed October, 2022) and Metron

1 Introduction

Although the bulk of Corrado Gini’s career predated the beginnings of the field of
regional science, his ideas and contributions have been, and continue to be, influential

P. Rogerson (B)
School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning, Arizona State University, Tempe,
AZ 85287, USA
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 109
P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_5
110 P. Rogerson

in the past and current work carried out in many areas of regional science research.
While the coefficient of inequality that bears his name is certainly his most well-
known contribution, his other work has also had a lasting impact and influence on
the development of important measures in geography and regional science.
After reviewing some of the highlights and pertinent aspects of Corrado Gini’s life
in the second section, the third section focuses on his well-known and eponymous
measure of inequality. The following four sections review his contributions to other
areas of measurement that have been critical for progress in a variety of research
areas in geography and regional science. These include: locating centers of popula-
tion; making international price comparisons; constructing indexes of agreement and
classification accuracy; and measuring diversity. The final section provides a short
discussion and conclusion.

2 Biography and Life

Corrado Gini (1884–1965) was born the son of wealthy landowners in Motta di
Livenza, in the province of Treviso, about 60 km northeast of Venice. He studied law,
mathematics, economics, and biology at the University of Bologna. He went on to
become well known in the fields of statistics, sociology, economics, and demography,
and his work has had a tremendous impact on many other fields, including geography
and regional science.
Gini’s first paper was published in 1908; in it, he provided evidence to support the
theory that the tendency to produce children of a given sex was an inheritable trait.1
Two years later, at the age of 26, he became Chair of Statistics at the University of
Cagliari; three years after that, he accepted the same position at Padua. He started the
journal Metron in 1920; the journal publishes papers on statistical methodology and
applications, and, at the time of writing this chapter, it was celebrating its centennial.
Gini was Chairman of the Central Institute of Statistics from 1926 to 1932.
He founded the Italian Committee for the Study of Population Problems in 1929,
and in 1931 this Committee organized its first Population Congress. In 1934, he
was responsible for the beginning of Genus, that committee’s journal of population
sciences that has continued until the present day. Later on, the Committee was respon-
sible for leading several international population congresses that were supported by
the United Nations and the International Union for the Scientific Study of Popula-
tion. The Committee also became widely known for its expeditions aimed at better
understanding isolated populations.
Gini’s honorary degrees include those awarded in economics, by the Catholic
University of the Sacred Heart in Milan (1932); sociology, by the University of
Geneva (1934); sciences, by Harvard University (1936), during the celebration of the

1A recent study provides strong support for this hypothesis (Gellatly 2009). In particular, men who
have many brothers are more likely to father sons; men with many sisters are more likely to father
daughters.
Corrado Gini (1884–1965): Versatile Originator of Measures … 111

300th anniversary of its founding; and social sciences, by the University of Cordoba,
Argentine (1963).
Extremely active in scientific societies, Gini was an Honorary Fellow of the Royal
Statistical Society, President of the Italian Genetics and Eugenics Society (1934),
President of the Italian Sociological Society (1937), and President of the Italian
Statistical Society (1941).
Although he could at times appear sociable and extroverted, these traits were not
those of his inner nature; more often, he came off as quiet and withdrawn. He was
married and had two daughters—and it does not appear that, with his professional
duties, he spent a great deal of time with his family. Giorgi (2001) writes: “As far as
human relationships were concerned, for Gini they were reduced to a minimum and
compliments were almost non-existent.” But Benedetti (1965), who knew Gini well,
tempers this (a bit) and says that this was only Gini’s way of progressing with his
work, and once he saw his way through on an issue or problem, he was very adept at
adjusting his intellect and needs to those of others. Benedetti also mentions that he
gave few lectures, instead spending time on conferences, scientific expeditions, and
writing what turned out to be over 800 papers! He relates that “Gini’s assistants and
some other professors used to work in small glass boxes, fitted with a microphone
which Gini could use to listen and talk, but the occupier of the box could only reply
if spoken to… as for the university students, Gini was practically unapproachable”
(Benedetti 1965, pp. 9–10).
There has also been some discussion regarding Gini’s relationship with Mussolini
and fascism. While Macuglia (2014) argues that his interest in eugenics and early
connections with Mussolini were associated with the rise of fascism, Castellano
(1965) argues that Gini’s “independent and impatient spirit” led him to resign his
position as President of the Central Institute of Statistics in 1932, following interfer-
ence of Mussolini, the rise of fascism, and the related desire for strong centralization
and control.
Although Corrado Gini worked primarily before the field of regional science
started, his ideas and contributions have been instrumental in the past and current
work carried out in many areas of regional science research. Indeed, a Google
search of “Gini” + “regional science” yields over 50,000 hits. Among his broad-
ranging works on statistical measurement that would serve as important antecedents
to research in regional science were: (a) the Gini coefficient, (b) median centers of
population, (c) the EKS index and international price comparisons, (d) indexes of
agreement and classification accuracy, and (e) measures of diversity.

3 The Gini Coefficient

Corrado Gini is most widely known of course for the coefficient of inequality that
bears his name. Shortly after Lorenz (1905) developed his curve to depict inequality
by plotting the relationship between two cumulative distributions, Gini (1912, 1921)
112 P. Rogerson

developed a numerical measure to accompany the curve. The Gini coefficient (some-
times referred to as the Gini index or the Gini ratio) is equal to the ratio of the area
lying between the 45-degree line and the Lorenz curve, to the full triangular area
beneath the 45-degree line. It is most often used to describe income inequality, but it
has also been widely used to describe variability in population density over a region
that has been divided into subregions and in many other contexts as well.
The Gini index may be expressed as a fraction or a percentage, and higher values
indicate more inequality. One interpretation in the context of income is that it repre-
sents the average amount that would have to be paid from one randomly chosen indi-
vidual to another (relative to the mean income), in order to equalize their incomes.
Accordingly, the Gini coefficient may be expressed as one-half of the relative mean
absolute difference between all pairs of incomes:
n n  

i=1 j=1 x i − x j
G= (1)
2n 2 x

The quantity 2G x is the sample estimate of Gini’s mean difference (GMD), defined
as the expected absolute value of the difference between two random observations—
that is, GMD = E[|X 1 − X 2 |], where X 1 and X 2 are independent observations from the
distribution of X. This is an alternative way of measuring variability (for instance,
the variance is E[(X 1 − X 2 )2 ]/2). Several properties of Gini’s mean difference as
a measure of variability make it more attractive than the variance for the case of
non-normal distributions, and these have been touted by Yitzhaki (2003).

3.1 Regional Aspects of Inequality Measures

Bickenbach and Bode (2008) note that measures of inequality have the property
of “anonymity”; like Rey and Janikas (2005), they point out that different spatial
patterns of income can yield identical measures of inequality. In studies of resi-
dential segregation, this is known as the “checkerboard problem” (White 1983). To
address the issue, Rey and Smith (2012) decompose the Gini coefficient into pair-
wise contributions between observations that are close, and those that are not close.
This allows spatial autocorrelation to be detected in addition to inequality. Rey and
Smith also trace the history of efforts to include space in measures of inequality
and segregation, citing the work of Arbia (2001), Dawkins (2004), and Wong (1993,
2003). A spatial version of the Gini index has been suggested by Dawkins (2004),
and another generalized spatial version has been set forth by Folch (2012) (see also
Folch and Rey 2016).
Panzera and Postiglione (2020) develop methods for assessing the effect of spatial
dependence on measures of regional inequality. They, and Dawkins (2007), base
their measures on Schechtman and Yitzhaki’s (1987) Gini correlation, which in
turn is based on the covariance of a variable X and the cumulative distribution of
Corrado Gini (1884–1965): Versatile Originator of Measures … 113

another variable Y (in their case, Y, is defined as a weighted sum of the nearby X’s),
standardized by Gini’s mean difference of X.
In addition to its use in the regional analysis of income inequality, locational Gini
coefficients were introduced by Krugman (1991). These he defined using Eq. 1, and
then dividing by 2, where x i is defined as the location quotient for an industry (say k)
in region i. In turn, the location quotient is simply region i’s share of employment in
sector k, divided by region i’s share of total employment. This locational Gini ranges
from a minimum of zero (when sector employment is spread out across regions in
proportion to total employment) to a maximum of 0.5 (when the sector’s employment
is concentrated in one region). This has been applied by regional scientists in, e.g., a
widely cited study of production in the UK (Devereux et al. 2004) and in the study
of economic activity in the European Union (Combes and Overman 2003).
An alternative spatial Gini coefficient was developed by Ellison and Glaeser
(1997), and this version has been used in numerous regional studies. For example,
Guimaraes et al. (2009) note that within the Ellison-Glaeser framework, the location
quotient can be viewed as an estimator; they thus provide the basis for a statis-
tical framework for what previously had been a purely descriptive measure. Another
example of the Ellison-Glaeser approach is in the work of Alkay and Hewings (2012),
who use it to study the agglomeration of manufacturing in Istanbul.
There has also been a fairly lively debate regarding whether regional measures of
inequality such as the Gini index should be weighted by population. Gluschenko
(2018) summarizes this debate and argues that weighting inequality measures
by regional population gives a poor estimate of overall interpersonal inequality.
Furthermore, many authors misinterpret such a measure as an estimate of regional
inequality.
Other measures of concentration used in geography and regional science are based
conceptually in Gini’s contributions. Folch’s (2012) centralization index, which has
applications to the measurement of segregation and is used to measure the relative
concentration of groups around a center, has its foundations in the Gini index. It is
further developed by Folch and Rey (2016).
Gini’s contributions to other measures of concentration and dissimilarity should
also be recognized. The Hoover index of population concentration (Hoover 1941)
and the Duncan index of dissimilarity (Duncan and Duncan 1955)—both well known
and widely used within geography and regional science—have their roots in Gini’s
(1912) original study of variability. The Hoover index of population concentration
is:

1
r
H= | pi − ai |
2 i=1

where pi and ai are the shares of total population and total area that are in region i.
The Duncan index of similarity is:
114 P. Rogerson

r  
1  Pig Pi h 
D= −
2 i=1  Pg Ph 

where there are r regions, g and h are two subgroups of the population, and P repre-
sents population. These indexes may be interpreted as the fraction of population that
would have to move to equalize either population density or subgroup representation
across regions.
Both the Hoover and Duncan measures rely on a sum of the absolute values of
differences, which is precisely what is also used in Eq. 1. Goodman and Kruskal
(1959) thus, rightly, give credit to Gini (1914–15a, 1914–15b, 1937) for suggesting
measures of variability that led to these applications. Duncan (1957) gives credit
to Hoover (1941) for being the first to make use of this measure in applications to
population concentration.
The Hoover index is also known as the Pietra index. Pietra (1915; translated in
2014) discusses it explicitly and cites one of Gini’s measures of variability as forming
the conceptual core of the index. In fact, in his early work, Gini (1912) set out 13
different measures of inequality! These have been nicely summarized by Ceriani and
Verme (2012).
Finally, the Gini index itself has been used in areas where these other measures
are used. Plane and Mulligan (1997), for example, use different Gini indexes in the
context of migration, measuring the degree of focusing (analogous to inequality)
that was observed in sets of in- and out-migration streams. Duncan and Duncan
(1955), James and Taeuber (1985), and Plane and Rogerson (1994), among others,
give an alternate version of Eq. 1 for determining the Gini coefficient in the context
of residential segregation.
Absolute differences between pairs of observations have also been used in other
important contexts. For example, the absolute difference between pairs of residuals
has been the basis for a robust form of regression that is not sensitive to outliers
(Olkin and Yitzhaki 1987).
In addition to the inequality coefficient that bears his name, Gini made many
other lasting contributions—both to his primary fields of statistics and population
studies, and to ancillary fields and topics. A large number of these have had—or
could potentially have—significant impacts on geography and regional science. In
the sections that follow, I describe the most relevant and most interesting of these
contributions.

4 Median Centers of Population

Sviatlovsky and Eells (1937) begin their paper on “The centrographical method and
regional analysis” with a statement on the importance of the study of center points:
Corrado Gini (1884–1965): Versatile Originator of Measures … 115

The development of a fully adequate theory of regional analysis by statistical means is one of
the outstanding problems of geography today. The map alone is not enough, nor are statistical
data alone. They must be brought together. This is the aim of centrography. (p. 240)

They go on to discuss the history of center points and note the US Bureau of the
Census’s error in equating the mean center of population with the point of minimum
aggregate travel.2 They relate how it was Gini and Galvani (1929) who were the first
to point out the error and also the first to suggest the now-accepted term “median
center” for the point of minimum aggregate travel. In their paper, Gini and Galvani
also developed a more general approach to finding a type of mean for nominal
data, basing it upon a measure of deviation between classes of the distribution.
The two combined with Berardinis to write on the means of bivariate distributions
(Gini et al. 1933), and there they applied their methods to geographical problems.
The contributions of this Italian-language paper may be under-recognized, since
Weiszfeld’s iterative solution, now widely cited, was not published until 1937.
The location of the median center is identical to the solution to the “1-median
problem,” which is a specific case of the p-median problem (where p facilities are
to be located) that has a long and rich tradition within regional science and geog-
raphy. ReVelle and Swain (1970) formulated the problem as an integer programming
problem and thus began what is now a fifty-year period of activity in the form of
research, collaboration, papers, and special sessions at regional science meetings
that has immeasurably increased the visibility and importance of the field of regional
science. Reviews of location science include Hale and Moberg (2003), Daskin and
Maass (2015), and ReVelle et al. (2008).

5 The EKS Index and International Price Comparisons

There are several alternative ways real gross domestic product (GDP) may be
compared across countries. Similarly, there are different ways the purchasing power
associated with the currencies of different countries may be compared. An important
and widely used index is the EKS volume and price index. It was developed simul-
taneously by Eltetö and Köves (1964) and by Szulc (1964). It has its antecedents
in the work of Drechsler (1962), where an appendix written by Elteto contains the
index itself, and, more importantly, in the antecedent work of Fisher (1922) and Gini
(1924, 1931).
Aten and Heston (2009) describe the contributions of Gini to this area, noting: (a)
The EKS index is the most widely used measure of international purchasing power
and real product; (b) Gini was the first to suggest the approach; and (c) as Gini noted,

2 Eells (1930) independently made the same point regarding the Census error in his own paper
that appeared the next year. The Census error is discussed in an editor’s note in the Journal of the
American Statistical Association that appeared later in 1930. The US Census Bureau continues to
calculate the center of population incorrectly. Correct calculations that account for the proper map
projection and great circle distances are described in Plane and Rogerson (2015).
116 P. Rogerson

it is constructed from the pairwise comparisons described by Fisher (1922) and the
solution to a least squares problem.
Gini’s circular test requires the product of successive indices over a period to
be equal to the product of the first and last indices. If, for example, there is a 5%
increase in the index in period 1, and a 6% increase in the index in period 2, the index
when calculated for the combined period should increase by (1.05)(1.06) = 1.113 or
11.3% (Donaldson and Pendakur 2010). Applications by regional scientists include
Rokicki and Hewings (2016) and Aten (1996, 1997).

6 Indexes of Agreement and Classification Accuracy

Classification analysis has been used in many areas of geography and regional
science, and indexes of agreement constitute another area where Gini’s work is
antecedent to today’s practice in these fields.
Hand (2012) reviews and compares measures of classification accuracy. He makes
the important points that different indexes measure different things, and hence, the
measure chosen should match the study’s objectives (in much the same way that
different statistics have differing statistical powers against different types of alterna-
tive hypotheses), and, consequently, empirical comparisons of measures have limited
value.
Regarding classification, Hand (2012) also makes the distinction between cases
where the success of a single classification table is to be measured and cases where
a threshold is specified to yield a classification. With regard to the latter, in epidemi-
ology and other fields, including geography and regional science, continuous vari-
ables are often dichotomized using some threshold to provide, e.g., maximally
discriminated relative risk ratios above and below the threshold.
Perhaps, the most common measure used to evaluate the success of a single
classification in this setting is Cohen’s (1960) Kappa index. The Kappa index is a
chance-standardized version of the probability of correct classification, equal to (C
− E)/(1 − E), where C is the actual proportion correct (or, in the case of raters, in
agreement), and E is the expected proportion correct (or in agreement), based upon
the marginals of the 2 × 2 table of predicted and true values.
The Kappa index is used both in the setting described here, where classification
success is measured (and classification is either right or wrong), and also in settings
where two raters are placing objects into categories, and a measure of agreement is
desired for the table cross-classifying the ratings of rater 1 with those of rater 2. The
Kappa Index is the most widely used measure for comparing the agreement among
two people who rate N subjects and place them into C mutually exclusive categories;
it provides a numerical measure of agreement.
Although the Kappa index now has Cohen’s name attached to it, Warrens (2015)
gives credit to Gini for developing and studying measures of agreement on nominal
scales at a much earlier date. Warrens (2013) compared Kappa with three separate
coefficients of agreement suggested by Gini. The story here is similar to Gini’s
Corrado Gini (1884–1965): Versatile Originator of Measures … 117

development of thirteen measures of inequality and variability mentioned earlier.

When he worked on these measures, he didn’t just develop one: he developed several.
In geography and regional science, the Kappa statistic is found in classifying trip
activities from GPS data (Feng and Timmermans 2017). Another common applica-
tion area is in the study of land use analysis; Lu et al. (2020), for example, make
use of the Kappa statistic in this context. The results of Warrens (2013) suggest that
these applications could just as easily have used one of Gini’s measures of agree-
ment/classification accuracy. In any case, Gini’s work serves as the antecedents for
this common measure.
In many applications, thresholds of a variable are selected to maximize classi-
fication accuracy. These thresholds may be chosen by maximizing a measure of
classification accuracy. Gini’s index, the Kappa index, and the odds ratio can all be
used for selecting a threshold. Nelson et al. (2017) compare many methods aimed
at threshold determination using simulation, and they find that the Gini index, like
several other measures, estimates the true threshold well.
When a threshold is to be specified in the classification exercise, relations between
sensitivity and the false positive rate (and hence classification tables) are examined for
a range of thresholds. The Gini coefficient is also used in this context, and it is directly
related to measures of classification accuracy. Hand (2012) also demonstrates that
this Gini coefficient used for classification is precisely the same as the Gini coefficient
of inequality.
Regarding spatial perspectives, the Kappa statistic has been extended to a regional
setting by Hagen-Zanker (2009). In particular, a fuzzy Kappa statistic gives weight
to cells or regions on one map that are in agreement not only with those same cells or
region on another map, but also to a region that is in agreement with a nearby region.
This suggests that Gini’s alternatives could also be extended to spatial problems in a
similar manner.

7 Gini and Measures of Diversity

Gini is also well known for his measure of entropy; it has seen widespread application
in many areas, including classification and decision trees, and in the measurement
of species diversity. His measure of entropy is:


n
Ge = 1 − pi2
i=1

where pi is the probability that an object belongs to class i and there are n classes.
The measure is interpreted as the probability that two elements chosen at random do
not come from the same class.
Simpson’s index is a widely used measure of diversity; it was suggested by
Simpson (1949) and is equal to 1 − Ge . It is interpreted as the probability that
118 P. Rogerson

two random elements come from the same class. In ecology, Ge has also been called
the Gini-Simpson index (Jost 2006) and the probability of interspecific encounter
(Hurlbert 1971).
In economics, Simpson’s index is known as the Hirschman-Herfindahl index,
where pi is the market share of firm i. A maximum index value of 1 indicates concen-
tration in one firm, whereas a minimum value of 1/n occurs if each firm were to have
an identical market share. Its pedigree under that name has an interesting history of its
own. In a note in the American Economic Review, Hirschman (1964) points out that
a number of articles (Massell 1964; Kindleberger 1962; Michaely 1958; Tinbergen
1962) refer to it as the Gini index or the Gini coefficient. Hirschman claimed that
his index (which was originally suggested in 1945 as the square root of 1 − Ge ) was
original; he was, of course, aware of the Gini coefficient for income inequality but
was seemingly unaware of Gini’s Ge . He also noted the work of Herfindahl (1950;
Herfindahl used 1 − Ge without taking the square root) and was frustrated by the
fact that the index had then come to be known as the Herfindahl index—principally
in measuring industrial concentration—due in part to Rosenbluth’s (1955) use of it.
At least now both economists receive credit for the Hirschman-Herfindahl index in
economics, notwithstanding the fact that it was Gini who originally developed the
measure.
Gini’s measure is also used in other disciplines. It is the Gibbs-Martin index
(Gibbs and Martin 1962) in psychology, sociology, and management. In sociology,
it’s known as the Blau index (Blau 1977), where it is used to measure racial and ethnic
diversity. It is also used in population genetics to measure expected heterozygosity.
The Gini-Simpson index has seen application in a variety of areas of regional
science. It has, for example, been used to measure land use diversity (see, e.g.,
Saksena et al. 2014). Fassio et al. (2015) use the index to measure the diversity of
migrants in different occupational sectors. Nijkamp and Poot (2015) refer to it in
their study of measures of cultural diversity.
Another name for the measure under discussion here, as used in classification, is
“Gini impurity.” It is the probability of an incorrect classification of a new observation
when it is randomly chosen according to the probabilities associated with each class.
Gini impurity (GI) is equal to:


k 
k 
k
GI = pi (1 − pi ) = pi − pi2 = 1 − pi2
i=1 i=1 i=1

where there are k classes and pi is the probability that an observation belongs to class
i. If the proportion of sunny days is 5/8 and the probability of cloudy days is 3/8, the
probability that a new observation (which is classified randomly, according to the
probabilities above) will be misclassified is (5/8)(3/8) + (3/8)(5/8) = 30/64 = 15/32
= 0.4688. GI has a minimum value of zero, when there is only one category. The
Gini impurity measure is used in the construction of decision trees; features with low
measures are chosen first, because they have lower probabilities of misclassification.
An example of its use in geography and regional science is in decision tree approaches
Corrado Gini (1884–1965): Versatile Originator of Measures … 119

to house-price determination as an alternative to hedonic regression models (see Fan

et al. 2006).
Ellerman (2017) applied the logic of partitions to information theory. Whereas
Boole developed logical probability as a normalized counting measure on subsets in
his study of the logic of subsets, Ellerman does the same for partitions. That is, he
develops a normalized counting measure on partitions in a logic of partitions. All
this is to say that in so doing, Ellerman provides a logical derivation of Gini’s (1912)
measure of diversity; he terms this measure logical entropy.
In physics, Gini’s measure of diversity has been generalized and is known as
Tsallis entropy (1988); the latter is also a generalization of the widely known Boltz-
mann–Gibbs entropy. Tsallis entropy was also suggested earlier within the literature
on information theory (Havrda and Charvat 1967). For a discrete set of probabilities,
it is equal to:

k  qn
Sq = {1 − pi }
q −1 i=1

where Gini’s index of diversity is obtained for q = 2 and the Boltzmann–Gibbs

entropy is obtained in the limit as q approaches one. While this is an interesting
example of Gini’s impact in its own right, it is also important to recognize that infor-
mation theory and entropy maximization have been important in model development
in geography and regional science (Wilson 1970, and, for an overview of more recent
works, see, e.g., Wilson 2010).
Light and Margolin (1971) relate how the form of the familiar Gini coefficient
as used in economics can be related to the entropy version for categorical data, by
looking at the sum of pairwise products, instead of the absolute value of pairwise
differences:
 
1  n  n2
ni n j = 1− i
2
2n i= j 2 i
n

where there are ni responses in category i.

To understand the connection between this measure and Gini’s mean difference,
one needs to investigate the extension of the mean difference to the case of qualitative
variables—say, where there are K classes. Let ni be the number of observations in
class i, and set the diversity between anytwo classes
 equal
 to one. The mean difference
between observations is then equal to j p j 1 − p j . See, e.g., Light and Margolin
(1971) who also point out that Gini’s index of diversity may also be viewed as the
sum of variances across the K categories, where the variance for each category is
found by assigning one to each observation in the category and zero to all other
observations.
120 P. Rogerson

8 Discussion and Conclusions

One of the difficulties in assessing the entirety of Gini’s contributions to statistics

and social science is that many of his works have remained untranslated. This, of
course, has limited their impact, but summaries of these untranslated works show
both the scope of his mind and the potential for placing other areas of study in
historical perspective. The entry on Gini in the International Encyclopedia of the
Social Sciences (Salvemini 1968) summarizes and provides assessments of a number
of these works. The present chapter, while attempting to give an account of Gini’s
scholarly life in typical fashion, recognizes that many developments in both statistics
and social science have been followed up by others recognizing antecedents in Gini’s
work.
Much of what Gini contributed was rediscovered or reintroduced many years
later. For example, in a very early contribution, he discussed subjective probability,
beliefs, and inductive probability (Gini 1911, 2001). In many ways, this anticipated
the seminal work of Carnap (1945) and Bayesian probability.
Like many areas of science, it turns out that one of Gini’s important concepts,
now known as Gini’s mean difference, had actually been examined earlier. David,
in his historical reviews of measures of sample variability (1968, 1998), found that
Jordan (1869), von Andrae (1869, 1872), and Helmert (1876) had previously studied
properties of the Gini mean difference. Gini himself became aware of these only
after his own work had been published.
Today, most every economist, quantitatively oriented geographer, and regional
scientist is familiar with the Gini index now widely employed for measuring income
distribution inequality. In addition to his coefficient of inequality, however, his
antecedent work in many other areas has had a lasting impact and influence in the
fields of geography and regional science. As the versatile originator of so many of
the fundamental concepts now used in our statistically oriented research, Corrado
Gini merits inclusion among the Great Minds in regional science.

Acknowledgment I acknowledge the very helpful comments of David Plane on earlier drafts of
this manuscript.

References

Alkay, E., and G.J.D. Hewings. 2012. The determinants of agglomeration for the manufacturing
sector in the Istanbul metropolitan area. The Annals of Regional Science 48: 225–245.
Arbia, G. 2001. The role of spatial effects in the empirical analysis of regional concentration. Journal
of Geographical Systems 3: 271–281.
Aten, B. 1996. Evidence of spatial autocorrelation in international prices. Review of Income and
Wealth 42: 149–163.
Aten, B.H. 1997. Does space matter? International comparisons of the prices of tradables and
nontradables. International Regional Science Review 20 (1–2): 35–52.
Corrado Gini (1884–1965): Versatile Originator of Measures … 121

Aten, B., and A. Heston. 2009. Are all Fishers equal? https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251
695763_Are_All_Fishers_Equal. Last accessed April 28, 2022.
Benedetti, C. 1965. Ricordando Corrado Gini. Rivista Di Politica Economica 54: 3–9.
Bickenbach, F., and E. Bode. 2008. Disproportionality measures of concentration, specialization
and localization. International Regional Science Review 31: 359–388.
Blau, P. 1977. Inequality and heterogeneity. New York: Free Press.
Carnap, R. 1945. On inductive logic. Philosophy of Science 12 (3): 72–97.
Castellano, V. 1965. Corrado Gini: A memoir. Metron 24 (1–4): 3–84.
Ceriani, L., and P. Verme. 2012. The origins of the Gini index: Extracts from Variabilitia e Mutabilita
(1912) by Corrado Gini. Journal of Economic Inequality 10: 421–443.
Cohen, J. 1960. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological
Measurement 20 (1): 37–46.
Combes, P-P., and H.G. Overman. 2003. The spatial distribution of economic activity in the
European Union.Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics 4: 2845–2909.
Daskin, M.S., and K.L. Maass. 2015. The p-median problem. In Location science, ed. G. Laporte,
S. Nickel, and F. da Gama, 21–45. Cham: Springer.
David, H.A. 1968. Gini’s mean difference rediscovered. Biometrika 55: 573–575.
David, H.A. 1998. Early sample measures of variability. Statistical Science 13 (4): 368–377.
Dawkins, C.J. 2004. Measuring the spatial pattern of residential segregation. Urban Studies 41 (4):
833–851.
Dawkins, C. 2007. Space and the measurement of income segregation. Journal of Regional Science
47 (2): 255–272.
Devereux, M.P., R. Griffith, and H. Simpson. 2004. The geographic distribution of production
activity in the UK. Regional Science and Urban Economics 34 (5): 533–564.
Donaldson, D., and K. Pendakur. 2010. Index-number tests and the common-scaling social cost-of-
living index. Manuscript number SCWE-D-10–00032 http://www.sfu.ca/~pendakur/CSSCOL%
202010-11.pdf. Last accessed April 28, 2022.
Drechsler, L. 1962. A használati érték és az érték szerepe a volumenindex számításánál. Budapest:
Akadémiai Kiadó.
Duncan, O.D. 1957. The measurement of population distribution. Population Studies 11 (1): 27–45.
Duncan, O.D., and B. Duncan. 1955. A methodological analysis of segregation indexes. American
Sociological Review 20 (2): 210–217.
Eells, W. 1930. A mistaken conception of the center of population. Journal of the American
Statistical Association 25: 33–40.
Ellerman, D. 2017. Logical information theory: New logical foundations for information theory.
Logic Journal of the IGPL 25 (5): 806–835.
Ellison, G., and E. Glaeser. 1997. Geographical concentration in U.S. manufacturing industries: A
dartboard approach. Journal of Political Economy 105 (5): 889–927.
Eltetö, O., and P. Köves. 1964. On a problem of index number computation relating to international
comparison. Statisztikai Szemle 42: 507–518.
Fan, G.-Z., S.E. Ong, and H.C. Koh. 2006. Determinants of house prices: A decision tree approach.
Urban Studies 43 (12): 2301–2315.
Fassio, C., S. Kalantaryan, and A. Venturini. 2015. Human resources and innovation: Total factor
productivity and foreign human capital. Discussion Paper Series, IZA DP No. 9422, Institute for
the Study of Labor, Bonn, Germany.
Feng, T., and H.J.P. Timmermans. 2017. Using recurrent spatio-temporal profiles in GPSpanel datat
for enhancing imputation of activity type. In Big data for regional science, ed. L.A. Schintler and
Z. Chen, 121–130. London: Routledge.
Fisher, I. 1922. The making of index numbers. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Folch, D.C., and S.J. Rey. 2016. The centralization index: A measure of local spatial segregation.
Papers in Regional Science 95 (3): 555–576. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12145.
Folch, D.C. 2012. The centralization index as a measure of local spatial segregation. Ph.D.
Dissertation, Arizona State University, School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning.
122 P. Rogerson

Gellatly, C. 2009. Trends in population sex ratios may be explained by changes in the frequencies
of polymorphic alleles of a sex ratio gene. Evolutionary Biology 36 (2): 190–200.
Gibbs, J.P., and W.T. Martin. 1962. Urbanization, technology and the division of labor. American
Sociological Review 27 (5): 667–677. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089624.
Gini, C. 1921. Measurement of inequality of incomes. The Economic Journal 31 (121): 124–126.
Gini, C. 1924. Quelques considerations au sujet de la construction des nombres indices des prix et
des questions analogues. Metron 4 (1): 3–162.
Gini, C. 1931. On the circular test of index numbers. Metron 9 (9): 3–24.
Gini, C. 2001. Induction and statistics. Bologna: Clueb.
Gini, C., and L. Galvani. 1929. Di talune estensioni dei concetti di media ai caratteri qualitative.
Metron 8: 3–209.
Gini, C., L. Berardinis, and L. Galvani. 1933. Sulla selettività delle cause di morte durante l’infanzia.
Metron 11 (1): 163–183.
Gini, C. 1908. Il sesso dal punto di vista statistic: Le leggi della produzione dei sessi. Firenze:
Sandron.
Gini, C. 1911. Considerazioni sulle probabilità a posteriori e applicazioni al rapporto dei sessi alla
nascita. Studi Economico-Giuridici, Facoltà di Giurisprudenza Della Regia Università di Cagliari
anno III; reprinted in Metron, 1949, 15(1–4). English translation in Gini (2001).
Gini, C. 1912. Variabilit’a e mutabilit’a. Contributo allo studio delle distribuzioni e dekke relazioni
statistiche, Studio economico-giurdici Anno III Parte II. Facolt’a di giurrisprudenza della Regia
Universit’a di Cagliari. Bologna: Cuppini.
Gini, C. 1914–15a. Di una misura della dissomiglianza tra due gruppi di quantitA e delle sue
applicazioni allo studio delle relazioni statistiche. Atti del Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere
ed Arti, Series 8, 74 (2): 185–213.
Gini, C. 1914–15b. Indice di omofilia e di rassomiglianza e loro relazioni col coefficiente di corre-
lazione e con gli indici di attrazione. Atti del Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti,
Series 8, 74 (2): 583–610.
Gini, C. 1937. Die Messung der Ungleichheit zweier Verteilungen, angewendet auf die Unter-
suchung von qualitativen Rassenmerkmalen. Archiv fur Mathematische Wirtschafts- und Sozial-
forschung, 3: 167–84, plus two appendixes by Vittorio Castellano.
Giorgi, G.M. 2001. Corrado Gini. In Statisticians of the centuries, ed. C.C. Heyde, E. Seneta, P.
Crépel, S.E. Fienberg, and J. Gani, 364–368. New York: Springer.
Gluschenko, K. 2018. Measuring regional inequality: To weight or not to weight? Spatial Economic
Analysis 13 (1): 36–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/17421772.2017.1343491.
Goodman, L.A., and W.H. Kruskal. 1959. Measures of association for cross-classifications. II.
Further discussions and references. Journal of the American Statistical Association 54: 123–163.
Guimaraes, P., O. Figueiredo, and D. Woodward. 2009. Dartboard tests for the location quotient.
Regional Science and Urban Economics 39 (3): 360–364.
Hagen-Zanker, A. 2009. An improved fuzzy Kappa statistic that accounts for spatial autocorrelation.
International Journal of Geographical Information Science 23 (1): 61–73. https://doi.org/10.
1080/13658810802570317.
Hale, T.S., and C.R. Moberg. 2003. Location science research: A review. Annals of Operations
Research 123: 21–35.
Hand, D.J. 2012. Assessing the performance of classification methods. International Statistical
Review 80 (3): 400–414.
Havrda, J., and F. Charvat. 1967. Quantification method of classification processes. Concept of
structural α-entropy. Kybernetika 3 (1): 30–35.
Helmert, F.R. 1876. Die Berechnung des wahrscheinlichen Beobachtungsfehlers aus des ersten
Potenzen der Differenzen gleichgenauer director Beobachtungen. Astronomische Nachrichten
88: 113–132.
Herfindahl, C. 1950. Concentration in the US steel industry. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, New
York: Columbia University.
Corrado Gini (1884–1965): Versatile Originator of Measures … 123

Hirschman, A.O. 1945. National power and the structure of foreign trade. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1964. The paternity of an index. American Economic Review 54 (5): 761–762.
Hoover, E.M., Jr. 1941. Interstate redistribution of population, 1850–1940. Journal of Economic
History 1: 199–205.
Hurlbert, S.H. 1971. The nonconcept of species diversity: A critique and alternative parameters.
Ecology 52 (4): 577–586. https://doi.org/10.2307/1934145.
James, D.R., and K.E. Taeuber. 1985. Measures of segregation. Sociological Methodology 15: 1–32.
Jordan, W. 1869. Ueber die Bestimmung der Genauigkeit mehrfach wiederholter Beobachtungen
einder Unbekannten. Astronomische Nachrichten 74: 209–226.
Jost, L. 2006. Entropy and diversity. Oikos 113 (2): 363–375. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2006.0030-
1299.14714.x.
Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1930. Editor’s note on the center of population and
point of minimum travel 25: 447–452.
Kindleberger, C.P. 1962. Foreign trade and the national economy. New Haven: Yale University
Press.
Krugman, P. 1991. Geography and trade. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Light, R.J., and B.H. Margolin. 1971. An analysis of variance for categorical data. Journal of the
American Statistical Association 66: 534–544.
Lorenz, M.O. 1905. Methods of measuring the concentration of wealth. Publications of the American
Statistical Association 9 (70): 209–219. https://doi.org/10.2307/2276207.
Lu, Y., S. Laffan, C. Pettit, and M. Cao. 2020. Land use change simulation and analysis using
a vector cellular automata (CA) model: A case study of Ipswich City, Queensland, Australia.
Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science 47 (9): 1605–1621.
Macuglia, D. 2014. Corrado Gini and the scientific basis of fascist racism. Medicina Nei Secoli 26
(3): 821–855.
Massell, B.F. 1964. Export concentration and fluctuations in export earnings. American Economic
Review 54: 47–63.
Michaely, M. 1958. Concentration of exports and imports: An international comparison. Economic
Journal 68: 722–736.
Nelson, S.L.P., V. Ramakrishnan, P. Nietert, D.L. Kamen, P.S. Ramos, and B.J. Wolf. 2017. An
evaluation of common methods for dichotimization of continuous variables to discriminate disease
status. Communications in Statistics: Theory and Methods 46 (21): 10823–10834.
Nijkamp, P., and J. Poot. 2015. Cultural diversity: A matter of measurement, IZA Discussion Papers,
No. 8782, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA), Bonn.
Olkin, I., and S. Yitzhaki. 1987. Gini regression analysis. International Statistical Review 60 (2):
185–196.
Panzera, D., and P. Postiglione. 2020. Measuring the spatial dimension of regional inequality: An
approach based on the Gini correlation measure. Social Indicators Research 148: 379–394. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11205-019-02208-7.
Pietra, G. 1915. Delle relazioni tra gli inidic di variabilita (Nota I) Atti del Reale Istituto Veneto di
Scienze, Lettere e Arti. Vl. LXXIV (Part 1): 775–792.
Pietra, G. 2014. On the relationships between variability indices (note 1) (translated from the 1915
article) in Metron 72 (1): 5–16.
Plane, D., and G. Mulligan. 1997. Measuring spatial focusing in a migration system. Demography
34: 251–262.
Plane, D., and P. Rogerson. 1994. The geographical analysis of population: With applications to
planning and business. New York: Wiley.
Plane, D., and P. Rogerson. 2015. On tracking and disaggregating center points of population.
Annals of the American Association of Geographers 105 (5): 968–986.
ReVelle, C.S., H.A. Eiselt, and M.S. Daskin. 2008. A bibliography of some fundamental problem
categories in discrete location science. European Journal of Operations Research 184: 817–848.
ReVelle, C.S., and T.R. Swain. 1970. Central facilities location. Geographical Analysis 2: 30–42.
124 P. Rogerson

Rey, S.J., and M.V. Janikas. 2005. Regional convergence, inequality, and space. Journal of Economic
Geography 5: 155–176.
Rey, S., and R.J. Smith. 2012. A spatial decomposition of the Gini coefficient. Letters in Spatial
and Resource Sciences 6 (2): 1–16.
Rokicki, B., and G.J.D. Hewings. 2016. Regional convergence within particular country—An
approach based on the regional price deflators. Economic Modelling 57: 171–179. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.econmod.2016.04.019.
Rosenbluth, G. 1955. Measures of concentration. In Business concentration and policy, 57–99.
Princeton: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Saksena, S., J. Fox, M. Epprecht, C. Tran, M. Casternce, D. Nong, J. Spencer, N. Lam, M. Finucane,
D. Vien, and B. Wilcox. 2014. Role of urbanization, land-use diversity, and livestock intensifica-
tion in zoonotic emerging infectious diseases. Honolulu, HI: East-West Center Working Papers,
Environment, Population, and Health Series, No. 6.
Salvemini, T. 1968. Corrado Gini. In International Encyclopedia of statistics, ed. D.L. Sills, vol. 6,
187–191. New York: Macmillan and Free Press.
Schechtman, E., and Yitzhaki S. 1987. A measure of association based on Gini’s mean difference.
Communication in Statistics—Theory and Methods 16 (1): 207–231.
Simpson, E. 1949. Measurement of diversity. Nature 163: 688. https://doi.org/10.1038/163688a0.
Sviatlovsky, E.E., and W.C. Eells. 1937. The centrographical method and regional analysis.
Geographical Review 27 (2): 240–254.
Szulc, B. 1964. Indeksy dla porownan wieloregionalnych. Przeglad Statystyczny 3: 239–254.
Tinbergen, J. 1962. Shaping the world economy. New York: Twentieth Century Fund.
Tsallis, C. 1988. Possible generalization of Boltzmann-Gibbs statistics. Journal of Statistical
Physics 52 (1–2): 479–487.
Von Andrae, C.G. 1869. Schreiben des Herrn Geheimen Etatsraths von Andra an den Herausgeber.
Astronomische Nachrichten 74: 283–284.
Von Andrae, C.G. 1872. Ueber die Bestimmung des wahrscheinlichen Fehlers durch die gegebenen
vom gleich genauen Beobachtungen einer Unbekannten. Astronomische Nachrichten 79: 257–
272.
Warrens, M.J. 2013. A comparison of Cohen’s kappa and agreement coefficients by Corrado Gini.
International Journal of Recent Research and Applied Studies 16 (3): 345–351.
Warrens, M.J. 2015. Five ways to look at Cohen’s kappa. Journal of Psychology and Psychotherapy
5: 4. https://doi.org/10.4172/2161-0487.1000197.
White, M. 1983. The measurement of spatial segregation. American Journal of Sociology 88: 1008–
1018.
Wilson, A. 1970. Entropy in urban and regional modelling. London: Pion.
Wilson, A. 2010. Entropy in urban and regional modelling: Retrospect and prospect. Geographical
Analysis 42 (4): 364–394.
Wong, D.W.S. 1993. Spatial indices of segregation. Urban Studies 30 (3): 559–572.
Wong, D. 2003. Spatial decomposition of segregation indices: A framework toward measuring
segregation at multiple levels. Geographical Analysis 35 (3): 179–194.
Yitzhaki, S. 2003. Gini’s mean difference: A superior measure of variability for non-normal
distributions. Metron—International Journal of Statistics 61 (2): 285–316.
Laying the Foundations of Regional
Science
Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994): A Rational
Thinker on Inequality and Distribution

Peter Nijkamp

Jan Tinbergen. Photo source https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jan_Tinbergen_1982.jpg

(last accessed September, 2022)

P. Nijkamp (B)
Open University, Heerlen, The Netherlands
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 127
P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_6
128 P. Nijkamp

1 Jan Tinbergen: A Life Sketch

Regional science started to flourish as of the 1950s. It should be noted, however,

that the beginning of the twentieth century was already a fruitful vintage period for
the subsequent rise of regional science in the post-WWII years. Several scientific
giants who have generated lasting imprints in the history of regional science later
on in the second half of the twentieth century were born in the period 1900–1920:
Francois Perroux (in 1903), Wassily Leontief (1905), Jan Tinbergen (1903), August
Lösch (1906), Richard Stone (1913), Torsten Hägerstrand (1916), and Walter Isard
(1919). Clearly, Walter Isard—the founding father of regional science—found later
on a fertile cradle in the achievements of his earlier predecessors. One of them was
Jan Tinbergen, who also met with Isard during the early regional science conferences
in Europe held in The Hague, The Netherlands, in the 1960s.
Jan Tinbergen (April 19, 1903–June 9, 1994) was born in The Hague, The Nether-
lands. He was the eldest child in a middle-class family with five children, who were
raised in an atmosphere of scientific education and societal responsibility.
Tinbergen studied mathematics and physics (1921–1925) at the famous University
of Leiden, at a distance of only 20 kms from The Hague. His doctoral supervisor was
the world-known physicist Paul Ehrenfest, who brought him also in contact with other
great scholars, such as Heike Kamerlingh Onnes, Hendrik Lorentz, Pieter Zeeman,
and Albert Einstein, who were all featured Nobel laureates. Clearly, Tinbergen
grew up in an intellectual and international climate of theoretical physicists in an
epoch where major path-breaking discoveries in physics were made. Nevertheless,
Tinbergen’s interest shifted gradually toward societal problems of economic growth
and welfare distribution. He had a strong social-political orientation, which explains
his interest in growth and inequality in society, in particular, in the years before the
Great Depression. His Ph.D. subject provides witness to the gradual turn in his life;
the title of his Ph.D. dissertation signaled already his change in interest: ‘Minimisa-
tion Problems in Physics and Economics.’ This original study provided an interface
between mathematics, theoretical physics, macro-economics, and policy analysis.
He demonstrated that the mathematical formulation of economic processes may be
identical to the equations describing physical processes, for instance, in mechanics.
This study showed Tinbergen’s great potential to model complex processes in various
disciplines.
Meanwhile, as a substitute for compulsory military service in the country, he was
forced to provide community and social service, first in the administration of a prison
and later on at the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) in The Hague. He continued to
work there for a long time, even until the end of WWII. The wealth of empirical data
at the CBS allowed him to develop and test operational macro-economic models for
the Dutch economy, in particular on business cycles and economic dynamics. He also
started publishing on his findings. His great scientific skills did not remain unobserved
in Dutch academic circles. By the time he was thirty, he had been appointed as
part-time (associate) professor at the University of Amsterdam and the Netherlands
School of Economics (at present, Erasmus University) in Rotterdam. He was the first
Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994): A Rational Thinker on Inequality … 129

economist who developed a full macro-economic model for a national economy,

with an application to The Netherlands. This type of macro-economic modeling was
soon followed in many other countries.
Tinbergen lived most of his life in The Netherlands, although he worked in the
pre-WWII time also as an advisor to the League of Nations (later on, United Nations)
and traveled extensively after the war to numerous countries all over the world, as
well as spending one year (1955–1956) as a visiting professor at Harvard University.
After the end of WWII, he was appointed as the first director of the newly founded
Central Planning Bureau (CPB) in The Netherlands so as to provide independent
evidence-based economic advice on the reconstruction of the Dutch economy after
WWII. This position also allowed him to develop evidence-based macro-models
(including, for instance, distributed lag models), which later became the interna-
tional trademark of the CPB. In this period, he also laid the practical foundation for
the new discipline of econometrics, mainly from a macro-economic applied angle.
From 1955 onward, his interest shifted also to education, scientific guidance, and
service provision to less privileged academics and countries, not only for students
but also for scholars from developing countries (e.g., India, Pakistan, Indonesia, and
Venezuela). He founded the Econometric Institute in Rotterdam (1956), in coop-
eration with another founding father of econometrics, Henri Theil. His interest
shifted increasingly toward global issues of unequal development and later on toward
the global governance of resources and wealth from a macro-normative distribu-
tional perspective. Notwithstanding his deeply rooted social-political belief, he never
became a political figure; he remained a rational evidence-based thinker, despite
his deep social-democratic engagement in poverty and income-distribution issues.
He had a wide-ranging interest in issues like economic growth, international trade,
theory and models of economic policy, welfare and income distribution, develop-
ment economics, international economic order, global governance institutions, and
also spatial economics.
Jan Tinbergen became—together with Ragnar Frisch—the first Nobel laureate in
economics (1969). They received the Nobel Prize for their seminal work on the devel-
opment and application of dynamic growth models for depicting complex economic
processes. Interestingly, Tinbergen’s emerging interest in regional issues was not
mentioned during the Nobel Prize Award ceremony in 1969 in Stockholm, as this
interest had not yet crystallized in a consistent conceptual and analytical frame-
work of interconnected regional economies. Tinbergen, though, referred explicitly to
August Lösch in his Nobel lecture. It is—in passing—noteworthy that also for many
other Nobel Prize winners, who exerted a thorough influence on regional science
thinking and application, their regional economic interest—or spatial-economic rele-
vance—was never explicitly mentioned or hardly recognized in their official Nobel
Prize motivations. Examples are: Paul Samuelson, Simon Kuznets, Kenneth Arrow,
Lawrence Klein, Wassily Leontief, Gunnar Myrdal, Bertil Ohlin, Herbert Simon,
Richard Stone, Gary Becker, William Vickrey, Amartya Sen, Daniel McFadden,
Joseph Stiglitz, Daniel Kahneman, Thomas Schelling, Paul Krugman, William Nord-
haus, and Paul Romer. It is interesting that especially the first generation of Nobel
Prize awardees appeared to be well connected with regional economists and regional
130 P. Nijkamp

scientists, although—to the best of my knowledge—the term regional science was

never referred to in any of the Nobel Prize laudations.
Jan Tinbergen continued to be involved in scientific reflection and macro-analysis
till his death in 1994. He kept his broad interest in macro-economic issues, not only
inside the country, but increasingly at a worldwide scale. Despite his deeply rooted
social-democratic conviction, he was first of all the cool rational scholar who wanted
to understand societal and economic complexities before suggesting solutions. He
enjoyed a simple and sober lifestyle and was by no means interested in luxury. A
visit to his home—at a close distance from the Peace Palace in The Hague—was
always an unforgettable human and intellectual experience: As a real gentleman, he
always asked about your wellbeing while offering a cup of tea; then he started to
raise thought-provoking questions. He was a careful listener and a deep analytical
thinker; his answers and thoughts were logically grounded; his suggestions were
based on rational arguments; and his solutions took for granted that, in a rational
world, far-reaching improvements were—and should be—possible. He believed in
rational knowledge-based solutions for distributional questions in a heterogeneous
and often conflictful society.

2 Jan Tinbergen: The Scientist

Tinbergen’s core contribution to economics can mainly be found in the quantitative

modeling of interdependent macro-economic phenomena. He started his economic
research in the pre-WWII period mainly from the statistical analysis of business
cycles and international trade. He published seminal articles on these topics, for
instance, in Econometrica (Tinbergen 1938), in the Review of Economic Studies
(Tinbergen 1940), and in Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv (Tinbergen 1942). In particular
after WWII, he got involved in questions on how to control the economy in order to
provide a better wellbeing for mankind. As director of the Dutch Central Plan Bureau,
he got involved in questions on the controllability of the economy, in line with his
social-democratic ideas. He published a first article on his views on government
planning in the Review of Economic Studies (Tinbergen 1947).
In his analytical contribution to economic policy analysis, he made a distinc-
tion between quantitative policy (i.e., a quantitative flexible adjustment of existing
policy measures), qualitative policy (i.e., a change in the nature and composition of
policy intervention measures), and structural policy (i.e., a change in institutional
competences and governance structures).
His major contribution on the foundations of macro-economic policy can be found
in two seminal studies, viz., On the theory of economic policy (Tinbergen 1952)
and Economic policy: Principles and design (1956). The latter core publication
of Tinbergen’s came out in the same year as Walter Isard’s main conceptual and
seminal opus, Location and space-economy (Isard 1956). In his latter two publica-
tions, Tinbergen made a successful attempt to define economic policy as a rational
Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994): A Rational Thinker on Inequality … 131

process in a search for appropriate policy measures so as to achieve a set of pre-

defined goals (the so-called Tinbergen rule of ‘fixed targets’). Tinbergen was able to
mathematically show that an overambitious list of pre-specified policy goals will lead
to inconsistent outcomes, unless the policy intervention measures would also increase
with the same intensity (leading almost to a centralized regime). In his view, a model
should at least depict past realities in order to assess the intensity of policy measures
for achieving pre-specified goals. A necessary condition for balanced and realistic
economic policy is to bring the number of quantitative policy goals (e.g., balance
of payment, inflation rate, employment, etc.) in balance with the number of feasible
and available policy instruments (e.g., taxation measures, public investments, etc.).
Thus, given a set of prior quantitative policy targets, economic policy is a rational
process of finding a match between goals and tools by reversing the causality chain:
from instruments → targets, into: targets → instruments. This approach was inspired
by his belief in the makeable nature of an economic system, under the supervision of
a central coordinating authority. From 1965 to 1969, he even held a chair position at
the Erasmus University in Rotterdam on the theory of centrally planned economies.
Clearly, this approach also provoked criticism, as it has some serious limitations;
it presupposes a flexible adjustment capacity in an economic system by quantitatively
skilled rational policymakers, based on prior specified goals. Tinbergen was aware of
this restrictive element in his approach and also addressed explicitly a more general
method, called the ‘flexible target approach.’ In this case, the economic system
is supposed to be driven by an overarching social welfare function, which ought
to be maximized by a rational policy authority, subject to economic constraints
incorporated in an operational empirical model. This approach is still nowadays
used in welfare economics and also in regional science (see, e.g., the concept of a
‘social planner’ or ‘central authority,’ inter alia, deployed more recently by Batabyal
2017 and Batabyal and Nijkamp 2010). The shadow side of the latter approach,
however, is that for practical policy purposes, the social welfare function ought to
be estimated and known before the actual optimization process can be carried out.
It is even possible that the social welfare function might be influenced by the actual
outcomes of the economic process itself. It is clear that such real-world limitations
have meant a major hurdle to the theoretically more elegant operational social welfare
approach as compared to the straightforward fixed target approach.
A seemingly elegant way out of this dilemma was provided some years later
by Tinbergen’s closest colleague, Henri Theil, who was by origin, like Tinbergen,
also a physicist. He published in 1964 a path-breaking book on Optimal decision
rules for government and industry (Theil 1964). In his approach, Theil introduced
a social welfare function in the form of a so-called quadratic penalty function for
the discrepancy between pre-specified and actual target values for policy objectives.
This ‘compromise’ social welfare approach had a major analytical advantage, viz., the
first-order (necessary) conditions from the minimization of a quadratic penalty func-
tion subject to a linear model describing the economy concerned. This approach led
to an analytically tractable linear solution system for policy instruments, with unam-
biguous outcomes for policy-making bodies. The use of quadratic penalty functions
132 P. Nijkamp

in programming analysis has ever since been a common approach in programming

theory (e.g., in goals-achievement models).
However, the Theil approach also has—despite its elegant character—a serious
limitation, viz., the lack of empirical insight—or of empirically estimated values—
concerning the weights attached to the successive policy goals in the quadratic penalty
function. Using certainty equivalence and smoothing amendment procedures, Theil
made an attempt to address these issues, but they remained mainly at a conceptual-
technical level of economic policy analysis. A first successful attempt to solve the
latter ‘Maxwell’s demon’ problem was made by Nijkamp and Somermeijer (1971),
who introduced an operational econometric model to estimate so-called ‘implicit
social welfare functions.’ The pivotal idea of this approach is the assumption that
any policy realization—wanted or unwanted—is the empirical outcome of a complex
but implicitly socially optimal multidimensional evaluation process in a heteroge-
neous democratic economy. Examining then the first- and second-order conditions for
welfare optimization of an economic system, the policy-preference parameters can be
estimated ex-post, while also intertemporal robustness analyses concerning shifting
policy parameters over time can be carried out. This approach bears some resem-
blance to what is nowadays known as revealed preference estimation of individual
behavior, e.g., in discrete choice modeling (see McFadden 1974) or environmental
policy analysis (see Nijkamp and Paelinck 1973).
In this period, Tinbergen also got involved in three new complementary analyt-
ical departures in his scientific work. In the first place, he extended his interest in
international trade analysis toward an operational modeling framework of world trade
flows. In this context, he developed the first full-fledged gravity model for trade flows
(Tinbergen 1962b), an undertaking which was not a surprise given his background
in theoretical physics. From this perspective, he may be seen as the founding father
of operational gravity models in regional science. It is noteworthy that this original
contribution to spatial interaction modeling did not only find its origin in his ambition
to technically solve the specification and estimation of interdependent global trade
models from a gravitational angle, but also from his already mentioned normative
consideration that socio-economic inequality in the world, production specialization,
and trade flows were intricately interwoven phenomena which had to be thoroughly
understood in order to shape a more equitable world. A visit to India in 1951 had
once more convinced Tinbergen that the current economic power positions in the
world needed a change, based on rational economic arguments.
In addition to dealing with spatial inequalities, he also looked for fundamental
mechanisms to shape more analytical order in the capricious space economy. Central
place theory (as developed by Christaller 1933) was for him a structured, economi-
cally grounded theory based on logical principles that provided a logical hierarchical
constellation of the space economy. Although he did not develop new hexagonal
spatial systems, he believed that product specialization, scale advantages, distance
frictions, and effective market demand in a complex space economy were the basic
ingredients of a logical spatial-economic order. It is noteworthy that his paper on
‘Spatial distribution of industry’ (Tinbergen and Bos 1961) was presented in 1961 at
the first European regional science conference in The Hague in the presence of
Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994): A Rational Thinker on Inequality … 133

Walter Christaller. Tinbergen’s intelligent combination of central place theory and

gravity analysis may be seen as another pioneering contribution of this great thinker
to regional science. This systemic methodology on hierarchical patterns in space also
encouraged him to later write a study (in 1965) on the principles of regional planning,
in which logical considerations on the spatial-economic architecture played a basic
role.
And, finally, he also laid the systematic foundation for social cost–benefit anal-
ysis following a cascadic approach from macro-policy analysis, via sectoral and
regional model application, to project planning. This new approach was inspired by
the urgent need for spatial reconstruction policy in the Western part of the country
after the devastating flood disaster (‘Watersnood’) of January 30–31, 1953. He was
responsible for the economic calculation of the most far-reaching water-management
plan in Dutch history (the so-called Delta Works), which was only in recent years—
after more than 50 years—completed. Nowadays, this plan is often also referred to in
The Netherlands against the background of emerging sea-level rise threats and river
floods. Tinbergen not only prepared a comprehensive, spatially differentiated cost
calculation, but he tried to estimate also all direct and indirect costs and benefits of
all public intervention schemes (dikes, dams, etc.) by means of input–output analysis
(Tinbergen 1954a, b). This led, later on, to the design and application of the so-called
semi-input–output model including trade in open national or regional economies, an
approach which was—given the usual situation of restricted data—also applied in
various developing countries (e.g., Pakistan; see Tinbergen 1961a).
By the mid-1960s, Tinbergen had developed an increasingly thorough interest
in the global division of welfare. His systemic views on the world economy, as
reflected in his gravity-inspired trade interest and his hierarchical decomposition
of interacting economies, were helpful instruments in developing new structures
for economic order in the global space economy. He got increasingly involved in
ambitious initiatives to lay the foundations for a new economic world order. This is
clearly mirrored in the title of his article on ‘Wanted: A world development plan’
(Tinbergen 1965b). His science-inspired ideas on a balanced division of welfare
not only can be found in his seminal book (Tinbergen 1978) on income distribution,
which was preceded by another study on income distribution written in collaboration
with his colleague Jan Pen, but also in his visionary—original but still realistic—
study on the ‘New economic order’ (Tinbergen 1974, 1987). His cool and modest,
almost anti-emotional and seemingly apolitical, analysis of complex distributional
problems in the world made him a respected advisor to many governments and
international bodies. In the last part of his life, he also got deeply involved in the
global sustainability debate—in the spirit of the Brundtland Report (1987)—which
stimulated him to link his views on a more satisfactory world economy (one with
less painful inequality characteristics) to the global division of wealth and resources
and to the need for more equitable environmental quality. A good illustration of
his systematic analytical thinking can be found in his publication on ‘Warfare and
welfare’ (Tinbergen and Fischer 1987). He remained until his death in 1994 involved
in issues of global and environmental justice.
134 P. Nijkamp

During his extraordinarily productive and influential scientific career, Tinbergen

developed many contacts with the great economists from his time, for instance,
Keynes, Haberler, Rosenstein-Rodan, Kaldor, Schumpeter, Ohlin, Koopmans,
Kalecki, Chenery, Myrdal, Stone, Leontief, Frisch, Goldberger, Klein, Rothenberg,
Samuelson, Jorgenson, and Isard (several of them would later become Nobel laureates
themselves). Through this communication with so many other Great Minds, he was
able to work at the forefront of new views on human capital, talents, and education;
on combined supply and demand impacts on inequality; on the economic impor-
tance of good and solid institutions; on the benefits of decentralized and coordinated
centralization of socio-economic policy; and on the cornerstones of an optimal inter-
national economic order. He left behind an impressive volume of scientific contribu-
tions, sometimes published in prestigious journals (e.g., Econometrica, the Review
of Economics and Statistics, the Review of Economic Studies, and the American
Economic Review), sometimes in local outlets in order to reach out to a broader
public.

3 Jan Tinbergen: A Panoramic Overview

The broad spectrum of Tinbergen’s work on economics (including economic policy)

is amazing. The synergy of his physics-inspired thinking and his socio-economic
engagement with distributional inequality made him, over a period of several decades,
a real pioneer in new economic approaches and original perspectives. In the context
of a concise overview of the contribution of this great scholar, I will limit myself
here to a few prominent areas which characterize his scientific contributions, viz.,
econometrics, development economics, and regional science.

3.1 Econometrics

Tinbergen was convinced that—in contrast to qualitative logical policy arguments (as
advocated by respected colleagues, e.g., John Keynes)—economic theory and policy
needed to be substantiated by quantitative, testable, and evidence-based underpin-
nings. In this respect, he was in complete agreement with his co–Nobel laureate,
Ragnar Frisch. From a systemic perspective, he addressed problems like: How to
estimate a system of simultaneous equations, without the use of any computer power?
How to collect and develop reliable databases that are a solid foundation for economic
policy analysis? How to estimate a macro-economic production function with hetero-
geneous human-capital components? How to design a consistent global world trade
model, incorporating different countries and industrial sectors, using adjusted gravi-
tational principles? How to estimate a multi-country input–output model, with input
substitution in an open world economy?
Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994): A Rational Thinker on Inequality … 135

From his early scientific work in the 1930s onward, Tinbergen worked relentlessly
on the solution of such questions, with a view to the development of testable econo-
metric macro-models. His influence on the macro-economic modeling exercises of
his American colleague, Lawrence Klein, (also a later Nobel laureate) is undeni-
able. Reading Tinbergen’s work—or, better, his struggle—to find an evidence-based
pathway to the treatment of such complicated issues, in a period where computers
did not exist, is very insightful, since only intelligent analytical power was able to
come up with satisfactory solutions. His close colleague, Henri Theil, wrote later on
an extensive book on the principles of econometrics (Theil 1971), a work that culmi-
nated later on in novel research on the two-stage least squares estimation method
(when error terms are correlated with independent variables) by their colleague,
Arnold Zellner (again with a background in physics), who later on pioneered the
field of Bayesian econometrics (see Zellner 1999).1 Tinbergen—and, in his footsteps,
Theil—may be seen as among the founding fathers of modern applied econometrics,
with a worldwide impact.

3.2 Development Economics

After Tinbergen’s first visit to India in 1951, he was shocked not only by the bitter
poverty situation in that country, but also by the rigid structural societal causes of
that phenomenon. He even wrote later on an article on ‘Myrdal’s Asian drama’
(Tinbergen 1968a). He made an analytical attempt to understand and map out the
fundamental causes of poverty from the prevailing institutional-economic structures
in that country, while he also tried to articulate—and also criticized—the lack of
development cooperation of the wealthy nations.
In 1956, Tinbergen was also appointed as a professor in development economics
in Rotterdam; in this way, he was able to educate young people from abroad and
to lay the foundation for the Dutch school of development economics, which arose
later on (and could count among its members, e.g., Henk Bos, Loet Mennes, George
Waardenburg, and Hans Linnemann). In his structuralist view on the economy, plan-
ning and governance systems around the world had to be drastically changed and
improved so as to create a better—i.e., more equitable—world.
Tinbergen’s interest was less in microeconomic or personal motives of people to
achieve a higher position on the welfare ladder. Nevertheless, his interest in income
distribution brought him also into the domain of labor markets and, partly, microeco-
nomics. An interesting contribution of Tinbergen can be found in his view on optimal
income distribution: that there might be a logical empirical boundary to differences
in income in a given country. This is often referred to as the Tinbergen norm: The
difference between the lowest and highest income in an organization should not
exceed the ratio of 1:5, since otherwise productivity or efficiency will no longer be

1 I refer the interested reader to Zellner’s obituary published in the University of Chicago News
(2010) for more details.
136 P. Nijkamp

favored. This empirical rule, however, is hard to trace in Tinbergen’s writings (see
Akkerboom 2015). But in general, his work focused more on an aggregate level. In
his macro-view, educational quality was a critical component to cope with poverty
and inequality. He emphasized, in particular, equal access conditions for all people
to educational systems. Despite the fact that he saw little progress, and despite many
disappointing outcomes, he believed, on rational grounds, that the world has the
potential to improve its fortune and that a change in organizations governing the
world economy is necessary and realistic.

3.3 Regional Science

Jan Tinbergen was never trained as a regional scientist. His spatial interest started
from analyzing welfare disparities in a macro-economic system, but in so doing, he
became increasingly aware of the role of space (in particular, regions) in economic
modeling and socio-economic policy. And, therefore, in Sect. 4, a more detailed
presentation of Tinbergen’s influence in regional science will be given.

4 Jan Tinbergen: The Regional Scientist

The origin of Tinbergen’s interest in regional science has to be found in his macro-
economic international trade modeling research, which had started already in the
1950s. In his view, the use of gravitation analysis offered an applicable quantita-
tive methodology for investigating and explaining international trade flows, in which
distance frictions and economic heartland power played important roles. The gravi-
tational principle implied a logical, universally valid structure of spatial interactions
between countries of different size, location, and economic power. Any change in a
country’s welfare position would also imply a change in the country’s gravitational
power, which may be measured by the use of a multi-country gravitational flow
model.
One of the important conceptual problems to be solved by Tinbergen in his
attempts to specify a full-fledged gravitation model for international trade flows was
the question of dimensionality. Trade flows were usually physical in nature, but of
totally different dimensions, and, consequently, such heterogeneous trade flows had
to be homogenized by translating them into a monetary value, which was—given the
limited statistical data—a major analytical challenge needing to be addressed within
the standard framework of physically inspired gravitation theory.
Tinbergen’s rising interest in inequalities brought him not only into the realm of
economic welfare disparities, but also into that of international and regional economic
disparities. A region was essentially a vehicle for welfare creation and distribution,
and that idea stimulated him to write in 1958 an article on the economic principles for
the optimal use of space (Tinbergen 1958), followed in 1961 by a seminal article on
Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994): A Rational Thinker on Inequality … 137

the spatial dispersion of production (Tinbergen 1961b). This article formed also the
basis for his European Regional Science Association conference paper on ‘Spatial
distribution of industry’ (Tinbergen and Bos 1961), which he presented in 1961 in
The Hague in the presence of Walter Christaller and Walter Isard.
The global gravitational force field reflected in industry-specific and in sector-
specific trade flows offered an operational and logical constellation to better under-
stand uneven economic development from a structuralist perspective. In this context,
his attention was drawn to hierarchical spatial systems’ architecture as incorpo-
rated in decomposition principles of the Christaller-Lösch type (see, for an overview,
Nijkamp 2020). The first European Regional Science Association conference in The
Hague not only brought Tinbergen, Christaller, and Isard together, but also stim-
ulated a vivid debate. Apparently, Tinbergen was impressed by systemic thinking
in regional science and participated also in the seventh European Regional Science
Association conference in 1967 in The Hague, where he again met many well-known
regional scientists.
After his recognition of the great merits of hierarchical spatial systems—as a result
of Christaller’s central place theory—he continued his work on the organization of
the space economy with another seminal article, this one on ‘The hierarchy model of
the size distribution of centers,’ presented at the European Congress of the Regional
Science Association in 1967 in The Hague (Tinbergen 1967). He continued to publish
on regional matters in subsequent years, but less in regional science journals.
The ‘hierarchical systems’ approach was also used by Tinbergen as the cornerstone
of his conceptualization of the new world economy (Tinbergen 1962a, 1974). This
idea was later on (in 1969) operationalized in a really original, model-based study on
spatial structures in development planning, together with others (see Mennes et al.
1969; Zimmerman 1964). Economic order was for him the anchor point for policy
intervention.
In a period when computing power hardly existed, Tinbergen was able to develop
not only the first macro-econometric model for The Netherlands, but also the first
full-fledged global gravity model for international trade. This tool is now a standard
vehicle in quantitative regional science. An elegant model-based illustration of the
hierarchical structure of the space economy can be found in a modeling study by
Bos (1984). Tinbergen’s multi-layer, multi-sectoral model for interdependent hier-
archical spatial systems in the Christaller-Lösch tradition has found many followers
(see Paelinck and Nijkamp 1976; Paelinck 1959; Nijkamp and Ratacjzak 2021),
sometimes under the overarching umbrella of so-called Tinbergen-Bos systems (see
Tinbergen and Bos 1965). Even though Tinbergen never called himself a regional
scientist, he may be seen as one of the founding fathers of quantitative regional
science (see Nijkamp 2020).
138 P. Nijkamp

4.1 Realistic Ideals

Tinbergen during his entire life made an uninterrupted effort to create a better world
(as can also be witnessed from the memorial statement read for his funeral: “his
effort to create a better world remains an example for us all”). A comprehensive
overview of his work, his personal views, his national and international impacts, and
his driving forces can be found in a long historical biography by Dekker (2021). He
was not a utopian dreamer, but a realistic idealist who sought to lay the scientific
foundation for the structure of new economic systems that would be more equitable.
Despite his sometimes ‘centralistic’ views, he believed in democratic centralism. A
significant part of his work on controlled systems was more focused on the questions
of economic convergence between different political-economic systems, rather than
on political claims about the desirability of centralized versus decentralized gover-
nance structures. He became ultimately also increasingly skeptical about the centrally
governed economies in Central and Eastern Europe, as, in his social-democratic view
on society and economy, a democracy was a basic prerequisite. His work on the New
International Order (NIO), addressing issues like environmental quality, fair access
to resources, and socio-economic equity, was a predecessor to the subsequent Brundt-
land Report in 1987. His economic views on a new world order, in which wealthier
countries would be charged with financial transfers to the poorer countries, was based
on the logic of a win–win situation for both parties. His institutional proposal to turn
the IMF into a Global Ministry of Finance and the World Bank into a Global Central
Bank was sometimes seen as unrealistic ideas. However, Tinbergen’s argumentation
was not based on political feasibility, but on the necessity to change the world in the
interest of us all. All such new institutions should serve a livable earth, including a
redistribution of resources.
Tinbergen’s personal views are best articulated in his manifesto on ‘The liveable
Earth’ (1974), which offers a concise and systematic record of his realistic ideals on
poverty in the world, environmental and climatological concerns, industrial capital
and technology development, and, of course, the new international economic order.
A good illustration of his broad, but also modest, view on the need for alternative
and novel economic approaches to pressing world problems can be found in his
missionary message written as a foreword to Nijkamp’s (1980) book Environmental
policy analysis: “Recent information on environmental and energy supply limitations
have necessitated the introduction of the corresponding variables into models. Similar
enrichments may be obtained by the introduction of a number of social indicators
(on family life, work environment, position in a hierarchy) into our models which
increasingly require such an interdisciplinary approach.” And: “Among the future
activities a systematic collection of verifications of the strategies hypothesized with
the aid of observed behaviour may rank high” (Tinbergen 1980, pp. x–xiii). Despite
his great ambitions, Tinbergen would never impose his views on others; he always
sought a collegial and rational debate, far from political emotions.
Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994): A Rational Thinker on Inequality … 139

5 Epilogue

Jan Tinbergen has undoubtedly been one of the greatest economists of the twentieth
century. Despite international conflicts and turmoil, he offered an organized perspec-
tive by presenting a structuralist contribution to the achievement of a better earth,
in particular, by suggesting an applicable global governance structure for socio-
economic and environmental issues in a complex space economy. His interest in
market structures and labor division, public investments, and scale advantages in
a world with heterogeneous product specialization in different regions or centers
make him also one of the early predecessors, ‘avant la lettre,’ of the New Economic
Geography.
Despite many tragedies in his personal life (among others, the early decease of
his younger brother, the sad loss of his daughter), Tinbergen remained an indestruc-
tible rational optimist, who believed that logical arguments and empirical evidence
were needed to convince others (Tinbergen 1984). In a way, his world views may
sometimes be seen as somewhat naïve, as is witnessed in his attempts to rationally
understand national-socialism and communism. But his ideals were never dreams; he
started from current structures and built on top of these his ideal–typical but logically
based construction. His influence on Dutch economists has been great; an informed
overview on the ‘descendants of Tinbergen’ can be found in a book by van Dalen
and Klamer (1996, 1997), which shows the scientific footprints of Tinbergen all over
the country.
In another publication (Nijkamp 2020), the author has highlighted the influence
of Jan Tinbergen on the early development of regional science in The Netherlands.
Clear traces can be found back in the seminal works of another great Dutch regional
scientist, Leo Klaassen (see Klaassen et al. 1959). For an earlier overview from a
European perspective, the reader is referred to Van Geenhuizen and Nijkamp (1996).
Tinbergen’s path-breaking work in economics cannot only be traced in his
numerous publications (more than 900; see, for a sample, Dekker 2021), but also
in the Tinbergen Institute, a post-graduate research and education center based in
both Amsterdam and Rotterdam, which carries his name. And as one of the founding
fathers of the Tinbergen Institute, I was extremely fortunate to organize, beginning in
1995, an annual Tinbergen workshop on regional science, which over the course of
years attracted hundreds of regional science colleagues from all over the world. For
more information on Tinbergen’s work, I refer the interested reader to de Wolff
(1994), Derksen (1959), Hansen (1969), Heckman (2018), Kol and de Wolff (1993),
Pen and Tinbergen (1977), Pronk (1970), Tinbergen (1956, 1963, 1965a, b, 1966,
1968b, 1981a, b), Tinbergen and Bos (1965).
Tinbergen himself remained a modest gentleman in all the economic turbulence
he studied and wished to improve. He was also very modest about his contribution
to spatial dispersion issues and models in regional science, as witnessed by the
following text of an interview with him:
For some time I have been interested in the distribution of a population over cities and
villages, in short, over centres of different size, and I tried to develop a theory, but that
140 P. Nijkamp

theory was either incomplete or too simple. It was mainly based, I think, on the demand side.
So what I wrote about it was unfinished and I think that the subject, although it’s terribly
interesting, is very difficult, too difficult for me. Perhaps Jean Paelinck will be able to solve
that problem. But this is an area in which I would have liked to make more progress than I
did. (Tinbergen 1987, p. 138)

Tinbergen was fully aware of the limitations in his thinking, but at the same time,
he always raised the bar very high. Nevertheless, he has always kept his solid belief
in evidence-based and quantitative research for the improvement of our world, as is
witnessed in the following quotation: “For some queer and deplorable reason most
human beings are more impressed by words than by figures, to the great disadvantage
of mankind” (Tinbergen 1987, p. 141). His ideas on new world constellations are still
vivid and seem to get rejuvenation in the recent debates on global climate change.
Regional and global issues will ultimately appear to be connected phenomena on our
earth.

References

Akkerboom, B. 2015. Waar komt de ‘Tinbergennorm’ 1:5 vandaan? Me Judice (25 April 25): 1–13.
Batabyal, A.A. 2017. A note on optimal income redistribution in a creative region. Regional Science
Inquiry 9 (2): 39–44.
Batabyal, A.A., and P. Nijkamp. 2010. Asymmetric information, entrepreneurial activity, and the
scope of fiscal policy in an open regional economy. International Regional Science Review 33
(4): 421–436.
Bos, H.C. 1984. Spatial dispersion of economic activity. Rotterdam: Rotterdam University Press.
Christaller, W. 1933. Die zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland. Jena: Fischer.
de Wolff, P. 1994. Levensbericht J. Tinbergen. Levensberichten en Herdenkingen, 97–106. KNAW,
Amsterdam.
Dekker, E. 2021. Jan Tinbergen: een Econoom op Zoek naar Vrede. Meppel: Bruna.
Derksen, J.B.D. 1959. Short supplement to extensive bibliography of Jan Tinbergen. De Economist
117: 798–799.
Geenhuizen, M.S., and P. Nijkamp. 1996. Progress in regional science: A European perspective.
International Regional Science Review 19 (3): 223–245.
Hansen, B. 1969. Jan Tinbergen: An appraisal of his contribution to economics. Swedish Journal
of Economics 71 (4): 325–336.
Heckman, J.J. 2018. The race between demand and supply: Tinbergen’s pioneering studies of
earnings inequality. Discussion Paper IZA DP No. 12046. Bonn: Institute of Labor Economics.
Isard, W. 1956. Location and space-economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Klaassen, L.H., L.M. Koyck, and H.J. Witteveen (eds.). 1959. Jan Tinbergen, selected papers.
Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Kol, J., and P. de Wolff. 1993. Tinbergen’s work, change and continuity. The Economist 141 (1):
1–28.
McFadden, D. 1974. Conditional logit analysis of quantitative choice behavior. New York:
Academic Press.
Mennes, L.B.M., G.J. Waardenburg, and J. Tinbergen. 1969. The element of space in development
planning. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Nijkamp, P. 1980. Environmental policy analysis. New York: Wiley.
Nijkamp, P. 2020. Regional science in the Netherlands: A contextual interpretation of the ‘power
of smallness.’ Papers in Regional Science 99 (2): 275–292.
Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994): A Rational Thinker on Inequality … 141

Nijkamp, P., and J.H.P. Paelinck. 1973. Some models for the economic evaluation of the
environment. Regional Science and Urban Economics 3 (1): 33–62.
Nijkamp, P., and W. Ratacjzak. 2021. Gravitational analysis in regional science and spatial
economics: A vector gradient approach to trade. International Regional Science Review 44 (3–4):
400–431.
Nijkamp, P., and W.H. Somermeijer. 1971. Explicating implicit social preference functions. The
Economics of Planning 11 (3): 101–119.
Paelinck, J.H.P. 1959. Location-allocation aspects of Tinbergen-Bos systems. The Annals of
Regional Science 33 (4): 573–580.
Paelinck, J.H.P., and P. Nijkamp. 1976. Operational theory and method in regional economics.
Aldershot: Gower.
Pen, J., and J. Tinbergen. 1977. Naar een Rechtvaardiger Inkomensverdeling. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Pronk, J.P. 1970. Bibliography of Jan Tinbergen 1959–69. De Economist 118: 156–173.
Theil, H. 1964. Optimal decision rules for government and industry. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Theil, H. 1971. Principles of econometrics. New York: Wiley.
Tinbergen, J. 1938. On the theory of business cycle control. Econometrica 6 (1): 22–39.
Tinbergen, J. 1940. Econometric business cycle research. Review of Economic Studies 7 (2): 73–90.
Tinbergen, J. 1942. Zur theorie der langfristigen wirtschaftsentwickklung. Weltwirtschafliches
Archiv 55: 511–549.
Tinbergen, J. 1947/1948. Central planning in the Netherlands. Review of Economic Studies 15 (2):
70–77.
Tinbergen, J. 1952. On the theory of economic policy. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Tinbergen, J. 1954a. Centralization and decentralization in economic policy. Amsterdam: North-
Holland.
Tinbergen, J. 1954b. De Economische Balans van het Deltaplan. Rapport-Delta Commission, Part
6. The Hague: State Printing Publishing Co.
Tinbergen, J. 1956. Economic policy: Principles and design. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Tinbergen, J. 1958. The economic principles for an optimum use of space. Les Cahiers De Bruges
11: 15–18.
Tinbergen, J. 1961a. The appraisal of investment projects: The semi-input-output method. Industrial
India 25–26.
Tinbergen, J. 1961b. The spatial dispersion of production: An hypothesis. Schweizerische Zeitschrift
Für Volkswirtschaft and Statistik 97 (4): 412–419.
Tinbergen, J. 1962a. Planning in stages. Statsøkonomisk Tidskrift 1: 1–20.
Tinbergen, J. 1962b. An analysis of world trade flows. In Shaping the world economy, ed. J.
Tinbergen. The Twentieth Century Fund, New York, 5 (1): 27–31.
Tinbergen, J. 1963. Lessons from the past. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Tinbergen, J. 1965a. The economic framework of regional planning. Semaine d’Etude sur le
Rôle de l’Analyse Econométrique dans la Formulation de Plans de Développement, Pontificiae
Academiae Scientarium, Scripta Varia, Rome, 28: 1233–1264.
Tinbergen, J. 1965b. Some principles of regional planning. Nederlands Economisch Instituut,
Research Paper, 29/65, Rotterdam.
Tinbergen, J. 1966. Some refinements of the semi–input-output method. Pakistan Development
Review 6 (2): 243–247.
Tinbergen, J. 1967. The hierarchy model of the size distribution of centers. Papers of the Regional
Science Association 20: 65–68.
Tinbergen, J. 1968a. Myrdal’s Asian drama. Pakistan Development Review 8 (4): 618–625.
Tinbergen, J. 1968b. Wanted: A world development plan. International Organization 22 (1): 417–
431.
Tinbergen, J. 1974. Een leefbare Aarde (A liveable Earth). Amsterdam: Agon Elsevier.
Tinbergen, J. 1978. Income distribution, analysis and policies. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Tinbergen, J. 1980. Foreword. In Environmental policy analysis, ed. P. Nijkamp. New York: Wiley.
142 P. Nijkamp

Tinbergen, J. 1981a. The use of models: Experience and prospects. American Economic Review 71
(6): 17–22.
Tinbergen, J. 1981b. Misunderstandings concerning income distribution policies. The Economist
129 (1): 8–20.
Tinbergen, J. 1984. My life philosophy. The American Economist 28 (2): 5–8.
Tinbergen, J. 1987. Interview with J. Tinbergen: The ET Interview: Professor J. Tinbergen. Economic
Theory 3 (1): 117–142.
Tinbergen, J., and H.C. Bos. 1961. Spatial distribution of industry. Paper presented at the 1st
European conference of the Regional Science Association, The Hague, September.
Tinbergen, J., and H.C. Bos. 1965. Mathematical models of economic growth. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Tinbergen, J., and D. Fischer. 1987. Warfare and welfare: Integrating security policy into socio-
economic policy. Brighton, UK, and Arcata, CA, USA: Wheatsheaf Books.
University of Chicago News. 2010. Arnold Zellner, 1927–2010, a pioneer of modern econometrics.
13 August 2010. https://news.uchicago.edu/story/arnold-zellner-1927-2010-pioneer-modern-eco
nometrics. Last accessed May 2, 2022.
van Dalen, H.D., and A. Klamer, eds. 1996. Telgen van Tinbergen (Descendants of Tinbergen).
Amsterdam: Balans.
van Dalen, H.D., and A. Klamer. 1997. Blood is thicker than water. In Economic science and
practice: The roles of academic economists and policy-makers, eds. P.A.G. van Bergeijk, A.L.
Bovenberg, E.C. van Damme, and J. van Sinderen, 395–404. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Zellner, A. 1999. Bayesian analysis in econometrics and statistics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Zimmerman, L.J. 1964. Essays in regional and world planning. New Delhi: National Council of
Applied Economic Research.
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012):
An Unorthodox Regional Scientist

Abdul Shaban

Albert O. Hirschman, right, with Inter-American Foundation vice president Charles Reilly. Photo
source IAF

A. Shaban (B)
School of Development Studies, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai 400088, India
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 143
P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_7
144 A. Shaban

1 Introduction

Albert O. Hirschman was a product of one of the most difficult times in human history
of the first half of the twentieth century. This was the time when wars ravaged Europe
and so many other continents, causing human miseries, migration, holocaust, and
destruction of material wealth. From these ruins and implosion in central Europe, the
best brains of the world (Albert Einstein, Hannah Arendt, Hans Krebs, Fritz Haber,
James Franck, Fritz London, to name a few) also emerged helping the humanities
to write the stories of successes in many fields—physics, biology, medical sciences
to social sciences. Hirschman was one of those who contributed by extending our
understanding of regional and development economics, and in building cross-cultural
solidarity to stop violence and human rights violations, which Hirschman himself
witnessed and was subjected to. In his more than seven decades of academic life, he
would help regional scholars, planners, and practitioners to transform their under-
standing of the (regional) development processes from his experience and intellectu-
alism based on a cross-cultural life experience and from cross-disciplinary academics
in Europe and the Americas. His method of inquiry, analysis, theories, and develop-
mental policies emerged from different contexts and was rooted in cross-disciplinary
paradigms, though economics, as a discipline, dominated his approach. He lived two
parallel lives: an inner life, humanitarian at core that was wounded by Hitler’s fascist
violence, while an outer life, related to academics and regional science, was calm
and serene. He never revealed any of the miseries that he went through in Germany,
France, Spain, and Italy, where he fought the wars against the fascism during his
early youth. In the early days of his youth, he learned German idealism and Marxism
and was a radical member of the Social Democratic Party in Germany. He was a
prodigious concept builder and a cosmopolitan thinker.
Among luminaries in economics and regional science, Hirschman stands out
because (a) his wide range of essays related to many unconnected aspects of economic
and social life; (b) his methods of investigation were unorthodox and differed as per
the context and problems; and (c) he remained quintessentially a liberal in his ideo-
logical approach, a nonconformist and ‘possibilist’ (Lepenies 2008) with respect to
theorization and abstraction. Hirschman’s arduous life journey, especially when he
was young, may have shaped his orientation toward unorthodoxy and his tendency
to search for endless possibilities to understand, address, and resolve development
problems. His curious inquiries as a child from his father (Hirschman 1995), the holo-
caust, association with radical socialist groups, wars between countries, exposure to
a multiplicity of ideologies as he grew up, life as a refugee, fear of discrimination
and of violence as a Jew in Europe and America, his wife Sarah, reading of Hayek’s
‘Road to Serfdom,’ and his employment and research-related visits to various regions
all left indelible imprints on his thinking process and leave us amazed as they get
contextualized, abstracted, and theorized in an unorthodox manner in his writings
and everyday life. From these also stems his ability to contribute to regional science,
where (a) regional problems emerge in their own contexts and peculiarities with their
unique possible solutions, (b) the seed of solutions was, for him, embedded within the
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional Scientist 145

regions, and (c) there is no unique formal theory which can help in understanding the
grand phenomena. He worked in an interdisciplinary field and contributed through
his writing to all the social sciences and made a synthesizing discipline like regional
science richer. Hirschman also displayed a ‘propensity to self-subversion’ by re-
examining his own theories and arguments. Most relevant to regional scientists,
the concept of ‘unbalanced growth’ (besides the role of asymmetry in international
relations propounded in the 1940s and ‘exit and voice’ contributed in the 1970s)
presented in 1958 was also subject to his re-examination.
In this chapter, I attempt to take an overview of Hirschman’s biography and then
swiftly move to examine his major contributions to regional science. It is not that
all his contributions are related to spatial and regional questions, but they do have
significant potential to be further implicated into the regional science inquiry. The
rest of this chapter is divided into the following major sections. Section 2 presents a
short biography of Hirschman. Section 3 examines his major academic contributions
to regional science and is organized in several sub-sections. These consist of an
examination of his contributions to:
• unbalanced growth strategy
• the relationship between social overhead capital (SOC) and directly productive
activities (DPA)
• linkages
• grassroots development
• trade and regional development
• the non-economic factors in development
• rival interpretation of capitalism.
Section 4 discusses the limitations of his work, while Sect. 5 presents conclusions
and the legacy of his work for future generations.

2 A Short Biography

Albert O. Hirschman was born on April 7, 1915, in Berlin, Germany, into a Jewish
family. He went to Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, Berlin, for his law degree in 1932,
but the anti-Semitist policy of Hitler, the consequent social upheaval in Germany,
and the death of his father led to his emigration to France in April 1933 (Adelman
2013). In Paris, he studied at the École des Hautes Études Commerciales (HEC), and
it is said that economic geography courses at the École had a lasting impact upon his
academic career (Lepenies 2008). He assimilated in his development thinking the role
of regional and geographical features, like topography, climate, and social character-
istics, which is why he never became an orthodox economist for the rest of his life.
Unlike orthodox economists, he was not solely concerned with economic variables,
like investment, saving, interest rate, capital-output ratio, etc., while nevertheless
understanding the development processes and outcomes (Lepenies 2008, p. 441;
Hirschman 1995, p. 116). He did not shy away from stating, “it was a great relief
146 A. Shaban

to realize that one could do tolerably competent work in economics without having
to resolve whether Keynes…had all the right answers” (Hirschman 1995, p. 118).
From Paris, he also went to the London School of Economics as a research fellow
for a short period of time in 1935–1936.
It is amazing to see Hirschman fighting wars as well as continuing his studies
during those difficult times. In 1936, he participated in the Spanish civil war, while
at the same time continuing to work on his Ph.D. He received his Ph.D. in economics
from the University of Trieste in 1938. That was the time when Keynesianism domi-
nated macro-economic theory. Away from those, he published his first academic
paper on the Italian economy. He joined the French army against German aggression
in 1940, and once it was no longer possible to resist the Germans, he changed his
identity and left for the USA in December 1940.
In the USA, Hirschman received a scholarship from the Rockefeller Foundation,
which helped him to work as a researcher at Berkeley. He contributed to statis-
tical analyses of several reports on trade (Alacevich 2021) and, subsequently in
1945, published his first book: National power and the structure of foreign trade
(Hirschman 1945). He served in the United States Army (1943–1946) and became a
US citizen. After that, he worked from 1946 to 1952 with the Federal Reserve Board in
Washington on the Marshall Plan for the reconstruction of Western Europe. Later, he
became an advisor to the National Planning Board of Colombia (1952–1954). He held
various academic appointments related to economics in several American universi-
ties, among them: Yale (1956–1958), Columbia (1958–1964), Harvard (1964–1974),
and Princeton, in the Institute for Advanced Study (1974–2012).
The turbulence Hirschman had experienced as a young man may well have affected
his thinking process when he began his academic career (Lepenies 2008; Grant 2018).
In 1932, he was forced to leave Berlin, which, with the rise of Hitler’s fascism,
becomes a hotspot of polarization against Jews. As a consequence, he lived two lives:
“one as an anti-fascist and refugee, the other as a renowned economist” (Lepenies
2008, p. 440).
With rising McCarthyism in the USA in the early 1950s, and given his left-wing
sympathies, he moved to Colombia in 1952. Hirschman stayed there with his family
for almost four and a half years. He succeeded in reinventing himself as a regional and
development economist. Based on what he observed in Colombia, he turned the then
in vogue economic development theories on their heads. In 1958, he published his
famous book, The strategy of economic development (Hirschman 1958), and many
other important contributions followed subsequently.

3 Major Contributions

Hirschman wrote on several themes with multiple perspectives. He did not believe
that one model or universal economic theory could explain and help design strategies
of development everywhere. Rather, he was a pragmatist, who believed that there
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional Scientist 147

are endogenous forces within regional economies which need to be understood and
mobilized for the development of regions. In this context, Bray (2009) argues:
Hirschman was a prolific generator of theories and is associated with the idea that no universal
economic development template exists. Strategies had to be designed for the circumstances
of a particular country, he maintained, because, contrary to the prevailing belief, there was
no single correct sequence of interventions. (Bray 2009, p. 5)

His contribution extended to development economics, the understanding of regional

development, political economy, and social psychology. The major books by
Hirschman are:
• National power and the structure of foreign trade (1945)
• Colombia: Highlights of a developing economy (1955)
• The strategy of economic development (1958)
• Latin American issues: Essays and comments (1961)
• Journeys toward progress: Studies of economic policymaking in Latin America
(1963)
• Development projects observed (1967b)
• Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states
(1970)
• A bias for hope: Essays on development and Latin America (1971)
• The passions and the interests: Political arguments for capitalism before its
triumph (1977)
• Essays in trespassing: Economics to politics and beyond (1981c)
• Shifting involvements: Private interest and public action (1982)
• Getting ahead collectively: Grassroots experiences in Latin America (1984)
• Rival views of market society (1986)
• The rhetoric of reaction (1991).
Hirschman developed several important concepts and ideas that are helping us to
understand development processes and design strategies. These are listed in Table 1
with citations to the works in which Hirschman proposed or developed the respective
concepts. Given the limitation of space and scope of this paper, I have only discussed
some of these concepts while focusing on his major contributions in regional science.
Hirschman also received several awards. He received the Frank E. Seidman Distin-
guished Award in Political Economy in 1980, and the American Political Science
Association honored him in 2003 with the Benjamin E. Lippincott Award for his
exceptional contribution through his book, The passions and the interests: Political
arguments for capitalism before its triumph (Hirschman 1977).

3.1 Regional Economic Growth and Development

As I have noted already, one of Hirschman’s major contributions on regional develop-

ment is his book, The strategy of economic development (Hirschman 1958). Unlike
148 A. Shaban

Table 1 Important ideas and

Idea or concept Work(s) where he originated
concepts about development
or elaborated upon the idea
processes and design
strategies proposed or ‘Trade and political Hirschman (1945)
developed by Albert O. dependence’
Hirschman ‘The Herfindahl–Hirschman Hirschman (1945, 1964)
Index’
‘Unbalanced growth strategy’ Hirschman (1958)
‘Chain of disequilibria’ Hirschman (1958)
‘Growth pole’ Hirschman (1958)
‘Trickle down’ Hirschman (1958)
‘Linkages’ Hirschman (1958, 1992a,
1992b)
‘Hidden rationalities’ Hirschman (1958, 1968,
1992b)
‘Blessings in disguise’ Hirschman (1963a)
‘Fracasomania’ (failure Hirschman (1963b, 1975)
complex)
‘Reform mongering’ Hirschman (1963c, 1963d)
‘Visiting-economist Hirschman (1963e, 1992b)
syndrome’
‘Principle of the hiding hand’ Hirschman (1967a)
‘Exit and voice’ Hirschman (1970)
‘Bias for hope’ Hirschman (1971a)
‘Possibilism’ Hirschman (1971b, 1992c)
‘The right to a non-projected Hirschman (1971a)
future’
‘Obituary improving Hirschman (1973a)
activities’
‘The tunnel effect’ Hirschman (1973b)
‘Passions versus interests’ Hirschman (1977, 1992d)
‘Trespassing’ Hirschman (1981b)
‘Mono-economics’ Hirschman (1981a)
‘Rival views of market Hirschman (1982a, 1992e)
society’
‘Happiness of pursuit versus Hirschman (1982b)
free riding in public life’
‘Shifting involvements’ Hirschman (1982b)
‘Getting ahead collectively’ Hirschman (1984)
‘Rhetoric of reaction’ Hirschman (1991)
‘Propensity to self-subversion’ Hirschman (1995); see also
Özçelik (2014, pp. 115–116)
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional Scientist 149

many other economists and idealists of his time, he argued in favor of ‘unbalanced’
regional and sectoral growth. His major argument in defense of an unbalanced devel-
opment strategy was, “development depends not so much on finding optimal combi-
nations for given resources and factors of production, as on calling forth and enlisting
for development purposes, resources and abilities that are hidden, scattered or badly
utilized” (Hirschman 1958, p. 5). This was an attack on the ‘balanced growth’ strate-
gies, advocated by Rosentein-Rodan (1943) and Nurkse (1953), which required a
‘big push’ for development of underdeveloped countries. These theories were influ-
enced by Keynesianism, which required active investment by the State. However, for
Hirschman, the need for development of underdeveloped regions was just the oppo-
site: unbalanced sectoral and regional growth. According to him, this will create
regional economic disequilibria and tension for propelling economic growth. This
was in fact easier to implement and was pragmatic for countries and regions, as
they could prioritize the sectors where the investment can be made first based on
the limited resources at their disposal. Balanced growth was the end result for him,
which would emerge from the unbalanced growth processes.
Hirschman further summarized the main argument of this book in his co-authored
paper with Lindblom:
At any one point of time, an economy’s resources are not to be considered as rigidly fixed
in amount, and more resources or factors of production will come into play if development
is marked by sectoral imbalances that galvanize private entrepreneurs or public authorities
into action … The crucial, but plausible, assumption here is that there is some “slack”
in the economy; and that additional investment, hours of work, productivity, and decision
making can be squeezed out of it by pressure mechanisms. (Hirschman and Lindblom 1962,
pp. 211–212)

In the book, Hirschman argued that the best course of action for regional planning
was to identify and invest initially only in strategic sectors/regions, and, because
of the interlinkages, all the sectors/regions will grow. He argued that development
occurs through “growth being communicated from the leading sector of the economy
to the followers, from one industry to another, from one firm to another” (Hirschman
1958, p. 63). Like Perroux (1950), he argues that:
The process of development is better conceived as ‘a chain of disequilibria’ in which invest-
ment in particular industries raises profit and induces investment in other industries, which
in turn promotes further rounds of investment and increased profits in other parts of the
economy. (Hirschman 1958, pp. 65–66)

To maintain a chain of disequilibria in the development process, he asserted:

Our aim must be to keep alive rather than to eliminate the disequilibria of which profits and
losses are symptoms in a competitive economy. If the economy is to be kept moving ahead,
the task of development policy is to maintain tensions, disproportions, and disequilibria.
(Emphasis in the original text, Hirschman 1958, p. 66)

Hirschman believed that the key economic problem facing developing countries
did not arise because of scarcity of resources, but rather from the fact that factors
of production and ‘abilities’ were ‘hidden,’ scattered, and badly utilized (Hirschman
150 A. Shaban

1958, p. 5). For him, due to this, “the best development strategy is one which sets up
‘pressure’, ‘tensions’, which elicit and mobilise the largest amount of resources, in
effect inducing development.” (Gore 2013/1995, p. 95)
The unbalanced growth path proposed by Hirschman assumes that an economy is
balancing between two sectors—industrial and agricultural—and if the target of the
economy is to move forward and grow, the economy can follow either a balanced
growth path where both the sectors grow proportionately, called the balanced growth,
or the unbalanced growth path where the economy first strides out in one direction
(industry or agriculture) and then (as shortages emerge in other sector due to demand
generated in the developed sector) the developed sector pulls up the lagging one. He
states this as:
Unbalanced growth means to strike out first in one direction and then, impelled by resulting
shortages, balance-of-payments pressures, and other assorted troubles, in the other. …trav-
eling along this circuitous route, which is likely to be more costly because of the accompa-
nying shortages and excess capacities, the economy may get faster to its goal. (Hirschman
and Lindblom 1962, p. 213)

3.2 Unbalanced DPA and SOC

Hirschman provided special emphasis on regional development led by Social Over-

head Capital rather than its shortages (Friedmann and Alonso 1964). He defined SOC
as:
SOC is usually defined as comprising those basic services without which primary, secondary,
and tertiary productive activities cannot function. In its wider sense, it includes all public
services from law and order through education and public health to transportation, commu-
nications, power and water supply, as well as such agricultural overhead capital as irrigation
and drainage systems. (Hirschman 1958, p. 83)

To him, the role of SOC is crucial for further expanding the Directly Productive
Activities (consumer goods), which it “permits and, in fact, invites …to come in”
(Hirschman 1958, p. 84). He was in favor of SOC-supported unbalanced growth
of regional economies. He argued, “Development via shortage is an instance of the
‘disorderly,’ ‘compulsive’ sequence” (Hirschman 1958, p. 89), while the “excess
SOC capacity is essentially permissive” (p. 93). He favored this zig-zag manner of
growth of the economy. In his view “it is the experience of unbalanced growth in the
past that produces, at an advanced stage of economic development, the possibility
of balanced growth” (Emphasis in the original text, Hirschman 1958, p. 93).

3.3 Linkages in the Unbalanced Growth Process

Hirschman also propounded concepts of ‘linkages’ in the development process. These

concepts can be mobilized to understand the regional and sectoral evolutions of
economies.
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional Scientist 151

To him, strategizing of investments is needed with regard to whether they will

push the backward (linkages) or forward (linkages) production process (Lepenies
2008):
First, an existing industrial operation, relying initially on imports not only for its equipment
and machinery, but also for many of its material inputs, would make pressures towards
the domestic manufacture of these inputs and eventually towards a domestic capital goods
industry. This dynamic was called backward linkages, since the direction of the stimulus
towards further investment flows from the finished article back towards the semi-processed
or raw material from which it is made or towards the machines which help make it. Another
stimulus towards additional investment points in the other direction and is therefore called
forward linkages: the existence of a given product line A, which is a final good or is used as
in input in line B, acts as a stimulant to the establishment of another line C which can also
use A as in input. (Emphasis in the original text, Hirschman 1989, pp. 210–211)

The investment in one sector will generate demand from another sector, which, in
turn, will lead to investment in that sector. This complementarity effect of investment
is the main process through which one can break the vicious circle of underdevel-
opment. Therefore, to give maximum play to this complementarity process, the last
industry in the chain can be located first. Following this analogy, in a spatial context,
industries first can be located in big cities.

3.4 Polarization and Trickle-Down Effects

Polarization and trickle-down effects are two other concepts that have often been
used in the regional development literature. To explain the regional growth process
and its consequences for both the developed and developing regions, Hirschman
argued that there is no balanced growth process in regional development:
Economic progress does not appear everywhere at the same time and that once it has appeared,
powerful forces make for a spatial concentration of economic growth around the initial
starting points… the emergence of "growing points" or "growth poles" in the course of the
development process means that international and interregional inequality of growth is an
inevitable concomitant and condition of growth itself. (Hirschman 1958, pp. 183–184)

He recognized the Marshallian economies (Marshall 1961/1890) of scale and the

argument by Perroux (1950) about the ‘growth pole.’ For him, the economic
advantage that agglomeration provides is crucial in location decision making by
entrepreneurs and helps in creating a growth atmosphere within the region or city.
However, this localized growth will not proceed indefinitely. For “once growth takes
a firm hold in one part of the national territory, it obviously sets in motion certain
forces that act on the remaining parts” (Hirschman 1958, p. 87). This creates a coun-
tervailing tendency against polarization. This is what is popularly known as disec-
onomies of scale. He labels the growing region as ‘North’ and the lagging region as
‘South.’
Hirschman argues that the growth of the North “will have a number of direct
economic repercussions—some favourable while others adverse” (Hirschman 1958,
152 A. Shaban

p. 187). The favorable effect he calls ‘trickle down,’ which occurs through Northern
purchases and investments in the South. This helps in raising the factor income,
consumption, and labor productivity in the South. The migration of labor from the
South to the North and their remittances play an important role in this process of
income transfer from North to South. The demand for labor in the North also helps
in overcoming unemployment in the South.
Hirschman also recognizes the adverse impact on the South of polarization. The
efficient production in the North can depress the economic activities, and the migra-
tion can denude the human resources and enterprising men in the South (Hirschman
1958, p. 188). This may lead initially to increase the regional imbalance, but, like
Kuznets (1955) and Williamson (1965), he argues that in the long run, the geograph-
ical trickle-down effect will be sufficient to reduce such disparities. However, his
optimistic conclusions ultimately rest on the theory of state intervention, which is an
integral part of Hirschman’s unbalanced growth strategy. For him, the State is taken
as an equilibrating mechanism—a new kind of invisible hand—and thus:
If the market forces that express themselves through the trickling-down and polarization
effects result in a temporary victory of the latter, deliberate economic policy will come
into play to correct the situation. Actually, of course, economic policy will be an important
influence throughout the process. (Hirschman 1958, p. 190)

Overall, in the context of regional planning, Hirschman’s argument leads to the

conclusion that an urban industrial growth pole strategy offers the best way to achieve
national growth objectives.
Hirschman, being the kind of self-subversive and reflective regional scientist and
economist that he was, realized the limitation of his unbalanced growth model. In
the 1988 edition of The strategy of economic development, he subverted his own idea
and wrote that the sector and regions which may have initial advantage may gain at
the expense of the lagging region in the unbalanced growth process, and there may
be political consequences of the same (Hirschman 1988, pp. 28, 32). However, he
argued that rising inequalities in the development process are tolerated—at least for
some time—by those left out because of certain psychological reasons, which he
called the ‘tunnel effect.’ He explains this as follows:
Suppose that I drive through a two-lane tunnel, both lanes going in the same direction, and
run into a serious traffic jam. No car moves in either lane as far as I can see (which is not
very far). I am in the left lane and feel dejected. After a while the cars in the right lane begin
to move. Naturally, my spirits lift considerably, for I know the jam has been broken and that
my lane’s turn to move will surely come any moment now. Even though I sit still, I feel
much better off than before because of the expectation that I shall soon be on the move.
But suppose that the expectation is disappointed and only the right lane keeps moving: in
that case I, along with my left lane co-sufferers shall suspect foul play, and many of us will
at some point become quite furious and ready to correct manifest injustice by taking direct
actions (such as illegally crossing the double line separating the two lanes). (Hirschman
1981a, p. 41)

This explanation of the ‘tunnel effect’ is very realistic and is derived from his
own experiences and observations. This is a powerful explanation of toleration of
inequality by those left out rather than only the simple explanation, as by Kuznets
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional Scientist 153

(1955), that inequality rises at the initial state of development only to decline later
on as development proceeds.

3.5 Fieldwork, ‘Social Energy,’ and Grassroots Development

Fieldwork and observations constituted the central data collection process for
Hirschman. He wrote based on his own observations rather than drawing data from
grand, central sources. Starting from his observations, he proceeded to provide
abstractions and theorization. Among others, two of his books, Exit, voice and loyalty
(1970) and Getting ahead collectively (1984), are fine examples of this.
In 1983, Hirschman spent fourteen weeks in Latin American countries—The
Dominican Republic, Colombia, Peru, Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay—to study,
with support from the Inter-America Foundation, ‘grassroots development’ and
‘collective actions.’ He drew enormous insight from these field investigations. He
used them to explain the ‘working’ of (regional) development and relations among
rulers, the ruled, and social movements. This also highlights the importance of field-
work in academic inquiry, grassroots organizations and collective actions in people’s
development, and their relations with national development and political regimes.
Hirschman does not emphasize the grand framework of ‘gross’ and ‘total’ but
argues that fragmented and particular activities specific to their context do add signif-
icantly to the welfare of local communities. These grassroots activities, which can
be captured mainly from fieldwork, are important in ‘saving souls’ and vital for
the ‘solidarity and hope’ of communities, and one does not need to do the ‘impos-
sible’ task of aggregating them and comparing the resulting ‘total’ to ‘some equally
nebulous concept such as General Economic Welfare.’ (Hirschman 1984, p. 95)
Grassroots development remained very important to him. Grassroots initiatives
and their interactions shape regional economies. However, Hirschman did not want to
conflate the contribution of grassroots initiatives to the overall economic development
frame. In this regard, he further argues:
The whole venture of grassroots development has arisen in good measure from a revulsion
against the worship of the “gross national product” and of the “rate of growth” as unique
arbiters of economic and human progress. Grassroots development refuses to be judged by
these standards. (Hirschman 1984, p. 95)

Another important finding from Hirschman’s fieldwork in Latin America on grass-

roots initiatives is that grand political change need not be the first condition of people-
centered development. In fact, his findings are consistent with those of Francois Furet,
who argued that a change of central power is not a precondition for ‘social change’
(Scott 1991). In this connection, Hirschman argues that this need for a change in
central power is:
… also being questioned in Latin America, precisely by the grassroots movement. The
decision of many middle class professionals to work for the social activist groups is a case in
point… Latin America’s restless middle-class youth: becoming a promoter social whose task
154 A. Shaban

it is to build self-help communities at the grassroots and thus to achieve human betterment
and social change in a less spectacular, but perhaps more fundamental manner. (Emphasis
in the original text, Hirschman 1984, p. 96)

His fieldwork in Latin America contributed significantly to understanding of

the relationship between ‘grassroots’ movements and ‘centralized’ authoritarian
regimes. In this context, he argues:
A dense network of such movements, jointly with a large number of social activist organi-
zations, is bound to change the traditional character of Latin American society in several
ways, most of which are not yet well understood. But it seems safe to assert that, with such
a network, social relations become more caring and less private. …. In principle, the forma-
tion of cooperatives and other forms of collective action at the grassroots should therefore be
incompatible with the very structural requirements of those authoritarian regimes. Perhaps
these movements can then claim some credit for the recent weakening and retreats of these
regimes which, with all the might and frightfulness at their command, and with their preten-
sions to introduce a stable new order, seem to have a lifespan of at most ten years? (Emphasis
in the original text, Hirschman 1984, pp. 97–98)

In the book, Getting ahead collectively (Hirschman 1984), he argued that, as

opposed to popular belief in economics, poor people were working together to resolve
their hardship and to get ahead collectively, “…that collective action, arguably under-
taken because of immediate benefits to each individual, could broaden into public
advocacy with less clearly personal benefits” (Bray 2009, p. 5). To Hirschman, these
collective actions emerged, because of: (a) the aggression of poor people against
powerful individuals, society, and the State responsible for their sufferings, and,
more importantly, (b) because of the ‘principle of conservation and mutation of
social energy.’ His important concept of ‘social energy’ became very popular in
‘grassroots’ and ‘community’ development literature (e.g., Lepenies 2008; Dhesi
2000; Adelman 2013). However, he did not develop that further. Bray argues:
It is a useful concept that exists somewhere between that of “human capital,” meaning
knowledge, and that of “social capital,” personal networks that can be used for economic
advancement. He used the term “social energy” in his observation that failure did not always
lead to abandonment of collective action. Instead, participants often learned from the failure
and tried again later, their social energy in “storage” in the meantime. (Bray 2009, p. 6)

3.6 Trade and Regional Development

Hirschman recognized both beneficial and adverse effect of the trade on regions
in his book published in 1945, National power and the structure of foreign trade
(Hirschman 1945). To him, trade has possibilities to enhance peace; it can alter
citizens’ behavior from a feudalistic outlook to gentility, and it can promote order.
As trade often expands the interest of regions and countries, it has a civilizing effect
since the economic interest is more likely to be advanced through peace.
However, unequal trade power can turn dominant countries into monsters. The
classic example was Hitler’s Germany context, where Nazis attempted to expand
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional Scientist 155

trade through many means. In fact, through this economic means, economic relations
were created between countries that made “the pursuit of power a relatively easy task”
(Hirschman 1978, p. 46). Nazis capitalized on the side effects or disequilibria, which
are otherwise considered harmless trade relations, for exercising power on other
countries. Using the example of Hitler’s Germany, he argued:
…sheer economic weight enabled the German empire to exert a considerable political influ-
ence on a number of smaller East-European countries. The description of these negative polit-
ical effects of trade, and of the political dependencies resulting from international economic
inequalities, anticipated many arguments employed by the Dependency theory of the 1960s,
whose proponents readily claimed Hirschman as one of their own. (Lepenies 2008, p. 443)

It was not Germany alone which exercised the power through trade but, as
Hirschman pointed out later, “side effects of foreign trade and investment are still very
much with us—two obvious examples are the relations of the United States with Latin
America and of the Soviet Union with Eastern Europe” (Hirschman 1978, p. 46).
This is why, in 1945, he differed from other neoclassical economists who claimed
that trade could be beneficial to all the trading partners. He argued that trade gains are
asymmetrical between countries, and this asymmetry cost is higher for the poor and
small countries that engage in trade with large and richer countries. Thus, though he
agreed with the usual assumption of beneficial effects of the trade for trade partners,
he also highlighted the adverse effect as ‘Dependency’ theories did.
However, Hirschman was not in complete agreement with the Dependency theo-
rists who were only concerned with demonstrating the structure of relations between
unequal economic powers. “They hardly ever explore whether the system might
contain the ‘seeds of its own destruction’ or might otherwise be subject to some
changes” (Hirschman 1978, p. 47). In other words, one needs to explore whether in
such trading systems there are some endogenous forces which counteract against the
continuation and sustaining of dependencies (Lepenies 2008). Using this thought,
Hirschman in 1978 argued that the smaller country which pays more attention to its
trade relations with a bigger country, and the bigger country which gives less attention
to the smaller country as the volume of trade may be small from the smaller countries,
may develop a “dialectical movement which would transform an asymmetrical rela-
tion, not into its opposite à la Hegel, but at least into a relation of considerably reduced
asymmetry” (Hirschman 1978, p. 49). Through these arguments, he countered the
doomsdays presented by Dependency theorists while explaining the asymmetry of
trade power relations between the USA and Latin American countries.

3.7 Attention to the Non-economic Factors in Economic

Theory

Hirschman can be considered an ‘interdisciplinary essentialist’ in his approach to

understanding socio-economic phenomena. He successfully blended the roles of
sociology, psychology, geography, and political science in this regard. Besides this,
156 A. Shaban

for him, fusion of these disciplines with economics helps in (a) transcending the
artificial barriers erected by a disciplinary essentialist position, which is indispensable
for behavioral sciences, and (b) overcoming the feeling of superiority or limitations
which one develops while working mainly within a disciplinary confine. I provide a
few examples of his arguments below while discussing his other major contribution
to economic theory on “repairable lapses of economic actors” (Hirschman 1970, p. 1)
in his book, Exit, voice and loyalty: Response to decline in firms, organizations and
states.
Until the1970s, little attention was paid in formal economic theories to what
Hirschman calls ‘repairable lapses’ of economic actors, but, rather, the ‘exit’ of
consumers was considered as the only solution for correcting the firms’ behavior,
which Hirschman extended to other organizations including states and polit-
ical parties. With his interdisciplinary approach, he used the option ‘voice’ of
consumers/stakeholders as another major mechanism for correction of repairable
lapses of a ‘slack’ economy, which he technically defines as the gap between the
potential and actual output or quality of a good of a firm or political and organiza-
tional leadership. He borrows from the literature on animal (baboon) behavior and
beautifully fuses the same into the economic and political behavior of humans to
explain why under the surplus production condition, firms/human/state leaders may
err and lapses may happen. In this context, he argues:
The reason for which humans have failed to develop a finely built social process assuring
continuity and steady quality in leadership is probably that they did not have to. Most human
societies are marked by the existence of a surplus above subsistence. The counterpart of this
surplus is society’s ability to take considerable deterioration in its stride. A lower level of
performance, which would mean disaster for baboons, merely causes discomfort, at least
initially, to humans. (Hirschman 1970, p. 6)

Though breached in history many times, like John Stuart Mill’s 1848 inquiry
into the Principles of political economy (1965), Hirschman also considers economic
institutions exercising strong barriers to violence and instability, and he extends his
purview to authoritarianism and totalitarianism. He, thus, also contributes immensely
to criminology and political science. He argues, summing up from other studies:
While technical progress increases society’s surplus above subsistence it also introduces
a mechanism of the utmost complexity and delicacy, so that certain types of social misbe-
havior which previously had unfortunate but tolerable consequences would now be so clearly
disastrous that they will be more securely barred than before. (Hirschman 1970, 8–9)

Another of Hirschman’s important contributions was on the perpetual nature of

slackers being born in the economy. In fact, his book, Exit, voice and loyalty, takes
a “more radical step in recognizing the importance and pervasiveness of slack” and
argues that “it is continuously being generated as a result of some sort of entropy
characteristic of human, surplus-producing societies. There’s a slacker born every
minute…” (Hirschman 1970, pp. 14–15). To overcome the slack, countervailing
forces appear, and he argues “decay as an ever-present force constantly on the attack,
generates its own cure: … it is likely that the very process of decline activates certain
counterforces” (p. 15). Thus, to him, slack is countered by “endogenous forces for
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional Scientist 157

recovery” (p. 15) which are led by the “customer’s decision to shift” either through
‘exit,’ as empathized by Friedman (1962), or ‘voice,’ which is the opposite of ‘exit.’
Hirschman’s contribution here lies in the recognition of ‘voice,’ a messy concept;
it can be in the form of “critical opinion” inclusive of “faint grumbling to violent
protest,” is “direct” rather than “roundabout,” and “is a political action par excellence”
(Hirschman 1970, p. 16), but this was conceived as “cumbersome” by Friedman
(1962, p. 91).
Hirschman criticized Friedman’s bias against ‘voice’ and favoring of ‘exit.’
Hirschman added the importance of voice in the formal theory of ‘exit,’ which was
largely advocated by the economists. This also assured engagement and possibilities
of recuperating regional firms and organizations. For him, it was not the cumber-
some political channel as expressed by Friedman. He called this the economist’s
‘Blind Spot,’ or as Veblen (1999/1914) referred to it, “Trained incapacity.” For
Hirschman, exit can be criminal, and it results in desertion, defection, and treason.
Thus, he introduces the importance of both the market (demand/exit) and nonmarket
(political/voice) working together for the efficiency and sustainability of regional
economies. This idea was also introduced in his book, The strategy of economic
development (Hirschman 1958), where he had argued that “nonmarket forces are not
necessarily less ‘automatic’ than market forces” (p. 63). By introducing the interplays
between the ‘slack,’ ‘exit,’ and ‘voice,’ he essentially brought the interdisciplinary
approach to the fore. In fact, he argued,
In developing my play on that basis I hope to demonstrate to political scientists the usefulness
of economic concepts and to economists the usefulness of political concepts. This reciprocity
has been lacking in recent interdisciplinary work… (Emphasis in the original text, Hirschman
1970, p. 19)

3.8 On Varieties of Capitalism

A further important contribution of Hirschman was his recognition of four interpre-

tations of capitalism, which can be called varieties of capitalism, in his book, Rival
views of market society and other recent essays (1986). These different varieties have
implications for the regional development strategies one can adopt as they each in
their own way can be said to be contributing to the evolution of spatial economies.
He identifies these four rival interpretations of capitalism through concepts like the
‘sweet business’ (Silk 1988), the ‘self-destructive,’ the ‘feudal shackles,’ and the
‘feudal blessings.’
These four varieties of capitalism contributed to social development in their own
ways, but one common impact has been that they made humans gentler. The sweet
business is the early phase of mercantile…
capitalism, which … led a rather shaky existence, having to contend with a host of precapi-
talist mentalities left behind by the feudal and other “rude and barbarous” epochs, will create,
in the course of time and through the very practice of trade and industry, a set of compatible
psychological attitudes and moral dispositions, that are both desirable in themselves and
conducive to the further expansion of the system. (Hirschman 1986, p. 109)
158 A. Shaban

According to the self-destructive thesis, which combines thoughts of Marxists and

conservative thinkers, such as Hirsch (1977), “…capitalist society, far from fostering
douceur and other fine attitudes, exhibits a pronounced proclivity to undermining the
moral foundations on which any society, including its own, must rest” (Hirschman
1986, p. 110). In this regard, he further argues:
The advance of capitalism requires, so this story begins, that capitalists save and lead a frugal
life so that accumulation can proceed apace. However, at some ill-defined point, increases
in wealth resulting from successful accumulation will tend to enervate the spirit of frugality.
Demands will be made for dolce vita, that is, for instant, rather than delayed, gratification,
and when that happens capitalist progress will grind to a halt. (Hirschman 1986, p. 113)

On the feudal-shackle thesis, he argues:

…a number of societies that have been penetrated by capitalism are criticized and considered
to be in trouble because this penetration has been too partial, timid, and half-hearted, with
substantial elements of the previous social order being left intact. These elements are referred
to variously as feudal overhang, shackles, remnants, residues, ballast, or relics and they turn
out to retain considerable influence and power. (Hirschman 1986, p. 125)

Given the presence of feudal shackles as we see in many countries of Asia, Africa,
and Latin America, the bourgeois revolution gets obstructed. As such, capitalism is
not able to freely work to transform the society and space economy completely.
To Hirschman, as the USA has no feudal past, it also lacks ideological diversity:
…the lack of ideological diversity in America has meant the absence of an authentic conser-
vative tradition, is responsible for the often noted weaknesses of socialist movements, and
has even made for the protracted sterility of liberal political thought itself. (Hirschman 1986,
p. 134)

In this way, he combines from history several thoughts on market and society.
Each of the thoughts or perspectives can shape regional policy and may have their
own implications for regional development.

4 Limitations and Pragmatism

Hirschman’s contribution did not emerge as an integrated perspective toward develop-

ment, like we see from Sachs (2005) for reduction of regional poverty through a ‘big
push’ in development assistance or a strategy of ‘one step at a time,’ as propounded
by Easterly (2007).
However, Hirschman was skeptical of one solution working for all, which many
development institutions followed. Rodrik (2006, p. 986) has appreciated the World
Bank’s recent advocacy for the ‘case by case’ solution approach ‘rather than top-down
model.’ Easterly (2006a, 2006b) has also cautioned planners against the ‘blue print’
approach. In fact, this has been the approach of Hirschman. For him, the solution
of the development problems lies in the regional and social context. Hirschman has
been critical of grand theories and ‘one-size-fits-all’ approaches, without naming the
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional Scientist 159

propounders of the grand models like Escobar (1995), Chambers (1996), and Sachs
(1991). He himself acknowledged his approach in Shifting involvements : Private
interests and public action (Hirschman 1982b), advocating that real life is much too
complex to be captured through an all-encompassing theory or paradigm (Lepenies
2008).
Hirschman was a reflexive social scientist who was even critical of his own
approaches through what he called ‘self-subversion’ (Hirschman 1995). He denied
that there was ‘one best way’ (Lepenies 2008, p. 447) to development (Hirschman
1963a, 1971a, b). He believed in ‘endogenous’ development potentials and “calling
forth and enlisting for development purposes resources and abilities of the countries
and regions that are hidden, scattered or badly utilized” (Hirschman 1988, p. 5).
He was annoyed with the approach of some of the elite-led governments of Latin
American countries that often changed their development strategies based on the
advice of ‘visiting economists’ (Lepenies 2008) without giving due consideration to
the potential of past policies in shaping development. To describe the tendency of
new governments to engage in denial or indulge in a failure complex about previous
strategies, he coined the term ‘fracasomania.’ He thus contributed to the alternative
philosophy of development (Ellerman 2005), which he called ‘possibilism’ (Lepe-
nies 2008, p. 448), a concept he mobilized from the discipline of geography and used
as an antithesis of ‘fracasomania.’ He described possibilism as:
…an approach to the social world that would stress the unique rather than the general,
the unexpected rather than the expected, and the possible rather than the probable. For the
fundamental bent of my writings has been to widen the limits of what is or what is perceived
to be possible, be it at the cost of lowering our ability, real or imaginary, to discern the
probable. (Hirschman 1971a, p. 28)

Based on his observations of World Bank projects, Hirschman gave us the ‘Prin-
ciple of the Hiding Hand’ (Hirschman 1967a) to describe the unexpected problems
that may emerge in executing a development project where the solution of the same
can be hidden in the local capacities and resources (Lepenies 2008). He valued local
knowledge and traits for success of development. He distinguished two types of
projects on the ‘knowledge’ base: (a) the ‘trait-taking’ type, based on local knowl-
edge and practices, and (b) the ‘trait-making’ type, based on non-local knowledge
and practices, which require prior training of people for successful execution of the
project. However, to succeed, the projects of the latter category would need to adapt
to the local settings. This regional contextual approach of Hirschman was also the
antithesis of the ‘one-size fits all’ approach quite common in the donors and prac-
titioners’ approach. This academic and practice philosophy of Hirschman explains
why he was more fluid rather than rigid in his ideological approach and wanted to
‘cross boundaries’ of disciplines and thoughts. In fact, he wrote one of his essays with
the title ‘Crossing boundaries’ to explain why he preferred to do this (Hirschman
1998).
160 A. Shaban

5 Conclusions and Hirschman’s Legacy for Future

Generations

Hirschman made significant contributions to advancing our knowledge and under-

standing of the processes of regional economic development. His early life was full
of difficulties, as he had to escape from, and fight against, fascism in Europe in
the 1930s and 1940s. He moved from one place to another and joined armies to
fight wars, and yet he was able to direct efforts to carry on his academic pursuits.
He led two parallel lives: one that was very personal in Germany, France, Spain,
and Italy where he fought the wars; and the other the life of an academic in the
USA. However, we find that the academic understanding he evolved was based on
an intermingling of these two—the personal and the academic—spheres of his life.
His context-based, region-based, unbalanced, collective-action-led, moving together
approaches; his view of international trade as the exercising power; and his synthesis
of disciplines in understanding development emerged from his own personal experi-
ence in the places he fought wars, sought refuge, or traveled as an academic expert or
tourist. He was a great synthesizer of ideologies, disciplines, cultures, and languages,
and he was, at his core, anti-fascist. As a regional economist, he believed in local
development and ‘endogeneity.’
He was a reflexive social scientist who questioned his own ideas and their applica-
bility with time. He termed this as ‘self-subversion.’ However, his ‘uncertainty’ is not
chaotic but paves the way for possibilities of, and optimisms for, local development
through utilization of local resources “that are hidden, scattered, or badly utilized”
(Hirschman 1988, p. 5). Thus, his approach to development is more pragmatic,
context-based, and inclusive in every respect and has enormous potential for sustain-
able social, economic, and regional development. He did not attempt to provide grand
ideas and theories, rather “he favoured ‘small ideas’ and ‘lesser thoughts’ that have
the potential to generate ‘great insights’ of practical value” (Özçelik 2014, p. 1115).
In fact, we find today that many of his ideas are reflected in the United Nations’
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly in SDG-8 (Decent Work and
Economic Growth, especially Economic Growth), SGD-9 (Industry, Innovation and
Infrastructure), SDG-11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities, especially, Sustain-
able Communities), SDG-16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), and SDG-17
(Partnerships for the Goals).
Not only did he frame and guide the policies of development (and their implemen-
tation) of international organizations like the World Bank, but subsequently many of
his ideas also left a deep imprint on these institutions and helped shift their policies
beyond revolution and reforms to more pragmatic and realistic approaches.
As a scholar, he combined German idealism, English-US empiricism and political
economy, and Italian liberal socialism. He provided very interesting insights on
development processes based on his observations rather than concentrating on formal
development models. He turned economic theories on their heads as he provided
alternative explanations and integrated the different streams of thought in the social
sciences without any grand theories. He preferred complexity over certainty. He can
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional Scientist 161

be called a pragmatic idealist. He wanted observation-driven social science, which

can offer clues about how to get out of problems and traps. He was always looking for
endogenous social theory. He never believed in the shock therapy for development
that many mainstream theorists in economics articulate.
Albert O. Hirschman left behind a great fund of ideas for future generations of
regional scientists and development economists. He was inherently liberal and influ-
enced by Friedrich Hayek. He was an advocate for the idea that ‘nothing goes as
planned’ in real life, but he also recommended the ‘unbalanced growth’ strategy for
regional development. He was a possibilist and did not adhere to any orthodox theo-
retical perspectives. He argued that today’s developed countries developed without
any orthodox planning (Özçelik 2014) through trial and error and mostly led by unbal-
anced growth. This path can also guide developing regions rather than a prescribed
‘balanced development’ approach. He used many concepts, including ‘chains of
disequilibria,’ ‘unbalanced growth,’ ‘linkages,’ ‘hidden rationalities,’ ‘blessings in
disguise,’ ‘fracasomania,’ ‘the hiding hand,’ ‘the tunnel effect,’ the ‘last industry
first,’ and regional ‘endogeneity,’ to explain his unorthodox understanding of devel-
opment processes. He was an optimistic regional scientist. His ideas and methods will
continue to serve and guide future generations of planners and regional scientists.

Acknowledgments This paper is based on the lecture ‘Great Minds in Regional Science: Albert
O. Hirschman’ delivered in the session ‘In the Footsteps of Walter Isard’ at the joint workshop of
the Regional Science Association International (RSAI) and Regional Science Association (RSA),
India, on ‘Big Data and Methods in Regional Science’ held at Tata Institute of Social Sciences,
Mumbai, October 21–25, 2019. I am very grateful to Peter Nijkamp (Vice President, The Regional
Science Academy) and Karima Kourtit (Executive Director, The Regional Science Academy) for
the invitation to deliver this lecture, and Sumana Bandyopadhyay, President, RSA, India, for her
facilitations in many ways.

References

Adelman, J. 2013. Worldly philosopher: The odyssey of Albert O. Hirschman. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Alacevich, M. 2021. Albert O. Hirschman: An intellectual biography. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Bray, D.B. 2009. What big development thinkers ignore: 40 years of getting ahead collectively.
Grassroots Development 30 (1): 2–10.
Chambers, R. 1996. Whose reality counts? Putting the first last. Harlow: Longman.
Dhesi, A.S. 2000. Social capital and community development. Community Development Journal
35 (3): 199–214.
Easterly, W. 2006a. The white man’s burden: Why the West’s efforts to aid the rest have done so
much ill and so little good. New York: Penguin.
Easterly, W. 2006b. Planners versus searchers in foreign aid. Paper presented at the ADB
Distinguished Speakers Programme, 18 January. Manila: Asian Development Bank.
Easterly, W. 2007. Letter to the editor. In The New York Review of Books, 66, 11 January.
Ellerman, D. 2005. Helping people help themselves: From the World Bank to an alternative
philosophy of development assistance. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
162 A. Shaban

Escobar, A. 1995. Encountering development: The making and unmaking of the Third World.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Friedman, M. 1962. Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Friedmann, J., and W. Alonso, eds. 1964. Regional development and planning: A reader. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Gore, C. 2013/1995. Regions in question: Space, development theory and regional policy. New
York: Routledge.
Grant, A. 2018. The scientific exodus from Nazi Germany. Physics Today. https://physicstoday.sci
tation.org/do/10.1063/PT.6.4.20180926a/full. Last accessed June 16, 2021.
Hirsch, F. 1977. Social limits to growth. Revised. London: Routledge.
Hirschman, A.O. 1945. National power and the structure of foreign trade. Berkeley and Los Angeles,
CA: University of California Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1958. The strategy of economic development. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1963a. Introduction. In Journeys toward progress: Studies of economic policy-
making in Latin America, au. A.O. Hirschman, 1–7. New York: The Twentieth Century Fund.
Hirschman, A.O. 1963b. Problem-solving and policy-making: A Latin American style? In Journeys
toward progress: Studies of economic policy-making in Latin America, au. A.O. Hirschman,
227–249. New York: The Twentieth Century Fund.
Hirschman, A.O. 1963c. The contriving of reform. In Journeys toward progress: Studies of economic
policy-making in Latin America, au. A.O. Hirschman, 251–275. New York: The Twentieth
Century Fund.
Hirschman, A.O. 1963d. Models of reform mongering. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 77 (2):
236–257.
Hirschman, A.O. 1963e. Journeys toward progress: Studies of economic policy-making in Latin
America. New York: The Twentieth Century Fund.
Hirschman, A.O. 1964. The paternity of an index. American Economic Review 54 (5): 761–762.
Hirschman, A.O. 1967a. The principle of the hiding hand. In Development projects observed, au.
A.O. Hirschman, 9–34. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
Hirschman, A.O. 1967b. Development projects observed. Washington, DC: The Brookings
Institution.
Hirschman, A.O. 1968. The political economy of import-substituting industrialization in Latin
America. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 82 (February): 2–32.
Hirschman, A.O. 1970. Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and
states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1971a. A bias for hope: Essays on development and Latin America. New Haven,
CT: Yale University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1971b. Introduction: Political economics and possibilism. In A bias for hope:
Essays on development and Latin America, au. A.O. Hirschman, 1–37. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1973a. An alternative explanation of contemporary harriedness. The Quarterly
Journal of Economics 87 (November): 634–637.
Hirschman, A.O. 1973b. The changing tolerance for income inequality in the course of development.
The Quarterly Journal of Economics 87 (November): 544–565.
Hirschman, A.O. 1975. Policymaking and policy analysis in Latin America: A return journey. Policy
Sciences 6: 385–402.
Hirschman, A.O. 1977. The passions and the interests: Political arguments for capitalism before
its triumph. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1978. Beyond asymmetry: Critical notes on myself as a young man and on some
other old friends. International Organization 32 (1): 45–50.
Hirschman, A.O. 1981a. The rise and decline of development economics. In Essays in trespassing:
Economics to politics and beyond, au. A.O. Hirschman, 1–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Albert O. Hirschman (1915–2012): An Unorthodox Regional Scientist 163

Hirschman, A.O. 1981b. Morality and the social sciences: A durable tension. In Essays in
trespassing: Economics to politics and beyond, au. A.O. Hirschman, 294–306. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1981c. Essays in trespassing: Economics to politics and beyond. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1982a. Rival interpretations of market society: Civilizing, destructive, or feeble?
Journal of Economic Literature 20 (4): 1463–1484.
Hirschman, A.O. 1982b. Shifting involvements: Private interests and public action. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1984. Getting ahead collectively: Grassroots experience in Latin America. New
York: Pergamon Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1986. Rival views of market society and other recent essays. New York: Viking
Penguin Inc.
Hirschman, A.O. 1988/1958. The strategy of economic development (New edition with a new
postscript by the author). Boulder, CO: Westview Encore.
Hirschman, A.O. 1989. Linkages. In The new Palgrave: Economic development, eds. J. Eatwell,
M. Milgate, and P. Newman, 210–221. New York: Norton.
Hirschman, A.O. 1991. The rhetoric of reaction: Perversity, futility, jeopardy. Cambridge, MA, and
London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1992a/1986. Linkages in economic development. In Rival views of market society
and other essays, au. A.O. Hirschman, 56–76. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1992b/1986. A dissenter’s confession: The strategy of economic development
revisited. In Rival views of market society and other essays, au. A.O. Hirschman, 3–34. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press. Originally published in GM Meyer and D. Seers (eds.) Pioneers
in development. New York: Oxford University Press (1984).
Hirschman, A.O. 1992c/1986. In defense of possibilism. In Rival views of market society and other
essays, au. A.O. Hirschman, 171–175. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1992d/1986. The concept of interest: From euphemism to tautology. In Rival
views of market society and other essays, au. A.O. Hirschman, 35–55.
Hirschman, A.O. 1992e/1986. Rival views of market society and other essays. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1995. A propensity to self-subversion. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hirschman, A.O. 1998. Crossing boundaries. Selected writings. New York: Zone Books.
Hirschman, A.O., and C.E. Lindblom. 1962. Economic development, research and development,
policy making: Some converging views. Behavioral Science 7 (2): 211–222.
Kuznets, S. 1955. Economic growth and income inequality. American Economic Review 45: 1–28.
Lepenies, P.H. 2008. Possibilism: An approach to problem-solving derived from the life and work
of Albert O. Hirschman. Development and Change 39 (3): 437–459.
Marshall, A. 1961/1890. Principles of economics: An introductory volume (9th ed. reprint). London:
Macmillan.
Mill, J.S. 1965. Principles of political economy, 1848, Volumes 2 and 3, in Collected works of John
Stuart Mill. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Nurkse, R. 1953. Problems of capital formation in underdeveloped countries. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Özçelik, E. 2014. Albert O. Hirschman: A ‘Beamish’ social scientist for our grandchildren.
Development and Change 45 (5): 1111–1133.
Perroux, F. 1950. Economic space: Theory and application. Journal of Economics 4: 90–97.
Rodrik, D. 2006. Goodbye Washington consensus, hello Washington confusion. Journal of
Economic Literature 44 (4): 973–987.
Rosentein-Rodan, P.N. 1943. Problems of industrialisation of eastern and south-eastern Europe.
Economic Journal 53 (210/211): 202–211.
Sachs, W., ed. 1991. The development dictionary: A guide to knowledge as power. London: Zed
Books.
164 A. Shaban

Sachs, J.F. 2005. The end of poverty: Economic possibilities for our time. London: Penguin.
Scott, W. 1991. François Furet and democracy in France. The Historical Journal 34 (1): 147–171.
Silk, L. 1988. Economic scene; four perspectives on free market. The New York Times,
June 24. https://www.nytimes.com/1988/06/24/business/economic-scene-four-perspectives-on-
free-markets.html. Last accessed April 27, 2022.
Veblen, T. 1999/1914. The instinct of workmanship and the state of the industrial arts. New York:
Routledge.
Williamson, J.G. 1965. Regional inequality and the process of national development: A description
of the patterns. Economic Development and Cultural Change 13 (4): 158–200.
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder
of the Random Spatial Economy
and Spatial Autocorrelation

Daniel A. Griffith

Leslie Curry, lecturing in New Zealand early in his career. Photo source Caryl Curry

D. A. Griffith (B)
School of Economic, Political, and Policy Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson,
TX 75080, USA
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 165
P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_8
166 D. A. Griffith

1 Introduction

Leslie Curry (nickname: Les) ranks among the Great Minds in regional science,
with his scholarly contributions having significant impacts on the early formation
and evolution of this interdisciplinary field, especially in terms of its quantitative
theoretical geographic thinking and heritage. Several of his papers appear as special
anthology reprints in, among others, Leahy et al. (1970) Urban Economics reader,
English and Mayfield’s (1972) famous compendium, and Noma’s (1977) Japanese
translated compilation. He made a lasting contribution to a better understanding of
geospatial data through his spatial autocorrelation work (foreshadowing the emer-
gence of the spatial statistics and spatial econometrics subdisciplines), and his revo-
lutionary treatment of the gravity model captures spatial autocorrelation latent in
geographic flows: a conceptualization Nijkamp and Ratajczak (2021) praise as a key
regional science instrument and as undoubtedly one of the most popular regional
science models. His influential insights about these descriptors of georeferenced
phenomena also link him to other Great Minds, such as Tobler and Ullman. Curry
was active in various regional science associations from their early onsets, further
contributing to the intellectual development of the discipline through his many confer-
ence presentations. His scholarship embraced, as well, transformative pioneering
work about settlement theory and stochastic processes, mostly with regard to map
pattern description.

2 Biographical Sketch

Leslie Curry was born November 22, 1922, in Gosforth, a suburb of the Northeastern
England city of Newcastle upon Tyne, to parents John—a gardener employed by a
municipal park—and Sarah (Hedley) Curry. He had one older brother (by four years),
Frank. Toward the end of his primary education, he earned a local scholarship for
his secondary education, going on to become a star athlete (cross-country and track;
see Fig. 1) and soccer player while completing his grammar school education. His
running continued as one of his personal hallmarks throughout his career.
Curry was a young man when World War II (WWII) began, and at age 18 he volun-
tarily joined the British Royal Navy (Fig. 1) on February 24, 1941 (his service
commenced on August 6, 1941). He served for five years as a 14th Destroyer Flotilla
radar mechanic. This happenchance helped motivate his later academic interest in
spatial autocorrelation. He not only served in the Mediterranean, but also participated
in the June 1944 Normandy invasion. By the end of WWII, he was training to be a
crew member on a submarine destined for deployment to the western Pacific Ocean.
Upon leaving the military, Curry went to university for undergraduate education
(with funding from the British government), then on to graduate studies. After grad-
uating with his master’s degree, Curry worked for six months as an economic affairs
officer at the United Nations (UN), during which time he met and began dating Jean
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 167

Fig. 1 Photo montage of Leslie Curry through the years. Top left: competing in a race. Top right:
in his WWII Royal Navy uniform. Bottom left: at age 59, Central Park Zoo. Bottom right: in Paris
(the early 1980s). Photo sources Caryl Curry

Blick, a UN bilingual secretary originally from New York City, who became his
first wife. They were married in the Bronx on September 18, 1952, and together
had twins (a boy and a girl) and then another daughter. In 1981, Jean died. That
same year, Curry was named Connaught Senior Fellow in the Social Sciences and
awarded a residency at the Rockefeller Foundation’s Study Center on Lake Como at
Bellagio, Italy. There, at age 59 (Fig. 1), he met Caryl Pines, who became his second
wife nearly a decade later; they were married in September of 1989. They lived in
Annapolis, MD, until Curry’s death on January 12, 2009 (Sullivan 2009). During his
retirement years, Curry returned to the sea by owning a boat, at least to the point
of passing the required Coast Guard safety test (apparently skills gained during his
days in the Royal Navy were waning).
168 D. A. Griffith

2.1 Academic Career

Curry’s intellectual interests started coming into focus as his university career began
in Durham University’s King’s College—created by the 1937 amalgamation of
Durham University’s Armstrong College and the College of Medicine in Newcastle,
becoming the independent University of Newcastle in 1963—where he studied and
then received a joint bachelor of arts (AB) degree in geography and economics
(with honors) in 1949. This training was a motivator of his later space economy and
quantitative economic geography interests.
Two years later, with Fulbright and Isaiah Bowman School of Geography scholar-
ship funding, he received a Master of Arts (M.A.) degree in geography from the Johns
Hopkins University, where, among other things, his coursework introduced him to
probabilistic models of queuing and storage theory. His thesis, titled The use of the
regional concept in economic studies, built upon the works of Ohlin, von Thünen,
Christaller, Lösch, Koopmans, and other pioneers of spatial economics, a number of
years before geography underwent its quantitative revolution; he was a geographic
scholar before his time!
Curry next spent a short time, in 1952 (after his stint at the UN), as Bill Garrison’s
temporary replacement at the University of Washington. Next, he became a doctoral
student in the Department of Geography at the University of Auckland. His posi-
tion was that of both a member of the teaching staff (an instructor) and a doctoral
student in geography, being on staff there for seven years (with responsibilities for
climatology courses), specializing in climatology and then graduating with his Ph.D.
degree awarded on May 8, 1959; his doctoral dissertation was titled Climate and live-
stock in New Zealand: A functional geography. This research endeavor examined
relationships between livestock farming and climate across New Zealand, building
upon earlier knowledge he gained while at Thornthwaite’s Johns Hopkins Univer-
sity Laboratory of Climatology (Seabrook, New Jersey) for nine months. Curry’s
New Zealand tenure established his academic interests in probability theory as well
as the treatment of storage operations (Curry 2002, p. 87). In 1957, he returned to
the University of Washington for three months to teach quantitative methods to its
Geography Department’s graduate school program.
Curry left New Zealand in 1960, going from there to the University of Maryland,
and then to Arizona State University (where his interest in spatial autocorrelation
solidified; Curry 2002, p. 88), before settling at the University of Toronto (UofT)
for the remainder of his academic career. He arrived in Toronto in 1964 and retired
as an emeritus professor in 1985. Curry and his family lived in Rosedale, a rather
upscale residential neighborhood in which such world renowned UofT faculty as the
non-Euclidean geometrist Coxeter and the urban geographer James Simmons lived.
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 169

Table 1 Curry’s major/legacy contributions by thematic area

Journal articles Book chapters
Those writings blended together for his book
Curry (1967b, 1972a, 1976a, 1976b, 1978b, Curry (1966c, 1971b, 1977, 1981b, 1983b,
1979, 1981a), Curry and Sheppard (1982), 1986b)
Curry (1982b, 1984a, 1984b, 1984c, 1985a,
1985b, 1985c, 1986a, 1989)
Other writings that, along with some of the works chosen for the book, established his enduring
legacy as a Great Mind in regional science
Curry (1952, 1955, 1959, 1960a, 1962a, Curry (1962c, 1966a, 1967a, 1971a)
1962b, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1970, Curry et al.
(1975, 1976)
A remaining assortment of his individual writings on especially quantitative and economic
geography topics
Curry (1960b, 1966b, 1967c, 1969, 1972b, Curry (1960c), Curry and Bannister ( 1974),
1982a, 1983a, 1991, 1998a) Curry (1978a, 1987, 1993)

3 Major Intellectual Contributions

Toward the end of his career, while in retirement, Curry published his sole book,
titled The Random Spatial Economy and Its Evolution (1998b). It represents a life-
time of research and publishing work and essentially is a loose integration of 23
of his published pieces (see Table 1). Collectively, these articles place Curry in the
general category of theoretical geographer, a scholar who scrutinizes the generation,
differentiation, and change through time of patterns, structures, and systems that can
be represented on a map, as well as how individuals’ behaviors connect to them,
seeking explanations that furnish predictions of these map patterns, structures, and
systems. He self-described his scholastic ilk and curiosities as follows:
Geography studies spatial arrangements and resulting flows over the Earth’s surface.
Economic geography addresses the areal commercial structures and processes by which
the world works and evolves. These are usually much too complex to be understood directly
so that simplified models of them are abstracted in attempts to see the logic involved. Hence
theory! Imaginary worlds are created in hopes of providing insights about the real world. We
theoretical economic geographers are distinct from economists in that our concern is with
areas and spatial processes, theirs with value theory.1

This statement sets the stage for at least one of Curry’s legacies: his extremely
insightful and novel contribution to gravity model specifications describing
geographic flows.

1 From personal written archival materials provided by Curry’s widow, Caryl.

170 D. A. Griffith

3.1 Contributions to Climatology: Early Career Years

The middle panel of Table 1 shows the major journal articles and book chapters
by Curry, including those appearing in the climatology literature. Curry (2002,
p. 87) eventually characterizes his work during this period as “two lifelong interests
emerged…; probability theory … and the treatment of storage operations.” Curry
(2002, p. 88) describes the context of his first Annals of the Association of Amer-
ican Geographers (1962a) paper as follows: “I started taking stochastic processes
seriously as a way of life: this was the way the world worked. As I saw it, climatic
change as a random series again involved storage.” Curry’s future Toronto colleague,
distinguished climatologist Kenneth Hare, later commented that this specific paper
contributed a significant intellectual breakthrough to the climatology field (Johnston
2010, p. 390). King (2009, p. 156) writes about papers Curry (1962b, 1963) derived
from his doctoral dissertation that “[t]heir analysis of pastoral farming, ‘a common-
place picture’ in which ‘one may discern the poetry of finely modulated, integrated
systems, the drama of risks taken, the statement and the solution of problems of
baffling complexity’, was brilliant, elegant and novel in the economic geography
literature.” Johnston (2010, p. 390) further writes that these two papers “… brought
climatology and economic geography together in novel ways, treating climate as
varying both temporally and spatially but having to be addressed as ‘not a fact but a
theory … because each investigator [has] to provide an ordering of the weather expe-
rience appropriate to his own purposes’ (Curry 1963, p. 95).” Notable is that Curry
unsuccessfully “… tried to develop an analytic queuing model rather than simu-
lating to obtain actual evapotranspiration …” (Curry 2002, p. 87), a disappointment
helping to usher out his climatology era, which essentially ended with the publication
of his 1965 journal paper about the topic, but not before publishing a book chapter
now considered a “… pioneering application of Bayesian statistics, suggesting that
farmers use their appreciations of the experienced recent past as the basis for their
decisions: ‘Given the range of possibilities, utilities can be assigned and decisions
taken: without them decisions become gambles’ (Curry 1966a, b, c, pp. 136–37)”
(Johnston 2010, p. 390).
The closure of this period in Curry’s academic life coincided with the beginning of
one concentrating on economic geography. Curry abandoned climatology, declaring
“Nothing interesting there” (Johnston 2010, p. 390). He already had begun transfer-
ring his skills to economic geographic analysis with the publication of his 1960 Lund
Studies paper, followed by his famous 1964 Annals of the AAG paper on the random
spatial economy (Table 1).
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 171

3.2 Selected Quantitative Economic Geography

Contributions: Mid- and Late-Career Years

Curry’s quantitative and economic geography publications cluster into three group-
ings: (1) those he blended for his book, Random Spatial Economy and Its Evolution
(1998b); (2) others that, along with some of the works chosen for the book, estab-
lished his enduring legacy as a Great Mind in regional science to be discussed in
detail in this chapter; and (3) a remaining assortment of his individual writings on
quantitative and economic geography topics. Table 1 enumerates the various works
included in these clusters. The first group constitutes the topic of Sect. 3.3, and
the non-climatological pieces in the second group constitute a foundation for the
subsequent Sect. 4.
Curry’s publications in the third category here are classified as “other” works
solely because of the focus of this chapter; they are somewhat reflective of his 19
H-index value (calculated with Google Scholar data as of May 8, 2021). His most
cited composition (Curry 1972a) currently has 276 overall citations and is the funda-
mental essay for his gravity model legacy. His two most cited entries in category (3)
presently have 69 (a book chapter) and 53 (a journal article) citations. The former,
“The geography of service centres within towns; the elements of an operational
approach” (Curry 1960c), is considered a classic by many senior urban economic
geographers and regional scientists. It enjoys a long life, having been cited as recently
as (2018) by van Meeteren and Poorthuis. His other reasonably well-cited miscella-
neous publication, “A note on spatial association” (Curry 1966b), has fared almost
equally as well, being cited by Jacobs-Crisioni et al. (2014) in a journal article, and
by a book chapter author in Yagamata and Seya’s (2018) edited collection.
Because this subsection devotes attention to depicting Curry’s overall non-
climatological publishing history, it seems the suitable place to present some context
for his three North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Advanced Studies Institute
(ASI) book chapters. These pieces symbolize his tradition of writing his research
papers while summering in Europe. The NATO Scientific Affairs Division, in Brus-
sels, Belgium, sponsored a civilian research program that funded specialized confer-
ences (up to three with related themes) at designated (usually renovated historical
sites) facilities across Western Europe; the former Eastern Europe now enjoys an
expansion of this program. The geostatistics community had an extremely successful
outcome with this research support mechanism (even today, histories of geostatistics
continue to mention its formative ASIs), which motivated me to seek funding for
quantitative space–time themed conferences. During my doctoral program of study
at the UofT, Curry had encouraged my desire and then efforts to organize a math-
ematical spatial theory titled special session at the 1975 Milwaukee annual AAG
meeting. We were taking advantage of the program openness Curry achieved with
his 1973 Atlanta business meeting public remarks. He helped me obtain participation
commitments from such regional science luminaries as Ben Stevens, as well as other
prominent regional scientists. Later, Environment and Planning A published some
of the final papers generated by this session that were at the frontiers of our research
172 D. A. Griffith

interests. This experience was both rewarding and a primary motivator of my NATO
ASI pursuits.
I secured the first ASI funding and co-convened it with Ross MacKinnon. As
already noted, Curry liked to spend summers in Europe, particularly in Greece;
he comments in his Geographic Voices chapter that “[Jean and I] tried a different
island or group of islands each year, Naxos, Samos, Paros, Rhodes, Corfu, Cos, and
others” (Curry 2002, p. 92). MacKinnon and I met Curry in Paris (see Fig. 1) in
July of 1980, and the three of us drove to Chateau de Bonas, in Southern France
(near Auch, of Tour de France fame). This two-week sojourn resulted in Curry’s
(1981b) book chapter. Curry did a long run each day, sometimes in the afternoon and
sometimes in the evening, depending upon breakout session scheduling; lecturers
delivered their presentations to participants in the mornings. The second ASI, co-
convened in July 1982 with Tony Lea at Centro studi <i Cappuccini>, was held in San
Miniato, Italy. This two-week sojourn resulted in another of Curry’s (1983b) book
chapters. Again, he ran each day, with the timing of his runs based upon scheduled
ASI events. The third, and final, ASI of this series, co-convened with Bob Haining,
took place in Hanstholm, Denmark, in August 1985, and resulted in yet another of
Curry’s (1986b) book chapters: a foundational penning for his subsequent book. Once
more, when time permitted, Curry did his daily run. All three of these book chapters
became integral parts of the anthology-style book Curry produced in retirement.
Their intellectual content is a topic of the next subsection.

3.3 Curry’s Book: Retirement Years

Curry selected 17 journal articles and 6 book chapters from 15 publishers as his most
influential pieces, securing copyright permission to weave them together into his
single book comprising 7 sections. Curry’s assessment of his most important works
agrees to some degree with recently compiled citation counts.
Curry writes the following essay in his Prologue (Curry 1998a, b, p. xi) to his
book:
… this is a theoretical study, representing a lifetime’s pursuit of understanding how the
economy works geographically. Unfortunately, our discipline does not have a tradition of
theory; even Immanuel Kant reads like the worst form of “capes and bays” gazet[t]eer. But
nowadays no one with any curiosity about the surface of the earth and its myriad places can
avoid coming to grips with theorizing—attempting to generalize, looking for processes. …
The “Random Spatial Economy” (RSE) was a term that I dreamed up on a whim in 1964. It
had no past and was to have no future. I little thought that I would be spending a quarter of
a century working away at it.

This statement underlines a catch-phrase for Curry: the random spatial economy.
It also underlines the previously declared classification of him as a theoretical
geographer.2

2As an aside, Bannister coined the eponymous phrase “the Curry effect,” referring to spatial auto-
correlation effects in spatial interaction data in terms of the convolution of distance with human
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 173

Paraphrasing Curry (1998a, b, pp. x–xvii), this volume constituted a highly innova-
tive first attempt at a consistent theoretical framework capturing the elements, struc-
tures, and dynamics of the geography of economic agents, human settlements, and
trade flows. Curry drafted narratives asserting abstraction from the particular, with a
fairly general conceptualization that sought to explain articulation of the preceding
concepts. His objective was to establish a simplified model that provides insights
into a hopelessly complex reality. Constrained chance replaces determinism, aggre-
gate populations replace hypothetical representative individuals, variability replaces
uniformity, and stochastic processes replace unique history. Ignorance is a major
factor in these inter-personal and inter-locational commercial relations (e.g., spatial
autocorrelation in spatial interaction effects), shifting focus to flows of information
and their effects on the efficiency of the space economy, or, alternatively, on changes
in its information content. The narrow set of economic geography themes addressed
includes: organization of, geographic variation in, and linkages among places housing
the work of the world, the use of land and its resources, usage constraints arising from
the motivation and practices of various cultural groups, direct interactions between
economies and their immediate physical environments, and the nature and degree
of geographic interactions among neighboring economies (i.e., spatial autocorre-
lation). Accordingly, the communicated concern is with spatial interaction of both
inter-personal and inter-regional commerce; the substantive focus is on the existence
of and processes generating evolving geographical structures.
Methodologically focused, this book integrates recent work at its time of publica-
tion about the role of spatial arrangement in many physical and social sciences, assem-
bling and then translating this cognate subject matter into an overriding geographical
viewpoint. Key concepts include: location potential, distance friction, mobility, diffu-
sion, spatial pattern and texture, adaptability, efficiency, and spatial interaction and
dependence. Analytic methods include: autocovariance (re spatial autocorrelation)
and transfer functions and areal spectral densities and entropy. Examinations extend
to various forms of the self-organization of economic spatial patterns.
Kanaroglou (2003, p. 256) evaluates this book by saying “Overall, although hard
to penetrate at times, this volume is full of great ideas and belongs on the shelves of all
researchers in spatial analysis and economic geography.” He comments that Curry’s
highlighting of the elements that one must account for when studying economic
geography phenomena is particularly effective, providing ideas about the necessary
tools for doing so, a contribution that quantitative economic geographers should
not underestimate. Kanaroglou further notes that because one aim of the models
appearing in this book is to understand economic processes across space, Curry
appropriately incorporates the term “spatial economy” in its title. MacKinnon (2004,
p. 113) echoes Kanaroglou’s sentiments, stating that “The articles included here are
formidable in terms of their scope and difficulty” and noting “… passages that are
difficult to appreciate, either because they are technically demanding, unclear in

behavior and map pattern. This term appears in Gould (2000, p. 65), referencing Curry’s 1972a
highly cited Regional Studies article, but its use never became fashionable; in addition, Curry did
not like it.
174 D. A. Griffith

exposition, or obscure in their empirical referents,” while also expressing that this
compendium builds upon at least two of Curry’s seminal papers. In addition, MacK-
innon agrees that a geographic viewpoint guides all of Curry’s scholarship, empha-
sizing that Curry frequently borrows theories and models from disparate disciplinary
sources (e.g., economics, biology, physics, operations research, climatology, engi-
neering, statistics, and mathematics). MacKinnon (2004, p. 114) assesses this book
as follows: “… this is an amazing body of work—grand theorizing that is unique
in geography. Curry is clearly a deep thinker with a span of knowledge and insight
that is astounding. Geography is much richer for his presence and dedication to our
discipline.”

4 A Broader Context for Curry’s Work

This section spotlights the broader quantitative economic geography context of

Curry’s work encompassing the substance of both his book and his contributions to
regional science; this restriction in no way dismisses or diminishes his climatology
contributions. His beyond-climatology interest dates back to his master’s program of
study, in which, as already mentioned, he explored works by the great location theo-
rists and other pioneers of spatial economics (e.g., he presented Hotelling’s spatial
competition geographic landscape in some of his UofT courses). Contextualizing
his contributions and positioning them in a broader paradigm also situates them
within the writings of Beckmann, Eigen, Ising, Lotka-Volterra, Lowry, Nijkamp,
Paelinck, Prigogine, Weber, and Wilson. The intellectual background was one in
which regional science à la Isard, urban economics à la Mills (1997) [O’Sullivan
(2019) adding a contemporary version], and regional economics à la Richardson
were emerging. The Journal of Urban Economics appeared in 1974, as did Regional
and Urban Economics earlier, in 1971 (which became Regional Science and Urban
Economics in 1975). Dean et al. (1970) and Leahy et al. (1970) supply useful antholo-
gies, whereas Richardson (1969) supplies a comprehensive survey, for this backdrop.
Meanwhile, Ponsard (1983) provides an informative historical synopsis of this litera-
ture. The more contemporary Urban Economics Association hosted its first meetings
in 2006. In other words, Curry formulated his work within this developmental trajec-
tory, also resorting to the nascent scholarship about complex dynamical systems,
foreshadowing developments to come in the profession.
In the mid-1970s, Curry began thoroughly educating himself about classical
physics potential theory, which developed from the theories of gravitation and of
electrostatics. Familiar for decades with an analogous form of gravitational anal-
ysis that had been a key instrument in analyzing geographic flows (e.g., Nijkamp and
Ratajczak 2021), Curry shifted his attention to physics potential fields to describe not
only geographical variability in price, but also price gradients that drive economic
commodity flows. Sheppard (1979) further pursued this new variant of research,
resulting in their 1981 collaboration (entry #16 for his book), examining the notion
of spatial price equilibrium from a potential theory standpoint, and rendering an actual
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 175

Table 2 Brief history of the Ising model in geographical analysis

Year Event
1925 The one-dimensional Ising model derived (from Ising’s 1924 doctoral dissertation)
1944 Onsager’s extension of the Ising model to two dimensions
1972 Besag coins the term “auto-logistic”
1975 Bartlett links the Ising and auto-logistic models
1985 Haining applies the Ising model–based auto-logistic model to spatial price
competition
1985 Curry applies the Ising model to geographic labor markets
1998 Huffer and Wu derive Markov chain Monte Carlo maximum likelihood estimates
(MCMC-MLEs) for the auto-logistic model
2004 Griffith devises the Moran eigenvector spatial filtering (MESF) auto-logistic
alternative specification

market situation solution with it. Curry exploited the two-dimensional Ising model
(re spatial autocorrelation) to capture inefficiencies in the geographical operation of
labor markets (entry #21 for his book) in terms of phase transitions, demonstrating
a mechanism that could fragment a coherent geographic labor market into sepa-
rate stable zones of employment and unemployment. The Ising model involves a
Bernoulli random variable and hence relates to an auto-logistic model specification.
Table 2 summarizes its history.
In addition, Curry (entry #2 for his book) describes macroscopic occupational
competition in a spatially structured labor market with the Lotka-Volterra predator–
prey model, rewriting it to establish a microscopic foundation. He argues that the
Lotka-Volterra equations are not inherently biological; rather, they represent an
interaction matrix, one having negative coefficients for geographic labor markets.
Occupations compete for recruits, do not struggle for existence and may grow or
decline: “survival of the fittest” translates into an ability of an occupation to repro-
duce itself through recruiting. Manfred Eigen introduced the hypercycle (a natural
self-organizing principle embodying a cycle of connected, self-replicating very large
molecules composed of thousands of covalently bonded atoms) in 1971. This was
another conceptualization Curry found insightful and useful, and he introduced (in
entry #24 for his book) this construct as a formal mathematical structure of general
villages and settlements. However, he ignores its biochemical origins and treats it as
though it was devised to investigate the evolution of settlements. He uses this notion
to denote a primitive economic organization, analogous to either medieval European
village organization or contemporary India with internal commerce based upon direct
contact between occupations. The first requirement for any type of phenomenon to
evolve is reasonably accurate self-reproduction: A geographic labor market occupa-
tion is only viable if it can recruit successors to replace those who retire or die. A
necessary condition is that not only a single occupation must reproduce itself, but
also an entire set of coupled occupations must do so. To achieve this end requires
three occupational properties: (1) correct roles populate a geographic labor market;
176 D. A. Griffith

(2) information flow works in the space economy to ensure that these roles reproduce;
and (3) scope for change exists, such that better roles are allowed without unduly
affecting the entire set of occupations. The hypercycle embraces these characteristics,
allowing it to serve as a mechanism in urban economies.
Finally, Curry (entry #18 for his book) proposes to overcome the naive morpholog-
ical studies of commercial geography and the spaceless structural ideas of economics
by employing Prigogine’s Brusselator, a theoretical model for a genre of spatial
economic reactions concerning trade and its geographic arrangement foundation
that also serve as a catalyst for the same or coupled reactions, with the possibility of
a set of such reactions collectively becoming self-sustaining; spatial autocorrelation
plays a crucial role here.
Sheppard (2010, p. 397) interprets the preceding natural science sourced depic-
tions as “utilizing emergent scholarship on complex dynamical systems almost two
decades before it became popular in geography,” which furnishes a bridge between
previous and contemporaneous contributions by his colleagues and others. Today,
the Ising model continues to be utilized to describe geographic variation (e.g.,
Schawe et al. 2017). The Lotka-Volterra model supports diffusion of disease investi-
gations (e.g., Sarkar and Pal. 2020). Eigen’s hypercycle informs an understanding of
nonlinear urban system characteristics (e.g., Dongchen et al. 2014). And, Prigogine’s
Brusselator relates to, for example, spatial analysis through spatial pattern generation
(e.g., Ekaterinchuk and Ryashko 2016). Interestingly, spinoffs from Curry’s adap-
tion of potential theory remain absent. The discipline of geography and the field of
regional science have come a long way since a launching of the new urban economics
by Curry and some of his contemporaries.

5 The Present Relevance of Curry’s Work: Whither

a Research Legacy?

Haining (2010, p. 393) delivers suitable remarks about what has become at least
part of Curry’s research legacy, namely a set of unanswered questions posed by him
that guide some present-day spatial analysts. Haining categorizes two of these as
Curry’s “most important contributions to [the spatial analysis] literature”; Table 1
enumerates affiliated publications. The first theme arises from Curry (1970, 1971a,
b) wherein:
... he proposed decomposing maps into different scales of variation which could be used as
the building blocks for forecasting. His method was based on a form of spatial averaging
that identified local departures from averages calculated at different map scales.

The other concerns the spatial analysis of gravity model descriptions of geographic
flows:
Curry (1972a) published a significant paper that continues to make an impact in the field
of spatial interaction modelling … Among other problems, he considered those associated
with estimating the parameters of the unconstrained gravity model. … his view, that friction
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 177

of distance effects and the map structure of the origins and destinations were confounded
making it difficult (indeed impossible) to determine the true distance exponent in empirical
fits of the gravity model.

This second theme garnered Curry a large share of his total citations: 276 for the
original paper and 102 and 53, respectively, for his exchanges with Cliff and Ord
that were co-authored by Sheppard and me. Efficiently, effectively, and comprehen-
sively addressing this particular research question had to wait decades for appropriate
computer technology to evolve.

5.1 Geographic Data Cascading

Curry argued that spatial analysis needs specialized methods, acknowledging that
this condition is attributable in part to spatial variation existing at different scales.
Accordingly, he devised a scale decomposition data cascading technique. When
designing this procedure, one goal was that computational requirements should not
be too onerous. The resulting data organization resembles the quad tree structure
of geographic information systems databases (Fig. 2a): It organizes a large spatial
tessellation into a multi-level hierarchical structure with multiple segmentations at
each level, and, for a regular square tessellation (e.g., a remotely sensed image), it is
similar to an image pyramid in remote sensing.
Research dating back to my doctoral dissertation, supervised by Curry, eventu-
ally spawned Moran eigenvector spatial filtering (MESF; see Table 2) to account
for spatial autocorrelation in geographic regression model specifications (Griffith

Fig. 2 Left a: a graphical illustration of Curry’s geographic data cascading technique (adapted
from Curry 1971a, b, p. 12; see Table 1); right b: a remotely sensed image subregion segmentation
(demarcated by white boundaries) of part of Yellowstone National Park with a superimposed mesh
of subregions to support a cascading scheme. Source Created by the author
178 D. A. Griffith

2003). This methodology constructs n synthetic variates from an n-by-n spatial

weights matrix, where n denotes the number of locations; functioning as covariates, a
subset of these accounts for spatial autocorrelation in data geographically distributed
across the arrangement of locations designated by the given spatial weights matrix.
The methodological challenge arises from extending this data analytic approach
to remotely sensed datasets, whose pixels number from the hundreds of thousands
through the tens of millions. Curry’s cascading procedure furnishes a convenient and
effective way to handle this challenge. A three-level structure example implementa-
tion for a Landsat 7 remotely sensed image is as follows: A regular square tessellation
of pixels is divided into multiple segments at the first (or finest resolution) level, with
an aggregation of these segments comprising subregions at the second level; the third
(coarsest resolution) level tessellation is constructed by aggregating the second level
segments. Figure 2b portrays these first and second levels; partitioning this image
further by constructing 5-by-5 square collections of white subregions forms the third
level. This local regionalization allows estimation of an eigenvector spatial filter
(ESF) for each of the subregions by level; concatenating these ESFs yields an almost
perfect composite global ESF. This strategy converts a single n-variate regression
analysis into K smaller nL (the number of pixels in each region for a specific level;
e.g., Fig. 2b) regression analyses, where n = KnL ; expediency necessitates trimming
an image’s edges to ensure that n/K is an integer. Chun and Griffith (2019) success-
fully adapt this version of Curry’s cascading scheme to analyze massively large
remotely sensed images, deciding from their summarized empirical and simulation
analyses that a square, 25-by-25 subregion seemingly is an ideal size.

5.2 The Curry Effect

Consider the following doubly constrained gravity model description of spatial

interaction flows (see Sen and Smith 1995):

Fij ≈ κeSFOi ×D j Ai Oi B j D j e−γ d ij ,

where F ij denotes the flow between origin areal unit i and destination areal unit j,
Ai and Bj respectively denote the origin and destination balancing factors (ensuring
that total predicted and observed in/out flows are equal), Oi and Dj respectively
denote the observed in/out flows, d ij denotes the distance separating origin i and
destination j, γ denotes a distance decay parameter to be estimated, and κ denotes a
constant of proportionality that often is set to 1 because it is absorbed by Ai and/or Bj .
Curry accepted Wilson’s negative exponential distance decay derivation appearing
here. Parameter estimation is by Poisson regression when F ij are counts, with log-
F ij utilized for normal approximation-based parameter estimation. The term eSF Oi ×D j
integrates into this specification a certain source of spatial autocorrelation latent in
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 179

geographic flows data. Prior to Curry’s 1972a paper, eSF Oi ×D j ≡ 1; thereafter, it gained
wide recognition as being variable.
In 1972, with co-authored follow-ups in 1975 and 1976 (see Table 1), exploiting
the way Lowry used a gravity model describing spatial interaction, Curry (1972a,
p. 137) theorized that.
... allocating [a] “pure” gravity number to a particular destination, the pure gravity total may
be greater or less than the known total for that destination. This means that each origin will
send some of its people greater distances or lesser distances than pure gravity on various
legs of the total distance.

This proposition declares that the term eSF Oi ×D j ≡

/ 1; rather, the geographic arrange-
ments of flow origins and destinations influence nearby flows between locations (i.e.,
spatial autocorrelation at work; Fig. 3). The geographic distributions of Ai and Bj
offered some, but only a partial, accounting of spatial autocorrelation in spatial inter-
action data. The continued presence of this dependency in georeferenced flows data
also transfers to and corrupts the estimation of γ.
Figure 3a illustrates Curry’s contention. The principal areal unit flow is between
the two black transportation zones (denoted by a heavy arrowed solid black line
showing the direction of the flow). Spatial autocorrelation enters this geographic
landscape by this principal flow being correlated with flows from the origin (i.e., the
City of Toronto) to the gray zones surrounding the principal destination (denoted
by an intermediate width arrowed solid black line): The probability of these flows

Fig. 3 ESF-DCGM results for the 2011 Toronto transportation survey; for maps (b), (c), (e), and (f),
white denotes low, gray denotes intermediate, and black denotes high values. Top left a: illustrative
spatial dependence sources and materialization. Top middle b: LN(Ai ); MC = 0.57, GR = 0.42.
Top right c: origin flows ESF; MC = 0.41, GR = 0.50. Bottom left d: scatterplot of predicted and
observed flows. Bottom middle e: LN(Bj ); MC = 0.57, GR = 0.42. Bottom right f: destination
flows ESF; MC = 0.41, GR = 0.49. Source Created by the author
180 D. A. Griffith

occurring is in/deflated simply by their origin/destination locational relationships

with the principal flow. Flows from gray origins to the principal destination (denoted
by a narrow width arrowed solid black line) also endure this effect, as do the flows
between gray origins and gray destinations (denoted by a narrow width arrowed
dotted black line). The eSF Oi ×D j term creates this in/deflation: Because ESFs have
means of zero, a negative ESF value yields a multiplicative factor between 0 and 1,
deflating what otherwise would be the predicted independent flow; an approximately
zero ESF value essentially yields a multiplicative factor of 1, leaving the predicted
independent flow unaltered; and a positive ESF value yields a multiplicative factor
greater then 1, inflating what otherwise would be the predicted independent flow.
This is spatial autocorrelation at work!
Table 3 summarizes estimation results for three specimen journey-to-work flows
datasets, with this particular type of flow being selected because Curry comments
about commuting in his 1972a article. In all three cases, the simple gravity model
specification furnishes a respectable description of flows, although one with an incor-
rect distance decay parameter estimate, exactly as Curry claimed. Capturing some of
the spatial autocorrelation in these data (Fig. 3b, e) buried in the geographic distribu-
tion of workers and of jobs improves model performance (e.g., reduced extra-Poisson
variation and an increased pseudo-R2 ) and slightly alters the distance decay parameter
estimate. Capturing the remaining spatial autocorrelation (Fig. 3c, f), that portrayed
in Fig. 3a, further improves model performance (the V-shaped increasing disper-
sion affiliated with a Poisson random variable gives way to a much better alignment
between the predicted and observed flows; see Fig. 3d) and dramatically reduces the
distance decay parameter estimate. This is the “Curry effect” established in Curry’s
1972a article.

5.3 Present Relevance of Curry’s Work

Although this section restricts attention to two specific studies, it exemplifies that
Curry’s publications have had major impacts, have been followed up by others, and
are of a trend-setting nature. For example, Griffith and Jones (1980) documented the
presence of one reservoir of spatial autocorrelation, that in the Ai and Bj balancing
factors of a double-constrained gravity model, within a decade of Curry’s 1972a
article appearing. The other reservoir, which scholars label network spatial autocor-
relation and which relates to the three arrow links in Fig. 3a other than the thick
black one, has been far more difficult to quantify. Bolduc et al. (1992) achieved this
end with a computationally intensive procedure that discouraged, and in some case
prevented, other spatial analysts from implementing it. With the advent of computer
RAM, ROM, chip clock speed, and multiple processor design advances, numerical
constraints dramatically diminished. Consequently, LeSage and Pace (2008) formu-
lated a modified gravity model that employed the log-normal approximation and a
standard spatial autoregressive specification. Chun and Griffith (2011) formulated a
MESF-modified gravity model, with their specification including ESF terms (e.g.,
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 181

Table 3 Poisson regression estimation results for selected gravity model specifications
Specification γ̂ Over-dispersion Pseudo-R2 Bivariate Spatial autocorrelation
regression
a b Normalizing MC GR
factor
Toronto journey-to-work (n = 36)
GM 10.06 79 0.844 3056 0.703
DCGM 11.03 41 0.981 −250 1.024 Ai 0.57 0.42
Bj 0.57 0.42
ESF-DCGM 8.86 31 0.989 47 0.995 Ai 0.41 0.50
Bj 0.41 0.49
Seoul journey-to-work (n = 77)
GM 14.17 3257 0.645 −1309 1.336
DCGM 13.84 1992 0.783 −114 1.029 Ai 0.41 0.12
Bj 0.59 0.18
ESF-DCGM 10.32 1291 0.890 −224 1.058 Ai 0.17 0.94
Bj 0.21 0.82
Germany journey-to-work (n = 439)
GM 5.57 201 0.919 −41.2 1.289
DCGM 5.64 166 0.933 −5.5 1.039 Ai 0.94 0.03
Bj 0.94 0.02
ESF-DCGM 3.14 69 0.974 −4.2 1.030 Ai 0.86 0.34
Bj 0.80 0.33
MC denotes the Moran coefficient spatial autocorrelation index
GR denotes the Geary ratio spatial autocorrelation index
GM denotes the simple unconstrained gravity model equation
DCGM denotes the doubly constrained gravity model equation
ESF-DCGM denotes the doubly constrained gravity model equation explicitly containing the term
SF Oi ×D j
e

Fig. 3c, f). Griffith et al. (2017) compare these two alternatives. Meanwhile, Metulini
et al. (2018) extend this analysis to one that accounts for the excessive number of
zeroes that frequently appears in origin–destination (O-D) tables.

6 Policy and Societal Impact of Curry’s Work

Curry crafted little applied or policy-relevant work. Two exceptions were his pair of
jointly authored reports, one to the US Geological Survey (Curry and McDougall
1972) and the other for UofT’s Centre for Urban and Community Studies (Curry and
MacKinnon 1974).
182 D. A. Griffith

Curry cited the first, co-authored in 1972 with E. Bruce McDougall, entitled
“Statistical Spatial Analysis and Remotely Sensed Imagery,” in his co-authored book
chapter with Bannister, his Geographica Polonica article, and his Man, Culture and
Settlement book entry. Gould (1975, pp. 310, 218) comments on the ingenious use
of optical computers for spatial forecasting reported in this document.
“Aggregate dynamic urban models oriented towards policy,” co-authored by Ross
D. MacKinnon, with contributions by Eric Sheppard, Russell Lee, and John Miron, is
a 1974 report submitted to the Canadian Ministry of State for Urban Affairs. Its overall
goal was to attempt to demonstrate the policy relevance of the scrutinized models, all
of which exhibit potential relevance to policy related matters, have formulations that
assume a willingness and capability to control urban development by the Canadian
government, and encourage initiation of a discussion with policy makers to determine
whether or not these models are relevant, as well as how they could be made more
relevant to policy questions.

7 Scientific Recognitions

As a prominent scholar, Curry was the recipient of a number of

honors/awards/recognitions. During his long and distinguished career, and without
discernible mathematical spatial theory precedent beyond some piecemeal spatial
economics literature, the preceding sections underscore that his scholarship devel-
oped innovative, transformative, and highly mathematical approaches to locational
analysis based upon stochastic variation—drawing upon probability theory math-
ematics and physical systems analysis concepts—and promoted the perspective
that the importance of economic geography depends upon a healthy suspicion
of neoclassical economic theory. His contributions to spatial analytic economic
geography brought into question the highly problematic Walrasian assumptions that
rational individuals in a free market would construct a socially rational geographic
landscape. By doing so, his work challenged established lines of thinking and
provided valuable new insights into the ways human behavior shapes the world
in which we live. Gould (1985, p. 99) characterizes him as “one of geography’s
major and most imaginative theoreticians,” also noting (p. 115) that one novel
and monumental outcome of Curry’s work has been a serious questioning of the
role played by distance in many quantitative spatial models: What is the effect of
distance on human behavior, and how is it convoluted with map pattern (geographic
arrangement)? This question rests upon one of Curry’s legacies.
Maclaren and Johnston (2009) inventory academic acknowledgments and recog-
nitions of Curry’s outstanding contributions to theoretical economic geography.
During his university career, Curry had a Visiting Commonwealth Professorship
to the University of Reading while a US resident, a three-month fellowship in the
School of Pacific Studies at Australian National University—a higher education insti-
tution established in 1946 within a climate of post-WWII optimism—and, as already
mentioned, a residency at the Rockefeller Foundation’s Bellagio Study Center. Curry
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 183

received an inaugural UofT Connaught Senior Fellowship in the Social Sciences

that funded his Bellagio residency. In 1969, Curry received American Association
of Geographers Honors—an accolade established in 1951. Curry was named John
Simon Guggenheim Fellow in 1976, which supported a visit to Cambridge University.
The Canadian Association of Geographers (CAG) conferred their Award for Schol-
arly Distinction upon Curry in 1977. In 2000, Curry received his most prestigious
award, the Lauréat d’Honneur from the International Geographical Union (IGU; see
Fig. 4), an award established in 1976 to recognize individuals who have achieved
particular distinction in international geography. The IGU bestows only three or
four of these tributes quadrennially at its world congress, and Curry became its first
Canadian recipient. His reads: “…a scholar who by way of his contributions in clima-
tology, economic geography and spatial analysis has challenged established lines of
thinking and provided valuable new insights into the ways whereby human behavior
shapes the world we live in” (King 2009, p. 156). Curry’s ultimate standing in geog-
raphy and regional science mostly reflects his theoretical treatises about economic
geography and about settlement patterns, almost all work undertaken and completed
while he was at the University of Toronto.

8 Curry’s Legacy

Curry made a variety of transformative contributions to the discipline of geography.

One was to the sociology and leadership service of the now American Associa-
tion of Geographers (AAG) organization: He stood up during the 1973 AAG busi-
ness meeting, in Atlanta, GA, and admonished the leadership for operating a too
exclusive and inadequately inclusive and diverse program of paper presentations.
One outcome was a radical opening of the annual AAG program; its net effect was
that, within only a very few years, annual meeting attendance grew from a roughly
stable 20% to a sizeable 75% of the Association’s membership, a percentage that
continues through today. Curry also was instrumental in establishing an AAG quan-
titative geography specialty group (SG)—first named the Mathematical Models and
Quantitative Methods SG, and then around 2000 renamed the Spatial Analysis and
Modeling (SAM) SG. This effort dovetailed with his serving as chairperson of the
IGU’s Working Group on Systems Analysis and Mathematical Models in Geography
(1976–1984).
In the classroom, Curry was never considered to be an engaging or charismatic
instructor, punctuating every one of his lectures with one or more extended pregnant
pauses (Johnston 2010, p. 391); his professional presentations, too, often incorporated
this same quirky silence. Nevertheless, his second major contribution was his ability
to organize outstanding graduate education opportunities for his students, as well
as attract—unfortunately just a relatively few—advisees who eventually would help
make a real difference in the geography discipline. With regard to the former, at one
point in time, Curry co-organized a weekly informal exchange seminar between the
UofT and McMaster University quantitative geography graduate programs focusing
184 D. A. Griffith

Fig. 4 Leslie Curry at his

IGU award ceremony in
Seoul, Republic of Korea,
2000. Photo source Caryl
Curry

on mathematical spatial theory; trips between campuses rotated. Faculty participating

in this educational venture also included Ross MacKinnon, Leslie King, Yorgo Papa-
georgiou, and Michael Webber; doctoral students participating in it included Geof-
frey Bannister (former Butler University President, Schiller International University
President, and Hawai’i Pacific University President), Anthony C. Lea (2001 Geog-
raphy in the Service of Government and Business Award recipient, the CAG), Eric
Sheppard [University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Alexander von Humboldt
Chair in Geography], and me (foreign fellow, Royal Society of Canada) from UofT,
and A. Stewart Fotheringham [GWR and United States (US) National Academy of
Science], Morton O’Kelly (Edward L. Ullman Award, AAG Transportation Geog-
raphy SG), and Russell Lee [Distinguished R&D Staff Member, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory (ORNL), prior to his demise] from McMaster. Bannister, Sheppard, and I
were Curry’s doctoral advisees, and Lee was his master’s advisee; Curry was on Lea’s
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 185

doctoral committee. Curry’s third, and perhaps most influential academic contribu-
tion, was his set of scholarly publications, virtually all being journal articles and book
chapters.3 While not especially large in number by today’s standards, his publications
certainly were of exceptionally high quality.
Curry’s major contributions to the regional science literature were noted in
Isserman’s 2005 North American Regional Science Council presidential address that
highlighted, among others, Curry’s significant contributions to the regional science
literature (also see Isserman 2004) and mentioning that Curry’s (1967b) “Central
places in the random spatial economy” had the most citations over the longest period
of time (17 years) during 1955–2001 of any article in the field’s flagship outlet, the
Journal of Regional Science. Whitehead (1985, p. 228) corroborates this stature,
noting that Curry was one of the small group of 32 most cited geographers during
1966 to 1982. Sheppard (2010, p. 395) labels him “the Frank Knight, John Maynard
Keynes or Friedrich von Hayek of late twentieth-century Anglophone economic
geography.” Curry’s publications also generated occasional disciplinary controversy,
such as pushback from the emerging feminist geography community of that time
because of an included cartoon in his 1967c article showing a naked quantifactus
kidnapping a near naked geographia, taking her across the fluvius calculus, away from
distraught qualifactus (the Latin usage reflecting his grammar school education).

9 Concluding Comments

Curry’s academic career was concomitant with the early days of regional science,
before excessive publish-or-perish pressures became the norm; regardless, his
final articles-plus-book-chapters-plus-book publication record numbers are quite
respectable, being catapulted into the impressive realm by their quality. Curry’s
UofT fonds reveals an additional six unpublished manuscripts to add to this body of
literature.
In some ways, Curry was a scholar before his time with regard to the quantita-
tive revolution in geography, which helped build bridges between human geography
and regional science; Johnston (2010, p. 388) points out that the same previously
mentioned spatial economics pioneers inspiring Curry also later inspired Garrison’s
Seattle group (e.g., Berry, Bunge, Dacey, Getis, Marble, Morrill, Nystuen, and
Tobler). “Yet [Curry’s] scholarship departed from the approach associated with
the urban and economic geography forged by Bill Garrison and his students at the
University of Washington” (Sheppard 2010, p. 395). This was a time when universi-
ties organized themselves according to traditional academic disciplines; in contrast,
Curry pursued interdisciplinary research, merging concepts from geography with
those from biology, economics, physics, and mathematics (e.g., probability theory).
One outcome was an allegiance to regional science; Curry attended and presented

3See, e.g., https://discoverarchives.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/leslie-curry-fondsforagrosslyin

completelisting.
186 D. A. Griffith

a paper at most North American meetings, first publishing in the regional science
literature proper in the early 1980s (see Table 1, and entry #7 for his book), and is
classified by Isserman (2004) as an intellectual leader of the founding generation
of regional science. Curry was instrumental in inviting leading regional scientists to
give UofT colloquia, including: Isard, Paelinck, Tietz, and Richardson.
Although Curry conversed with non-quantitative geographers (e.g., he had inter-
esting discussions with historical geographer Don Meinig when I hosted him at Syra-
cuse University), Curry was frustrated by the qualitative nature of human geography
theory formulations before he pursued his economic geography interests, as well as by
its return to this mode after his retirement. Nevertheless, he was not uniformly appre-
ciated by quantitative economic geographers, either; Sheppard comments (2010,
p. 396):
Writing at a time when quantitative human geography prided itself in developing law-like
deterministic explanations of the space economy, rooted in rational behavior, Curry’s episte-
mology was neither popular nor particularly influential. Yet he was one of twentieth-century
economic geography’s most original thinkers …

Sheppard (2009, p. 377) expounds as follows:

His strategy of theory construction was orthogonal to that favoured by his fellow quanti-
tative revolutionaries, who prioritized a deterministic deductive approach, deriving spatial
economic patterns from individuals’ rational economic choices. Notwithstanding a shared
faith in science, mathematics and logical empiricism, Curry’s contribution to the first gener-
ation of theoretical human geography avoided such rootedness in neoclassical economic
analysis. He argued that deterministic theories are not necessary to make sense of the world,
and that careful consideration of the spatiality of economic activities profoundly disrupts
economists’ theorizations of production and exchange. His approach to theory construction
often eschewed logical rigor for intuitive leaps of faith.

Moreover, although somewhat out of step with many of his peers, “The importance
[Curry] attached to geographical theory reflected the geographer in him, certainly,
but a geographer of the Quantitative Revolution for whom theory was everything”
(Haining 2010, p. 393).
In conclusion, regional science attracted Curry because of its multidisciplinary
nature, one of its early-day strengths. It benefited greatly from contributions by geog-
raphers like Curry, who were the best and brightest minds in that discipline. Going
forward, Curry’s bolstering of the gravity model success story by uncovering its
dormant, marked, spatial autocorrelation complications, allowing a contemporary
refinement of this construct, and his then-fresh, multiple-scale conceptualization of
georeferenced data should continue to help quantitative geographers solve new prob-
lems. Leslie Curry left an indelible mark on regional science, one with a legacy. He
posited theories and concepts that have promoted a better understanding of the space
economy. However, comprehending his work comes with a cost. Haining (2010,
p. 394) summarizes Curry’s accomplishments as follows:
Curry’s intuition inspired many of his colleagues, while his inattention to, or disregard for,
detail frustrated others. His papers were never easy to read but they engaged with important
topics and he left the literature richer and more interesting for his contribution.
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 187

MacKinnon (2009, p. 114) concurs:

[Curry’s] results often were bewildering, even for, perhaps especially for, the quantitatively
sophisticated audience; there was something of the poet or impressionistic artist in Curry—
huge leaps of logic, matters to take on faith; gaps, details that could be filled in later, perhaps
by others; many got stuck in those gaps and never fully appreciated Curry’s contributions to
the field.

But familiarity confirms that the cost involved is worth incurring for the insights
gained; certainly many, if not most, newly trained regional scientists should make
this expenditure.

Acknowledgments I gratefully acknowledge provision of a curriculum vitae, family history docu-

mentation, and verbal contributions (via e-mail) by Caryl Pines Curry, Claudia Curry, and Ann
Curry-Stevens. I also gratefully acknowledge query feedback from Ross MacKinnon, Valerie
Preston, and Eric Sheppard, as well as online document retrieval help by David Wong.

References

Bolduc, D., R. Laferriere, and G. Santarossa. 1992. Spatial autoregressive error components in
travel flow models. Regional Science and Urban Economics 22: 371–385.
Chun, Y., and D. Griffith. 2011. Modeling network autocorrelation in space-time migration flow data:
An eigenvector spatial filtering approach. Annals of the Association of American Geographers
101: 523–536. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2011.561070.
Chun, Y., and D. Griffith. 2019. Implementing Moran eigenvector spatial filtering for massively
large georeferenced datasets. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 33:
1703–1717.
Curry, L., D. Griffith, and E. Sheppard. 1975. Those gravity parameters again. Regional Studies 9:
289–296.
Curry, L. 1952. Climate and economic life: A new approach with examples from the United States.
Geographical Review 42: 367–383.
Curry, L. 1955. The physical geography of Western Samoa. New Zealand Geographer 11: 28–52.
Curry, L. 1959. Atmospheric circulation of the tropical Pacific Ocean (with R. Armstrong).
Geografiska Annaler 41: 245–255.
Curry, L. 1960a. Atmospheric circulation in the Southern South Pacific. New Zealand Geographer
16: 71–83.
Curry, L. 1960b. La culture irriguée du taro en Nouvelle-Calédonie. Études Mélanésienne 14–17:
48–64.
Curry, L. 1960c. The geography of service centres within towns; the elements of an opera-
tional approach. In Proceedings of the International geographical union, symposium in urban
geography, ed. K. Norborg, 31–53. Lund: Lund Studies in Geography, Series B, 24.
Curry, L. 1962a. Climate change as a random series. Annals of the Association of American
Geographers 52: 21–31.
Curry, L. 1962b. The climatic resources of intensive grassland farming: The Waikato, New Zealand.
Geographical Review 52: 174–194.
Curry, L. 1962c. Weather and climate. In Western Samoa: Land, life and agriculture in tropical
Polynesia, eds. J. Fox and K. Cumberland, 48–62. Christchurch, NZ: Whitcombe and Tombs.
Curry, L. 1963. Regional variation in the seasonal programming of livestock farms in New Zealand.
Economic Geography 39: 95–118.
188 D. A. Griffith

Curry, L. 1964. The random spatial economy: An exploration in settlement theory. Annals of the
Association of American Geographers 54: 138–146.
Curry, L. 1965. Thornthwaite’s potential evapotranspiration term. The Canadian Geographer 9:
13–18.
Curry, L. 1966a. Seasonal programming and Bayesian assessment of atmospheric resources. In
Human dimensions of weather modification, ed. W. Sewell, 127–140. Chicago: University of
Chicago, Department of Geography, Research Paper 105.
Curry, L. 1966b. A note on spatial association. The Professional Geographer 18: 97–99.
Curry, L. 1966c. Chance and landscape. In Northern geographical essays in honour of G. H. J.
Daysh, ed. J. House, 49–55. Newcastle upon Tyne, England: Oriel Press.
Curry, L. 1967a. A wave statistics model for climate time series. In Computer applications in
the earth sciences: Colloquium on time-series analysis, ed. D. Merriam, 46–50. Lawrence, KS:
Kansas Geological Survey, The University of Kansas, Computer Contribution 18.
Curry, L. 1967b. Central places in the random spatial economy. Journal of Regional Science 7
(supplement): 217–238.
Curry, L. 1967c. Quantitative geography, 1967. The Canadian Geographer 11: 265–279.
Curry, L. 1969. A “classical” approach to central place dynamics. Geographical Analysis 1: 272–
282.
Curry, L. 1970. Univariate spatial forecasting. Economic Geography 46: 241–258.
Curry, L. 1971a. Applicability of space-time moving average forecasting. In Regional forecasting,
eds. M. Chisholm, A. Frey, and P. Haggett, 11–24. London: Butterworth.
Curry, L. 1971b. Geographical specialisation and trade in urban regional planning. In London papers
in regional science 2, ed. A. Wilson, 85–95. London: Pion.
Curry, L. 1972a. A spatial analysis of gravity flows. Regional Studies 6: 131–114.
Curry, L. 1972b. A bivariate spatial regression operator. The Canadian Geographer 16: 1–14.
Curry, L. 1976a. Fluctuation in the random spatial economy and the control of inflation.
Geographical Analysis 8: 339–353.
Curry, L. 1976b. Location theoretic style and urban policy. Economic Geography 52: 11–23.
Curry, L. 1977. Stochastic spatial distributions in equilibrium: Settlement theory. In Man, culture
and settlement: Essays in honour of Professor R. L. Singh, eds. R. Eidt, K. Singh, and R. Singh,
228–237. New Delhi, India: Kalyani Publishers.
Curry, L. 1978a. Position, flow and person in theoretical geography. In Timing-space and spacing
time: Time and regional dynamics, vol. 3, eds. T. Carlstein, D. Parkes, and N. Thrift, 35–50.
London: Edward Arnold.
Curry, L. 1978b. Demand in the spatial economy: II Homo stochasticus. Geographical Analysis 10:
309–344.
Curry, L. 1979. Demand in the spatial economy: I Homo deterministicus. Geographica Polonica
42: 185–212.
Curry, L. 1981a. Division of labor from geographical competition. Annals of the Association of
American Geographers 71: 133–165.
Curry, L. 1981b. Macro-ecology of vacancy chains. In Dynamic spatial models, eds. D. Griffith and
R. MacKinnon, pp. 165–185. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer, N.A.T.O. A.S.I. Series D, #7.
Curry, L. 1982a. 3D statistics of landforms from single air photos: A hypothesis. Geo-Processing
2: 51–64.
Curry, L. 1982b. Recruitment as diffusion and the spatial structure of occupations. Journal of
Regional Science 22: 479–498.
Curry, L. 1983a. Elements of spatial statistical systems analysis. The Professional Geographer 35:
149–157.
Curry, L. 1983b. Inefficiency and instability of trade patterns. In Evolving geographical structures,
eds. D. Griffith and A. Lea, pp. 278–292. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer, N.A.T.O. A.S.I.
Series D, #15.
Curry, L. 1984a. A trade localisation operator: The conservative case. Canadian Geographer 28:
373–376.
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 189

Curry, L. 1984b. Inefficiency of spatial prices using the thermodynamic formalism. Environment
and Planning A 16: 5–16.
Curry, L. 1984c. Information and evolution of the economy. Papers of the Regional Science
Association 54: 129–145.
Curry, L. 1985a. Factor returns and geography. Geografiska Annaler 67B: 69–81.
Curry, L. 1985b. Inefficiencies in the geographical operation of labour markets. Regional Studies
19: 203–215.
Curry, L. 1985c. The village economy as a hypercycle. Geographical Analysis 17: 156–166.
Curry, L. 1986a. Formalized behaviour in agents’ markets. Tjdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale
Geografie 77: 169–177.
Curry, L. 1986b. Trade as spatial interaction and central places. In Transformations through space
and time, eds. D. Griffith and R. Haining, 27–58. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer, N.A.T.O.
A.S.I. Series D, #29.
Curry, L. 1987. Areal heterogeneity and labour returns. In London papers in regional science, vol.
17, ed. I. Gordon, 101–115. London: Pion.
Curry, L. 1989. Spatial trade and factor markets. Economic Geography 65: 271.
Curry, L. 1991. Guest essay: The need for cumulative synthetic theory. The Canadian Geographer
35: 2–9.
Curry, L. 1993. Evolutionary mechanisms of the spatial economy. In Structure and change in the
space economy, eds. T. Lakshmanan and P. Nijkamp, 50–60. Berlin: Springer.
Curry, L. 1998a. Information in geographical systems. Geographical and Environmental Modeling
2: 9–21.
Curry, L. 1998b. The random spatial economy and its evolution. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
Curry, L. 2002. A random walk in terra incognita. In Geographical voices, eds. P. Gould and F.
Pitts, 81–98. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
Curry, L., and G. Bannister. 1974. Forecasting township populations of Ontario, from time-space
covariances. In Urban futures for Central Canada: Perspectives on forecasting urban growth and
form, eds. L. Bourne, R. MacKinnon, J. Siegel, and J. Simmons, 34–49, 315–367. Toronto: U. of
Toronto Press.
Curry, L., and E. MacDougall. 1972. Statistical spatial analysis and remotely sensed imagery, final
report to the Geographical applications program, Earth Orbiter Project. Washington, DC: United
States Geological Survey; 218.
Curry, L., and R. MacKinnon (with contributions by R. Lee, J. Miron, and E. Sheppard). 1974.
Aggregative dynamic urban models oriented towards policy, final report to Canada’s Ministry
of State for Urban Affairs. Toronto: Centre for Urban and Community Studies, University of
Toronto; 419
Curry, L., and E. Sheppard. 1982. Spatial price equilibria. Geographical Analysis 14: 279–304.
Curry, L., E. Sheppard, and D. Griffith. 1976. A final comment on mis-specification and
autocorrelation in those gravity parameters. Regional Studies 10: 337–339.
Dean, R., W. Leahy, and D. McKee, eds. 1970. Spatial economic theory. London: Collier-Macmillan.
Dongchen, H., C. Qiuxiao, and W. Shuang. 2014. Urban planning formulation problems in China
and the corresponding optimization ideas under the vision of the hypercycle theory. International
Journal of Architectural and Environmental Engineering 8: 985–990. https://doi.org/10.5281/zen
odo.1091834.
Ekaterinchuk, E., and L. Ryashko. 2016. Stochastic generation of spatial patterns in Brusselator.
In AIP conference proceedings, 8th International conference for promoting the application of
mathematics in technical and natural sciences, Albena, Bulgaria, 22–27 June 2016, Vol. 1773:
060005, ed. M. Todorov. Melville, NY: AIP Publishing; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4964980.
English, P., and R. Mayfield, eds. 1972. Man, space, and environment. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Gould, P. 1975. Mathematics in geography: Conceptual revolution or new tool? Revue Internationale
Des Sciences Sociales 27: 303–327.
Gould, P. 1985. The geographer at work. London: Routledge.
190 D. A. Griffith

Gould, P. 2000. Becoming a geographer. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Griffith, D. 2003. Spatial autocorrelation and spatial filtering: Gaining understanding through
theory and scientific visualization. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Griffith, D., and K. Jones. 1980. Explorations into the relationship between spatial structure and
spatial interaction. Environment and Planning A 12: 187–201.
Griffith, D., M. Fischer, and J. LeSage. 2017. The spatial autocorrelation problem in spatial interac-
tion modelling: a comparison of two common solutions. Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences
10: 75–86; https://https://doi.org/10.1007/s12076-016-0172-8.
Haining, R. 2010. Reflections on Les Curry’s contribution to spatial analysis. Progress in Human
Geography 34 (3): 393–394.
Isserman, A. 2004. Intellectual leaders of regional science: A half-century citation study. Papers in
Regional Science 83: 91–126.
Jacobs-Crisioni, C., P. Rietveld, and E. Koomen. 2014. The impact of spatial aggregation on urban
development analyses. Applied Geography 47: 46–56.
Johnston, R. 2010. Makers on modern human geography—Leslie Curry: The scholar, the teacher,
and the climatologist. Progress in Human Geography 34 (3): 387–392.
Kanaroglou, P. 2003. Book review: The random spatial economy and its evolution. Annals of the
Association of American Geographers 93: 255–257.
King, L. 2009. Obituaries. A tribute: Leslie Leigh Pownall (1921–2008) and Leslie Curry (1922–
2009). New Zealand Geographer 65: 155–157.
LeSage, J., and R. Pace. 2008. Spatial econometric modelling of origin–destination flows. Journal
of Regional Science 48: 941–967.
Leahy, W., D. McKee, and R. Dean, eds. 1970. Urban economics. London: Collier-Macmillan.
MacKinnon, R. 2004. Book review: The random spatial economy and its evolution, by Leslie Curry.
Economic Geography 80: 113–114.
MacKinnon, R. 2009. Encomium—Leslie Curry: A brief tribute. Geographical Analysis 41: 249–
251.
Maclaren, V., and R. Johnston. 2009. Professor Emeritus Leslie Curry. Progress in Human
Geography 33: 1–2.
Metulini, R., R. Patuelli, and D. Griffith. 2018. A spatial-filtering zero-inflated approach to the
estimation of the gravity model of trade. Econometrics 6: 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/econometr
ics6010009.
Mills, E. 1997. Urban economics, 5th ed. Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Nijkamp, P., and W. Ratajczak. 2021. Gravitational analysis in regional science and spatial
economics: A vector gradient approach to trade. International Regional Science Review 44:
400–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160017620980519.
Noma, S., ed. 1977. Readings in new geography (in Japanese). Tokyo Metropolitan University.
O’Sullivan, A. 2019. Urban economics, 9th ed. New York: McGraw Hill.
Ponsard, C. 1983. History of spatial economic theory. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Richardson, H. 1969. Regional economics: Location theory, urban structure, and regional change.
New York: Praeger.
Sarkar, I., and S. Pal. 2020. A prey predator model with disease in prey and recovery. Nonlinear
Studies 27: 609–619.
Schawe, H., C. Norrenbrock, and A. Hartmann. 2017. Ising ferromagnets on proximity graphs with
varying disorder of the node placement. Nature Science Reports 7: 8040. https://doi.org/10.1038/
s41598-017-08531-8.
Sen, A., and T. Smith. 1995. Gravity models of spatial interaction behavior. Berlin: Springer.
Sheppard, E. 1979. Geographic potentials. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 69:
438–447.
Sheppard, E. 2009. Obituary/Notice nécrologique: Leslie Curry (1922–2009). The Canadian
Geographer 53: 376–378.
Sheppard, E. 2010. Les Curry’s random spatial economy. Progress in Human Geography 34: 395–
398.
Leslie Curry (1923–2009): Expounder of the Random Spatial … 191

Sullivan, P. 2009. Leslie Curry Geographer, Obituaries, The Washington Post, Wednesday, January
28.
van Meeteren, M., and A. Poorthuis. 2018. Christaller and “big data”: Recalibrating central place
theory via the geoweb. Urban Geography 39: 122–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2017.
1298017.
Whitehead, J. 1985. Contributors to the recent development and influence of human geography:
What citation analysis suggests. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 10 (2):
222–234.
Yagamata, Y., and H. Seya, eds. 2018. Spatial analysis using big data: Methods and urban
applications. London: Academic Press (Elsevier).
Crawford “Buzz” Holling (1930–2019):
Progenitor of Resilience in Regional
Science

Amitrajeet A. Batabyal

Crawford Stanley “Buzz” Holling

A. A. Batabyal (B)
Department of Economics, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623-5604, USA
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 193
P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_9
194 A. A. Batabyal

1 Introduction

Canadian ecologist Crawford Stanley “Buzz” Holling was the first to give scientific
meaning to the term resilience in the post-World War II era and to demonstrate its
use in studying ecological systems. In the last four decades, a consensus has emerged
that the notion of resilience is pertinent not only for studying ecological systems but
also for analyzing socioeconomic systems studied by regional scientists. As such,
after briefly discussing two of Buzz Holling’s other major research contributions,
in this chapter, I comment on the contemporary relevance of resilience—the most
widely used concept in regional science attributable to Holling. Several aspects of
the use of resilience in regional science are discussed, including commentary on the
policy implications and the societal impacts of a resilience-based approach to regional
science. Even though Buzz Holling himself never worked in regional science, his
interdisciplinary research and his founding of the Resilience Alliance have stimulated
regional scientists to pursue research where the focus is on the development of
integrative theories of change that have practical value.
Crawford Stanley “Buzz” Holling was born on December 6, 1930, in Elmira,
New York, in the USA to Canadian parents.1 The name “Buzz” was given to him by
his older sister because she thought it suited his personality, a point on which there
was agreement between brother and sister.2 Holling grew up in the boreal forests
of Northern Ontario in Canada and, from a very early age, developed an interest in
nature in general and in insects in particular. Given this interest, he realized very
early in his life that “an education in science and ecology would be the only way to
appease [his] thirst for knowledge” (Holling 2017, p. 10).
Holling completed his B.A. and M.Sc. degrees in 1952 from the University of
Toronto and then proceeded to work for the Forest Research Laboratory in Sault Ste.
Marie, Ontario. This experience introduced him to a number of competent scientists,
gave him a feel for interdisciplinary research, and instilled in him a desire to “produce
excellent work” (Holling 2017, p. 15). After spending some time at this laboratory,
Holling proceeded to the University of British Columbia (UBC) for doctoral research
and obtained his Ph.D. in 1957. In his doctoral dissertation, Holling developed the
first mathematical theory of predation. This theory and Holling’s related ideas are
still widely used to analyze predator–prey interactions.3
After completing his Ph.D., in the 1960s and 1970s Holling extended his previous
work by using systems analysis to understand different kinds of interactions between
humans and nature. Professionally, Holling served as Professor and Director of the
Institute of Animal Resource Ecology at the University of British Columbia and then
as a visiting researcher at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

1 Go to https://www.resalliance.org/news/51 for more details. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).

2 Go to https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2019-08-23-pioneering-the-
science-of-surprise-.html for more details on this point. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).
3 See Carpenter and Peterson (2019) and https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-

news/2019-08-23-pioneering-the-science-of-surprise-.html for more on this point. (Last accessed

30 June 2021).
Crawford “Buzz” Holling (1930–2019): Progenitor … 195

(IIASA) in Laxenburg, Austria. He later returned to IIASA as its Director from1981

to 1984. During his tenure at IIASA, Holling collaborated with researchers both
inside and outside universities to better comprehend issues in land development,
forest management, and pest management.4
After the completion of his tenure as IIASA Director in 1984, Holling returned
briefly to his old faculty position at the University of British Columbia. However, he
“opposed the changes that had occurred while [he] was at IIASA…” (Holling 2017,
p. 64), and he found the Dean at UBC to be “rigid and opposed to change” (Holling
2017, p. 64). Therefore, he soon left UBC and in 1988 moved to the University of
Florida in Gainesville, where he became the Arthur R. Marshall, Jr. Professor, and
Eminent Scholar in the zoology department. Holling retired from the University of
Florida in 1999, but remained on the faculty as Emeritus Eminent Scholar.
During his decade-long stay at the University of Florida, Holling began a long-term
collaboration with a group of researchers based in Stockholm, initially through the
Beijier Institute of Ecological Economics at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences,
and then with researchers at Stockholm University. These collaborations were orga-
nized into the Resilience Network that was initially funded by the MacArthur Foun-
dation. The success of the Resilience Network projects led Holling to create the
Resilience Alliance in 1997.5 The Resilience Alliance was created to foster the
research activities of an international group of interdisciplinary researchers interested
in studying transformations in human and natural systems.
Carpenter and Peterson (2019) note that, as one of the world’s most eminent ecol-
ogists in the last five decades, Holling received a variety of prestigious awards from
professional and scholarly organizations. He received two significant awards from the
Ecological Society of America.6 The first, the Mercer Award, was given to Holling
in 1966 in recognition of an outstanding paper by a young scientist in that year.
The second, the Eminent Ecologist Award, was given to him in 1999 for outstanding
contributions to the science of ecology. Outside the field of ecology, Holling received
the Kenneth Boulding Memorial Award in 2000,7 the Volvo Environment Prize in
2008,8 and honorary doctoral degrees from the University of Guelph in 1998 and
from Simon Fraser University in 2011. Finally, he was a Fellow of the Royal Society
of Canada and Foreign Fellow of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences; he was
awarded the Austrian Cross of Honour for Science and Art; and, in 2009, he was
made an officer of the Order of Canada for his significant contributions to the field
of ecology, particularly for his work on ecosystem dynamics, resilience theory, and
the emergent field of ecological economics.

4 Buzz Holling’s time at IIASA overlapped with the time spent there by some prominent regional
scientists such as Peter Nijkamp (per personal e-mail correspondence) and Andrei Rogers; see
Rogers (2018). Even so, somewhat surprisingly, Holling appears not to have worked either with
Nijkamp or with Rogers on research projects.
5 See https://resalliance.org/. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).
6 Go to https://www.esa.org/about/awards/ for more details. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).
7 See http://www.isecoeco.org/boulding-award/. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).
8 See http://www.environment-prize.com/. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).
196 A. A. Batabyal

Accounts by contemporaries—see Carpenter and Peterson (2019)—tell us that in

addition to being an amiable person, Holling had a knack for getting people from
different disciplines to work together, often in congenial settings. As a result, his inter-
disciplinary planning sessions led to many friendships and productive collaborations
both across and within disciplines. A key point about Holling is the importance he
placed on mentoring young scholars, and prominent ecologists such as Eric Charnov
have acknowledged the positive impacts on their careers from Holling’s mentorship.9
His support of young scholars led to the creation of the Resilience Alliance Young
Scholars (RAYS) network which provided plenty of networking opportunities for
junior researchers. Aside from his research activities, Holling loved nature, loved
creating sculptures inspired by his fondness for nature, and loved being physically
close to his family.
After a sterling career that produced disciplinary and interdisciplinary research of
the highest quality, Holling died at the age of 88 on August 16, 2019, in Nanaimo, BC,
Canada. In his research, Holling routinely combined systems theory and ecology with
simulation modeling and policy analysis to develop integrative theories of change
that have practical value. Three key ideas that he introduced into the ecology litera-
ture and the literature on environmental management more broadly are: (i) adaptive
management, (ii) panarchy, and (iii) resilience. In Sect. 2, I briefly discuss the first
and the second ideas and then begin a systematic discussion of resilience, placing
particular emphasis on definitional issues. Sections 3–6 first point to a specific aspect
of the use of resilience in contemporary regional science research and then discuss
research and policy issues that arise from this particular manner of usage. Section 7
concludes the chapter with a prospective look at how researchers might enhance the
way in which they conceptualize and study resilience in regional science.10

2 Three Key Interdisciplinary Ideas

2.1 Adaptive Management and Panarchy

In the late 1970s, Holling (1978) described an approach to management that he called
adaptive. In this kind of management, when confronted with uncertainty, a decision-
maker utilizes an iterative and structured approach along with system monitoring to
attenuate the uncertainty over time. By acting in this way, a decision-maker can not
only accomplish one or more resource management objectives, but can also gather
information that is needed to improve management in the future. Put differently,
adaptive management can be thought of as a tool to not only alter a system, but also
to learn about this same system. A key point to grasp here is that because adaptive

9 Go to https://oceans.ubc.ca/2019/09/13/in-memoriam-buzz-holling/ for additional details on this

point. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).
10 This discussion borrows, in part, from Batabyal and Kourtit (2021).
Crawford “Buzz” Holling (1930–2019): Progenitor … 197

management is based on a learning process, the incorporation of this learning in

decision-making can improve the outcomes of management in the long run.11
There is no dispute on the point that a system—ecological or socioeconomic—
cannot be understood or managed by observing it at a single scale. This is because
all systems exist and function at multiple scales of space, time, and social organiza-
tion. Therefore, the interactions across scales are critically important in ascertaining
the dynamics of the system at any particular observational scale. This interacting
set of hierarchically structured scales is what Gunderson and Holling (2002) call
a panarchy. Looked at a little differently, because the central focus of panarchy
is to rationalize the interplay between change and persistence, on the one hand,
and between the predictable and the unpredictable, on the other, Gunderson and
Holling (2002) contend it is possible to draw on the concept of hierarchies of
influences between embedded scales or panarchies to denote structures that support
experiments, test their results, and permit adaptive evolution.12
Even though the concept of panarchy originated in ecology, we are now begin-
ning to see some applications of panarchy theory in other disciplines. For instance,
Garmestani et al. (2006, 2009) point out that the panarchy concept permits one to
examine the size of companies and thereby shed light more generally on governance
systems. In addition, Wieland (2021) discusses how the idea of a panarchy can be used
to analyze the management of supply chains. Regional scientists have devoted scant
attention to panarchy, and to the best of my knowledge, there are only two studies in
regional science that have worked with the notion. Specifically, Simmie and Martin
(2010) discuss the extent to which panarchy theory can be used to generate testable
hypotheses about urban and regional resilience. Eason and Garmestani (2012) use
panarchy theory and point out that urban systems are scale-dependent. Even so, they
note that it is important to comprehend that city growth is typically not random
but correlated with other salient variables such as mean household income and the
percentage of the population with a college degree. So, it is fair to say that of the
three key ideas put forth by Holling in the ecology and environmental management
literatures (see Sect. 1), resilience is the concept that has, by far, had the greatest
impact on research in regional science.

2.2 Two Interpretations of Resilience

In order to use the concept of resilience meaningfully in regional science, one needs to
first understand that, even though this concept was introduced into the ecology litera-
ture in the post-World War II era by Holling (1973), the concept now has two interpre-
tations in ecology. First, we have engineering resilience, or resilience of the first kind.
Even though Holling (1996) came up with the term engineering resilience, resilience
in this specific sense originates in the main from the research of Pimm (1984). Other

11 Go to https://www.resalliance.org/adaptive-mgmt for more details. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).

12 Also see https://www.resalliance.org/panarchy. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).
198 A. A. Batabyal

scholars who have contributed notably to the development of engineering resilience

include O’Neill et al. (1986), and Tilman and Downing (1994).
Second, we have ecological resilience or resilience of the second kind. This second
sense in which the notion of resilience is used in ecology is due to Holling (1973).
It is important to recognize that engineering resilience and ecological resilience are
dissimilar concepts, and therefore, in general, one does not expect there to be any
discernable relationship between these two disparate ideas.
To see the difference between these two notions of resilience, let us reflect on the
prevailing definitions of these two concepts. Engineering resilience “concentrates
on stability near an equilibrium steady state, where resistance to disturbance and
speed of return to the equilibrium are used to measure the property…” (Holling
1996, p. 33).13 In contrast, ecological resilience “emphasizes conditions far from any
equilibrium steady state, where instabilities can flip a system into another regime of
behavior—that is, to another stability domain” (Holling 1996, p. 33).14 From these
two definitions, it should be obvious to the reader that engineering resilience is an
“equilibrium-centered” view of an ecological system and that ecological resilience
is a “far-from-equilibrium” view of an ecological system.
The research of Pimm (1991) and Perrings et al. (1995) indicates that both these
notions of resilience are germane when studying the responses of ecological systems
to shocks. In addition, the research of Perrings (1987, 1991) and Batabyal (1998;
1999a, b; 2001) indicates that these two concepts are also pertinent when studying
jointly determined ecological-economic systems such as fisheries, forests, and range-
lands.15 That said, a central question now is the following: Are these two notions
of resilience useful as organizing concepts for socioeconomic systems, which are
the systems that regional scientists standardly work with? Research by Levin et al.
(1998), Batabyal (1998), and Walker (1998) indicates that the answer to the preceding
question is “yes.”
Given this “yes” answer, we must next decide whether to use the definition of
engineering or ecological resilience when studying socioeconomic systems. Regret-
tably, the literature in regional science does not provide an unambiguous answer.
On the one hand, Stanickova and Melecky (2017, p. 233) contend that for regional
economic analysis, “the most natural conceptual meaning of economic resilience is
the ability of a regional economy to maintain or return to a pre-existing state (typi-
cally assumed to be an equilibrium state) in the presence of some type of exogenous
shock.” The suggestion here is that engineering resilience is the apposite notion to
concentrate on. In contrast, in their commentary on how regional social-ecological
systems ought to be managed, Lebel et al. (2006, p. 3) observe that “[t]he alternative
to trying to maintain, or transform to, a system configuration that is very narrowly
defined is to manage resilience. Resilience is a measure of the amount of change a
system can undergo and still retain the same controls on structure and function or

13 Also see Pimm (1984), O’Neill et al. (1986), and Tilman and Downing (1994).
14 Also see Holling (1973) and Holling et al. (1995).
15 Such systems are said to be jointly determined because their evolution over time and space is

overseen by forces that are partly ecological and partly economic in nature.
Crawford “Buzz” Holling (1930–2019): Progenitor … 199

remain in the same domain of attraction…” These researchers are obviously speaking
about ecological resilience.
Regional scientists ought not to be bothered by the fact that there is no one
answer to the query concerning which definition of resilience to use when studying
socioeconomic systems. That said, regional scientists do need to understand the
yardsticks that will help them determine whether their attention in any given scenario
ought to be on engineering or on ecological resilience. I maintain that there are four
yardsticks that together will help a researcher ascertain whether the focus ought to
be on engineering or on ecological resilience.

2.3 Engineering or Ecological Resilience?

The first yardstick asks a regional scientist to focus on whether the socioeconomic
system under consideration is largely untouched, and therefore largely bereft of
human influence, or whether this system is a managed system. If the system under
consideration is mostly untouched, then the “near-equilibrium” viewpoint associated
with engineering resilience is relevant. In contrast—and this is likely to denote most
of the socioeconomic systems that regional scientists are interested in studying—if
the system under consideration is managed, then it is a lot more probable that this
system can exist in manifold stable states. In this case, the “far-from-equilibrium”
perspective associated with ecological resilience is the concept to concentrate on.
Given the research of Perrings (1996), the second yardstick relates to the number
of equilibria possessed by a socioeconomic system. If this system has a single equilib-
rium, then, tacitly, there is an assumption of global stability, and, hence, engineering
resilience is the apposite notion to focus on. On the other hand, a managed socioe-
conomic system can be expected to exist in manifold stable states. Thus, in this
instance, we are interested in discovering the size of the stability domain associated
with a particular stable equilibrium, and, consequently, ecological resilience is the
pertinent notion to pay attention to.
Humans are affected by a variety of functions that socioeconomic systems
routinely perform. Consequently, following Holling (1996), the third yardstick
involves figuring out whether to study the efficiency with which these functions are
being performed or to analyze the existence of one or more of these functions. If the
goal of a research project is to establish the efficiency with which system functions
are being performed, then the regional scientist ought to concentrate on engineering
resilience. If, on the other hand, a regional scientist’s goal is either to maintain the
existence of a system’s functions or to determine the survival of a specific function,
then this regional scientist’s attention should be focused on ecological resilience.
The fourth yardstick concerns the nature of the question(s) that a researcher
is looking to investigate. If the goal is to study a particular question about the
functioning of a socioeconomic system, then it makes more sense to concentrate
on engineering resilience. On the other hand, if a researcher’s intent is to shed
200 A. A. Batabyal

light on general questions about a socioeconomic system, then I maintain that this
researcher’s attention ought to be focused on ecological resilience.

2.4 Resilience and Stability

The research of Dei et al. (2015) and the discussion thus far in this chapter indicate
to us that regardless of whether we decide to focus on engineering or on ecological
resilience, at a very basic level, the concept of resilience is very closely related
to the concept of stability. In fact, this point has been made by the distinguished
ecologist Stuart Pimm (1991, p. 13) who has explained that “theoretical and empirical
ecologists [have] used the word stability to mean at least five different things…” and
that resilience is one of these “five different things.”
It is worth emphasizing Pimm’s (1991, pp. 13–14) point that, in addition to
resilience, ecologists have used the word stability to refer to related notions known
as persistence, resistance, and variability. For regional scientists, the point to recog-
nize is that words like persistence and resistance have well understood meanings in
ecology. Hence, when a regional scientist uses a word like resistance to delineate
something that is at odds with the way this word is used in ecology, there is consider-
able risk that it will create confusion about the meaning of the underlying concept in
an environment in which regional scientists are already using resilience in different
ways.
To see this point clearly, I now provide some examples from the regional science
literature. Consider the research of Rose (2015). After distinguishing between what
he calls static and dynamic economic resilience, Rose (2015, p. 247) provides defini-
tions of these two concepts. He points out that static economic resilience is “the
efficient use of remaining resources at a given point in time.” He then tells us
that dynamic economic resilience is “the efficient use of resources over time for
investment in repair and reconstruction.”
Abstracting away from the time dimension, the difficulty with the above two
definitions of economic resilience is that they are closely related to the definition of
economic efficiency. An economist would say that if a system is utilizing its resources
efficiently then this system is Pareto efficient. This means that no one in the system
can be made better off without making at least one person in the same system worse
off.16 From time to time, economists use the notion of efficiency in a narrower sense to
refer to, for example, resource efficiency. But even in this instance, Rose’s (2015) defi-
nitions of economic resilience would be comparable to the way in which economists
think about resource efficiency.17 So, regional scientists need to remember that when
studying a socioeconomic system, it is unconstructive to define terms (static and

16 See Bishop (1993), Hirshleifer et al. (2005, pp. 533–534), and Mas-Colell et al. (1995, pp. 312–
313) for more details on this point.
17 Go to https://www.resource-germany.com/topics/generel-remarks/what-is-resource-efficiency/

for more details on this point. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).

Crawford “Buzz” Holling (1930–2019): Progenitor … 201

dynamic economic resilience) that are closely related to an established concept in

ecology (resilience) with clear meanings (engineering and ecological) in a way that
separates the defined terms from any kind of stability consideration and, simulta-
neously, risks conflation with other well-understood concepts in economics (Pareto
efficiency and resource efficiency).
Moving on, Rose (2015, p. 248) says that research on resilience is split into two
groups and that about “half of the researchers view resilience as any action that
can reduce losses from disaster…” He then says that the “other camp focuses on
resilience as actions following the onset of a disaster.” It is important to comprehend
that resilience, be it engineering or ecological, is an attribute18 of systems including
socioeconomic systems. It is not an action or even a set of actions. Therefore, if
regional scientists are to make sound policy recommendations on the basis of their
studies of the resilience of a socioeconomic systems, then they must first comprehend
that resilience is one kind of stability property. This realization will also enable
regional scientists to better understand the societal impacts of the policy measures
they propose for adoption. I now ask whether it makes sense to view resilience as a
process.

3 Is Resilience a Process?

3.1 Process

The question as to whether resilience is appropriately viewed as a process is an

unsettled matter in the social sciences in general. For example, the psychologist and
social worker Michael Ungar (2018, p. 3) points out that “studies of social-ecological
systems tend to see resilience as the capacity of a system, closer to the description of
a trait than a process…” He then says that “[p]sychologists, social workers, and other
mental health professionals, on the other hand, abandoned descriptions of resilience
as a trait decades ago and now describe resilience most often as a process.” Finally,
Ungar (2018, p. 3) maintains that this “difference between the disciplines has become
somewhat blurred as social-ecological systems researchers…have shown interest in
the structure and processes associated with nested adaptive cycles across scales.”
Like Ungar (2018), other researchers, such as Rutter (1987) and Masten (2014),
would also have us believe that resilience is a process. This notwithstanding, my view
is that resilience is an attribute of a socioeconomic system and not a process. The
argument to corroborate this view is in two parts. First, we return to the ecology litera-
ture, where, in the post–World War II era, resilience was first defined and studied, and
pay careful attention to what distinguished ecologists have said about this concept.
Two illustrations follow in the next paragraph.

18 Other appropriate synonyms here would be “property” or “trait.”

202 A. A. Batabyal

Buzz Holling, who introduced the concept of resilience into the ecology literature
in 1973, says in a more recent contribution (1996, p. 32) that the resilience “of a
system has been defined in two different ways in the ecological literature. These
differences in definition reflect which of two different aspects of stability are empha-
sized.” Simon Levin (2015, p. 1) says that ecological resilience is “the ability of an
ecosystem to maintain its normal patterns of nutrient cycling and biomass produc-
tion after being subjected to damage caused by an ecological disturbance.” The clear
inference I draw from these two quoted observations is that resilience is an attribute
of a system and not a process.
The second part of my argument is to point out the need to differentiate between
an attribute of a system and intertemporal observations of this attribute. A collection
of observations over a period of time clearly makes up a process, but the observations
themselves represent an attribute, and this attribute can be viewed statically, that is,
at a point in time or intertemporally, that is, over time. In the static case, there is
plainly no process, but, in the intertemporal case, we do have a process. To grasp
the significance of the distinction I am making, consider the following elementary
example involving humans.
There can be no dispute on the point that obesity is an attribute of a person,
and we can observe how obese a person is at a point in time, and, thus, there is no
process issue to worry about. However, we can also observe how obese an individual
is intertemporally, and this undertaking would lead to a series of observations that
do make up a process. The point to recognize is that the observations refer to the
obesity attribute, and, hence, it does not make sense to say that obesity is a process.
The same rationale would apply to other human attributes such as the height of an
individual.

3.2 Uncertainty

Buzz Holling placed substantial weight on understanding how uncertainty affects the
ability of humans to manage ecological and socioeconomic systems.19 As such, it may
be surprising to note that, in this discussion about whether resilience is a process,
I have thus far said nothing about uncertainty. In other words, I have implicitly
assumed that it makes sense to view a socioeconomic system as a deterministic
system. Clearly, this is a simplification. When it makes more sense to view such
a system as a probabilistic system, then an attribute such as resilience ought to be
viewed as a random variable. In this instance, at a point in time, we would observe
a realization of this random variable. In contrast, intertemporally, we would have a
collection of such realizations, and this collection would constitute what is commonly
referred to as a stochastic process. Note, though, that even in this probabilistic setting,
as pointed out by Batabyal (1998), resilience would still be an attribute, but this
attribute would now be stochastic in nature.

19 Go to https://www.resalliance.org/news/51 for more details. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).

Crawford “Buzz” Holling (1930–2019): Progenitor … 203

I contend that the above two-part argument establishes the validity of my claim
that resilience is an attribute of ecological and socioeconomic systems and not a
process. Let us now move on and deliberate over whether resilience is always a good
thing that decision-makers ought to enhance.

4 Should Resilience Always Be Promoted?

4.1 The Question to Answer First

Let us focus for the moment on the wide-ranging paper by Martin and Sunley (2015).
These researchers (2015, p. 1) note that resilience “is now invoked in diverse contexts,
both as a perceived (and typically positive) attribute of an object, entity, or system
and, more normatively, as a desired feature that should somehow be promoted or
fostered.”20 Supportive of this viewpoint, Stone-Jovicich et al. (2018, p. 1) point out
that “[g]rowing attention is…being focused on social-ecological resilience. Indeed, it
is increasingly being adopted as a centerpiece of policy making, planning processes,
and management strategies…”
These and other scholars such as Brown et al. (2017) have all argued that resilience,
in general, is a good thing. Here, when I say good, I mean—as economists typically
do—something of which more is preferred to less. With this interpretation of good,
the policy suggestion is that decision-makers need to do all they can to augment the
resilience of a socioeconomic system. Even though this perspective is fairly common,
my view is that resilience is not always a good thing, and that, in order to determine
whether resilience in a given setting is a good thing, one must first answer the query
“Resilience of What?”

4.2 The Rationale

To show the soundness of my position, I begin with some comments on the proba-
bilistic analysis of Batabyal et al. (2003) that concentrates on lakes. These researchers
point out that many lakes exist in one of three potential states: a stable eutrophic state
that is bad from the viewpoint of humans; a stable oligotrophic state that is good from
the viewpoint of humans; and a third, unstable state that marks the border between
the eutrophic and the oligotrophic states. The lake may move from the oligotrophic to
the eutrophic state as a result of natural or human factors, but this move is generally
probabilistic. In this situation, actions taken by a decision-maker can, theoretically
speaking, shift the lake from the eutrophic to the oligotrophic state. However, whether

20 Note that even though elsewhere in their paper Martin and Sunley (2015) say that resilience is
a process, this specific reference to resilience as an attribute of an object, entity, or system would
appear to strengthen my contention in Sect. 3 that resilience is an attribute and not a process.
204 A. A. Batabyal

these actions will or will not be successful is a probabilistic and not a deterministic
matter. The salient point to recognize now is that the lake under consideration can
be resilient in either the eutrophic or in the oligotrophic state. Since the eutrophic
(oligotrophic) state is undesirable (desirable) from the perspective of humans, the
objective of policy clearly ought to be to decrease (increase) the resilience of the
eutrophic (oligotrophic) state. In other words, when the answer to the “Resilience of
What” query stated at the end of Sect. 4.1 is “the eutrophic state,” resilience in this
state is not a good thing, and, therefore, policy should seek to diminish the resilience
of the lake in this bad state.
In recent times, the lagging versus leading region dichotomy21 has generated a
substantial literature in regional science. In this two-part cataloging, lagging regions
are generally not vibrant, they are often rural or peripheral, they are technologically
retrograde, and they display slow economic growth rates. In contrast, leading regions
are viewed as vibrant, they are often urban and centrally situated, they are techno-
logically progressive, and they display relatively brisk rates of economic growth.
Lagging regions are frequently resilient and, as the research of Wolman et al. (2017)
and Anoni et al. (2019) demonstrates, opposed to change, occasionally even when
substantial resources have been devoted to altering their lagging status. Eyeing this
issue through the lens of the query “Resilience of What” ought to persuade the reader
that the resilience of lagging regions is plainly not an enviable state of affairs.
Let me close this section by underscoring two essential points made in a thoughtful
paper by a group of ecologists and economists. Levin et al. (1998, p. 226) first tell
us that “[n]ot all resilient phenomena are desirable. For example, discriminatory
class systems have proved resilient. Similarly, racism has proved stubbornly resis-
tant to policies aimed at wrecking its foundations.” Hence, we need to realize that
“[r]esilience…makes no distinctions, preserving ecologically or socially undesirable
situations as well as desirable ones” (Levin et al. 1998, p. 225). With this discus-
sion of the three basic issues out of the way, I now move on to discuss how Buzz
Holling’s notion of resilience has influenced thinking about two policy-related issues
in regional science. These two issues pertain to manifold stable states and the nexuses
between the two concepts of resilience and sustainability.

5 Manifold Stable States

5.1 Foreseeability and Policy Fixity

Research conducted by Arthur (1989, 1990) and Perrings and Brock (2009) indicates
that socioeconomic systems that are the object of inquiry by regional scientists can
exist in manifold stable states. This central point and its ramifications for the design

21 See Batabyal (2018), Batabyal et al. (2019), Batabyal and Nijkamp (2014a, b, 2019a), and the
references cited in these papers for further details about this literature.
Crawford “Buzz” Holling (1930–2019): Progenitor … 205

and implementation of what we might call “resilience sensitive” policy are of great
importance but, unfortunately, insufficiently studied by regional scientists.
We begin with the simpler of two cases to corroborate the above claim. Now, if a
given socioeconomic system can exist in only one stable state and, consequently, has
a unique equilibrium, then it makes sense for a decision-maker to concentrate on the
engineering resilience of this system. To see why, observe that when a socioeconomic
system with one stable state is shocked, this system will have a tendency to return
to its unique equilibrium. Of the two definitions of resilience that we have been
working with in this chapter, the one that accentuates the speed of return to the stable
state after a shock—or a near-equilibrium response of the system—is engineering
resilience (Holling 1996). This makes clear the usefulness of engineering resilience
or resilience of the first kind for such systems. A major differentiating characteristic
of such “one stable-state” socioeconomic systems is that their behavior over both
time and space is foreseeable, at least relative to truly manifold stable-state systems.
Thus, fixed policies that are both relatively undemanding to design and to implement
make more sense for such systems.

5.2 Unforeseeability and Policy Flexibility

Moving on to the more complicated and also to the more realistic case, I maintain
that most—and, in all likelihood, all—socioeconomic systems that regional scientists
investigate are manifold stable-state systems. Therefore, their spatial and temporal
behavior is likely to be unforeseeable. As a consequence, in this instance, the attention
of a decision-maker has to be on the size of the stability domain associated with a
specific stable state. Put differently, this decision-maker needs to concentrate on the
ecological resilience of the system being studied.
From the perspective of the design and implementation of policy, we need “a
response system that is flexible and adaptive” (Levin et al. 1998, p. 224). My reading
of the literature here substantiates the assertion of Sellberg et al. (2018, p. 906) who
point out that “studies of resilience practice are still rare. Few studies have analyzed
the applications of resilience thinking in real-world settings and assessed what it has
actually managed to achieve.” This assertion provides the rationale for my claim in
the first paragraph of Sect. 5.1.
Even if one accepts the above claim, there is no gainsaying the fact that compared
to fixed policies, flexible and adaptable policies are more costly to design and to
implement. Hence, in any given situation, a decision-maker will need to participate
in a benefit–cost analysis in which the hard-to-quantify benefit from following such
flexible policies is compared in a consequential way with the easy-to-quantify cost
of these same policies.
I now briefly highlight one final point. In contemporary times, war and civil unrest
in a nation like Syria, President Trump’s trade war with China, and the COVID-19
pandemic signify a breakdown of the balance of peace and security and, thus, are
illustrative of “qualitative shifts in which initially small disturbances may become
206 A. A. Batabyal

magnified through non-linear feedbacks” (Levin et al. 1998, p. 225). When faced with
such qualitative shifts, flexible and adaptive policies of the sort that I am promoting
need to take into account more than just the present outcomes of particular actions.
Specifically, decision-makers need to ponder the prospect that the effects of a series of
small actions—where each action is undamaging by itself—will add up in a way that
destabilizes socioeconomic systems. In such situations, decision-makers encounter
yet another problem and that is this: Even for flexible and adaptive policies, we can
generally forecast the immediate impacts of specific actions. However, it is much
more difficult to forecast the impacts of a sequence of actions without understanding
the intertemporal behavior of the systems that are being affected by the relevant
actions. That said, I now proceed to discuss the second of two policy issues, and this
relates to the connection between the two concepts of resilience and sustainability.

6 Resilience Contrasted with Sustainability

6.1 A Basic Difference

The research of Pierce et al. (2011) indicates that the two notions of resilience and
sustainability have increasingly become buzzwords. Perhaps this explains why there
is now some confusion in the regional science literature about the relationship, if
any, between these two concepts. As pointed out by Marchese et al. (2018), some
observers accept as true the idea that these two notions are the same, whereas others
think that they are different.22 Regional scientists need to be clear on the point that
these two notions are dissimilar. To see this, recall two points from our discussion
in Sects. 2 and 3 of this chapter. First, the term resilience has two meanings, and
these two meanings are not the same. Second, resilience is an attribute—and not a
process—of a socioeconomic system, and, hence, it can, in principle, be investigated
either at a point in time (statically) or over time (intertemporally).
It is essential to recognize that, even though the notion of sustainability at present
has numerous definitions, the idea of sustainability was introduced into the social
sciences literature most conspicuously in the form of the closely related notion of
sustainable development. In particular, the Brundtland Commission, backed by the
United Nations, stated in its well-known report—see Brundtland (1987, Chap. 2,
para. 1)—that “sustainable development is development that satisfies the needs of
the present without compromising the needs of the future.” Even though other mean-
ings are possible, one of the most familiar meanings of the word sustain is “to cause

22Go to https://www.barillacfn.com/en/magazine/food-and-sustainability/sustainability-and-resili
ence-refer-to-two-different-concepts/ for additional details on this point. (Last accessed 30 June
2021). See Batabyal and Nijkamp (2019b) for a discussion of related issues.
Crawford “Buzz” Holling (1930–2019): Progenitor … 207

or allow something to continue for a period of time.”23 So, sustainable develop-

ment is fundamentally an intertemporal phenomenon or a process. From this line of
reasoning, we maintain that the more general but still related notion of sustainability24
also has a distinct intertemporal dimension to it.

6.2 Rival Goals?

As observed by Saunders and Becker (2015), the point that resilience and sustain-
ability are disparate concepts is now recognized by quite a few researchers. Intrigu-
ingly, this recognition appears to have led some writers such as Zolli and Healy
(2012) to think of resilience and sustainability as rival goals for decision-makers.
For instance, Zolli (2012, p. 1) says that “because the world is so increasingly out of
balance, the sustainability regime is being quietly challenged, not from without, but
from within. Among a growing number of scientists…a new dialogue is emerging
around a new idea, resilience…” He then argues (2012, p. 1) that “[w]here sustain-
ability aims to put the world back into balance, resilience looks for ways to manage
in an imbalanced world.”
Given this “rival goals” viewpoint, it is worth stating clearly that in the ecological
economics literature, the significance of resilience for sustainable economic devel-
opment has been documented at least since the research of Common and Perrings
(1992). Consistent with my discussion above, this research indicates that whereas
resilience is a system attribute, sustainable development is about designing and imple-
menting policies that maintain the trajectories or time-paths of vital features of the
system under contemplation. As such, the crucial point to comprehend is that if a
policy diminishes the resilience of a socioeconomic system, then it does not make
sense to attempt to sustain the (undesirable) resulting trajectory of salient system
attributes with reduced resilience. Hence, Perrings (2006, p. 418) is surely right
when he asserts that a “development strategy is not sustainable if it is not resilient:
i.e. if it involves a significant risk that the economy can be flipped from a desirable
state (path) into an undesirable state (path), and if that change is either irreversible
or only slowly reversible.”
I now conclude this section by bringing to the attention of regional scientists
three significant results that spring collectively from the various papers published
in a special issue of the journal Environment and Development Economics in 2006.
Regional scientists studying socioeconomic systems and particularly the connections
between resilience and sustainable development ought to benefit by keeping these
results in mind.

23 Go to https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/sustain for more details on this

point. (Last accessed 30 June 2021).
24 I say “more general” because it is certainly possible to think of sustaining things that have nothing

to do with economic development in and of itself.

208 A. A. Batabyal

First, for socioeconomic systems, markets may be missing for attributes of the
system that may affect its resilience and, therefore, its sustainability. In such circum-
stances, prices can lead decision-makers to take actions that push the system closer
to unseen thresholds. Second, sustainable management of a socioeconomic system
depends on understanding the intertemporal behavior of the system. In turn, this
affects the choice a decision-maker makes between actions that involve adapting to
future changes and actions that alleviate these same changes.25 Finally, applying the
lens of modern finance, sustainable development demands that the value of the asset
base available to a population not deteriorate over time. In this regard, a resilience
point of view implies that the composition of this asset base is very important. This
concludes my discussion of (i) some of the main ways in which Holling’s (1973)
notion of resilience has been used in regional science and (ii) some of the concep-
tual and policy-related issues to be mindful of when regional scientists conduct
resilience-based studies of one or more socioeconomic systems.

7 Conclusions

In this chapter, I discussed the life of Buzz Holling and the considerable impact that
he has had on the social sciences, in general, and on regional science, in particular,
through the widespread contemporary use of resilience, a concept that he originated
in the early 1970s with his research on the stability of ecological systems. In this
regard, Carpenter and Peterson (2019, p. 997) have rightly noted that “[t]hrough his
research, collaboration and institution building, he was a visionary of change in nature
and society and central in the rise of resilience thinking.” This explains why—even
though Buzz Holling himself never worked in regional science—his interdisciplinary
research and his founding of the Resilience Alliance in 1997 (Holling 2017, p. 73–
78) have stimulated regional scientists to pursue research where the focus is on the
development of integrative theories of change that have practical value.
My discussion of three foundational and two policy-related issues involving
the use of resilience in regional science demonstrates that additional research is
necessary to (i) clear up some conceptual issues, (ii) comprehend that for socioeco-
nomic systems, resilience is not always a good thing, and (iii) focus clearly on the
distinctions between resilience and sustainability when formulating regional poli-
cies. Therefore, in the years to come, we look forward to exciting new research
developments arising from the use of resilience-based analyses of socioeconomic
systems that are marked by the trinity of conceptual clarity, analytical rigor, and
policy relevance.

25 Following Perrings (2006), adaptation involves actions by a decision-maker that modify either
the benefits or the costs of change without modifying the probability of that change. In contrast,
mitigation involves actions by a decision-maker that influence the known probabilities of future
outcomes.
Crawford “Buzz” Holling (1930–2019): Progenitor … 209

Acknowledgments Batabyal acknowledges financial support from the Gosnell endowment at RIT.
The usual absolution applies.

References

Annoni, P., L. de Dominicis, and N. Khabirpour. 2019. Location matters: A spatial econometric
analysis of regional resilience in the European Union. Growth and Change 50: 824–855.
Arthur, W.B. 1989. Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events.
Economic Journal 99: 116–131.
Arthur, W.B. 1990. Positive feedback in the economy. Scientific American 262: 92–99.
Batabyal, A.A. 1998. The concept of resilience: Retrospect and prospect. Environment and
Development Economics 3: 235–239.
Batabyal, A.A. 1999a. Contemporary research in ecological economics: Five outstanding issues.
International Journal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences 25: 143–154.
Batabyal, A.A. 1999b. Species substitutability, resilience, and the optimal management of
ecological-economic systems. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 29: 35–43.
Batabyal, A.A. 2001. A theoretical inquiry into aspects of the structure and the management of
ecological-economic systems. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment 15: 173–
184.
Batabyal, A.A. 2018. A note on local public good induced spillovers between a leading and a lagging
region. Regional Science Inquiry 10: 11–16.
Batabyal, A.A., and P. Nijkamp. 2014a. Technology, learning, and long run economic growth in
leading and lagging regions. Economic and Political Weekly 49: 92–96.
Batabyal, A.A., and P. Nijkamp. 2014b. Some properties of the technology gap between leading
and lagging regions. Theoretical Economics Letters 4: 1–6.
Batabyal, A.A., and P. Nijkamp. 2019a. The magnification of a lagging region’s initial economic
disadvantages on the balanced growth path. Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science 3: 719–730.
Batabyal, A.A., and P. Nijkamp. 2019b. Sustainable development and regional growth revisited. In
Handbook of regional growth and development theories, 2nd ed., eds. R. Capello and P. Nijkamp,
344–365. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Batabyal, A.A., J.R. Kahn, and R.V. O’Neill. 2003. On the scarcity value of ecosystem services.
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 46: 334–352.
Batabyal, A.A., and K. Kourtit. 2021. The use of resilience in regional science: Five outstanding
issues. Unpublished Manuscript, Rochester Institute of Technology.
Batabyal, A.A., K. Kourtit, and P. Nijkamp. 2019. New technological knowledge, rural and urban
agriculture, and steady state economic growth. Networks and Spatial Economics 19: 717–729.
Bishop, R.C. 1993. Economic efficiency, sustainability, and biodiversity. Ambio 22: 69–73.
Brown, K., N. Eernstman, A.R. Huke, and N. Reding. 2017. The drama of resilience: Learning,
doing, and sharing for sustainability. Ecology and Society 22 (2): 8.
Brundtland, G.H. 1987. Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Carpenter, S.R., and G.D. Peterson. 2019. C.S. ‘Buzz’ Holling, 6 December 1930–16 August 2019.
Nature Sustainability 2: 997–998.
Common, M., and C. Perrings. 1992. Towards an ecological economics of sustainability. Ecological
Economics 6: 7–34.
Dei, L., K.S. Korolev, and J. Gore. 2015. Relation between stability and resilience determines the
performance of early warning signals under different environmental drivers. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 112: 10056–10061.
Eason, T., and A.S. Garmestani. 2012. Cross-scale dynamics of a regional urban system through
time. Région Et Développement 36: 55–77.
210 A. A. Batabyal

Garmestani, A.S., C.R. Allen, and L. Gunderson. 2009. Panarchy: Discontinuities reveal similarities
in the dynamic system structure of ecological and social systems. Ecology and Society 14: 15.
Garmestani, A.S., C.R. Allen, J.D. Mittelstaedt, C.A. Stow, and W.A. Ward. 2006. Firm size
diversity, functional richness and resilience. Environment and Development Economics 11:
533–551.
Gunderson, L., and C.S. Holling, eds. 2002. Panarchy. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Hirshleifer, J., A. Glazer, and D. Hirshleifer. 2005. Price theory and applications, 7th ed. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Holling, C.S. 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and
Systematics 4: 1–23.
Holling, C.S. 1978. Adaptive environmental assessment and management. London: Wiley.
Holling, C.S. 1996. Engineering resilience versus ecological resilience. In Engineering within
Ecological Constraints, ed. P.E. Schulze, 31–43. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Holling, C.S. 2017. Bubbles and spirals: The memoirs of C.S. Buzz Holling, 2nd edition. http://
www.stockholmresilience.org/holling-memoirs. Last accessed 14 July 2020.
Holling, C.S., D.W. Schindler, B. Walker, and J. Roughgarden. 1995. Biodiversity in the functioning
of ecosystems: An ecological synthesis. In Biodiversity loss, eds. C. Perrings, K. Maler, C. Folke,
C.S. Holling, and B. Jansson, 44–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lebel, L., J.M. Anderies, B. Campbell, C. Folke, S. Hatfield-Dodds, T.P. Hughes, and J. Wilson.
2006. Governance and the capacity to manage resilience in regional social-ecological systems.
https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/ers_facpub/129. Last accessed 14 July 2020.
Levin, S.A. 2015. Ecological resilience. https://www.britannica.com/science/ecological-resilience.
Last accessed 14 July 2020.
Levin, S.A., S. Barrett, S. Aniyar, W. Baumol, C. Bliss, B. Bolin, P. Dasgupta, P. Ehrlich,
C. Folke, I. Gren, C.S. Holling, A. Jansson, B. Jansson, K. Maler, D. Martin, C. Perrings,
and E. Sheshinski. 1998. Resilience in natural and socioeconomic systems. Environment and
Development Economics 3: 222–234.
Marchese, D., E. Reynolds, M.E. Bates, H. Morgan, S.S. Clark, and I. Linkov. 2018. Resilience and
sustainability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications. Science
of the Total Environment 613–614: 1275–1283.
Martin, R., and P. Sunley. 2015. On the notion of regional economic resilience: Conceptualization
and explanation. Journal of Economic Geography 15: 1–42.
Mas-Colell, A., M.D. Whinston, and J.R. Green. 1995. Microeconomic theory. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Masten, A.S. 2014. Global perspectives on resilience in children and youth. Child Development 85:
6–20.
O’Neill, R.V., D.L. DeAngelis, J.B. Waide, and T.F.H. Allen. 1986. A hierarchical concept of
ecosystems. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Perrings, C. 1987. Economy and environment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Perrings, C. 1991. Ecological sustainability and environmental control. Structural Change and
Economic Dynamics 2: 275–295.
Perrings, C. 1996. Ecological resilience in the sustainability of economic development. In Models
of sustainable development, eds. S. Faucheux, D. Pearce, and J. Proops, 231–252. Cheltenham,
UK, and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.
Perrings, C. 2006. Resilience and sustainable development. Environment and Development
Economics 11: 417–427.
Perrings, C., and W. Brock. 2009. Irreversibility in economics. Annual Review of Resource
Economics 1: 219–238.
Perrings, C., K. Maler, C. Folke, C.S. Holling, and B. Jansson, eds. 1995. Biodiversity loss.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pierce, J.C., W.W. Budd, and N.P. Lovrich, Jr. 2011. Resilience and sustainability in US urban areas.
Environmental Politics 20: 566–584.
Pimm, S.L. 1984. The complexity and stability of ecosystems. Nature 307: 321–326.
Crawford “Buzz” Holling (1930–2019): Progenitor … 211

Pimm, S.L. 1991. The balance of nature? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rogers, A. 2018. But in my case. Bloomington, IN, USA: iUniverse.
Rose, A. 2015. Economic resilience in regional science: Research needs and future applications. In
Regional research frontiers, vol. 1, eds. R. Jackson and P. Schaeffer, 245–264. Cham, Switzerland:
Springer International Publishing.
Rutter, M. 1987. Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry 57: 316–331.
Saunders, W.S.A., and J.S. Becker. 2015. A discussion of resilience and sustainability: Land use
planning recovery from the Canterbury earthquake sequence, New Zealand. International Journal
of Disaster Risk Reduction 14: 73–81.
Sellberg, M.M., P. Ryan, S.T. Borgstrom, A.V. Norstrom, and G.D. Peterson. 2018. From resilience
thinking to resilience planning: Lessons from practice. Journal of Environmental Management
217: 906–918.
Simmie, J., and R. Martin. 2010. The economic resilience of regions: Towards an evolutionary
approach. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 3: 27–43.
Stanickova, M., and L. Melecky. 2017. Understanding of resilience in the context of regional
development using composite index approach: The case of European Union NUTS-2 regions.
Regional Studies, Regional Science 5: 231–254.
Stone-Jovicich, S., B.E. Goldstein, K. Brown, R. Plummer, and P. Olsson. 2018. Expanding the
contribution of the social sciences to social-ecological resilience research. Ecology and Society
23 (1): 41.
Tilman, D., and J.A. Downing. 1994. Biodiversity and stability in grasslands. Nature 367: 363–365.
Ungar, M. 2018. Systemic resilience: Principles and processes for a science of change in contexts
of adversity. Ecology and Society 23 (4): 34.
Walker, B. 1998. Resilience, instability, and disturbance in ecosystem dynamics. Environment and
Development Economics 3: 259–262.
Wieland, A. 2021. Dancing the supply chain: Toward transformative supply chain management.
Journal of Supply Chain Management 57: 58–73.
Wolman, H., H. Wial, T. St. Clair, and E. Hill. 2017. Coping with adversity. Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press.
Zolli, A. 2012. Learning to bounce back, https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/opinion/forget-sus
tainability-its-about-resilience.html. Last accessed 14 July 2020.
Zolli, A., and A.M. Healy. 2012. Resilience. Washington, DC: Free Press.
Karen R. Polenske (1937–): A Journey
from Rural Idaho to MIT

Geoffrey J. D. Hewings

Karen Polenske. Photo source Regional Science Association International, “Meet the Fellows,”
https://www.regionalscience.org/ (Last accessed 16 May 2022)

1 Introduction

Karen Polenkse was an intellectual leader in two professional organizations, the

Regional Science Association International and the International Input–Output Asso-
ciation. While her initial contributions focused on the modeling of multiregional

G. J. D. Hewings (B)
University of Illinois, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, 1301 W Gregory
Drive, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 213
P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_10
214 G. J. D. Hewings

input–output systems, she subsequently extended her contributions to regional devel-

opment issues, broadly defined, and, as well, she had as an extensive influence on
socioeconomic research in China. The latter work included methodological issues
(especially the development of hierarchical systems of accounts from national to indi-
vidual enterprises), environmental concerns, and the spatial processes of economic
growth and development. Polenske also contributed significantly to the organization
of science and to the training of succeeding generations of students, including several
hundred from China.
I have known Polenske since she came out to the University of Washington
(Seattle) in 1969 to deliver a seminar on her multiregional input–output modeling
project. Looking back, I believe that this was the first presentation or lecture I had
heard that was delivered by a woman, and, by this time, I was in the final year of my
doctoral work. This fact is mentioned to set the stage for the context in which Polenske
worked, highlighting the remarkable perseverance she exhibited in launching and
sustaining her career. Gender enlightenment in higher education in both Europe and
North America was still a nascent phenomenon in the 1960s; together with under-
representation of persons of color, women faced additional challenges that made
the normal trajectory of career advancement much more difficult. In many cases,
discrimination extended to difficulties securing grants, promotions, and even publi-
cation in major journals. However, the inclusion of Polenske in this series is not on
the basis of her sex but the variety of intellectual contributions she made to regional
science that extend beyond her many important publications.
This chapter is organized as follows. The next section provides a brief overview of
Polenske’s life and career; thereafter, discussion of her major accomplishments will
be addressed prior to some more in-depth analyses of her major research accom-
plishments. Given her extensive list of publications, only a small sample can be
highlighted, but these have been chosen to illustrate the breadth and depth of her
work. The penultimate section briefly addresses her contributions to the organiza-
tion of science (her work with professional organizations) and her strong commitment
to developing stronger relations with Chinese scholars. The chapter concludes with
some summary evaluation of her scholarship.

2 Early Life and Career Trajectory

Polenske was born in Idaho, but the family settled near Yakima, Washington; I believe
they owned an apple orchard, and, perhaps, this experience helped her early thinking
about supply chains and the myriad issues associated with production economics
and the marketing of output. In an interview for the Regional Science Association
International newsletter (October 2009), Polenske noted:
Some of us have wondered why more U.S. and European women are not attracted to the
sciences and engineering as well as economics, regional science, and other disciplines that
require mathematics. Encouragement to do mathematics (and statistics) is needed early from
parents and teachers while girls are still in grade school and high school. Often young girls
Karen R. Polenske (1937–): A Journey from Rural Idaho to MIT 215

are discouraged from taking it beyond the required subjects, although the use of the computer
may be changing this. I never gave much thought as to taking or not taking mathematics
when I was in high school. I enjoyed maths and also enjoyed teaching other students about
how to do the problem sets.

In high school, when I took geometry, I was the only girl out of about 200 in my class who
was still attending the mathematics class. I was planning to be an extension agent, and my
teachers could not understand why I wanted to learn maths. In graduate school, I was part of
the first class in the economics department at Harvard University where we had the option
of taking either a language or a mathematics examination. Until then, graduates were only
required to pass the language examination. I took the maths option.

However, the journey into the economics Ph.D. program at Harvard started with
an undergraduate degree in home economics from Oregon State University, perhaps
reflecting the parental expectations at the time for women to prepare for a life that
would be devoted to “the family.” Polenske obviously had other ambitions, and, after
completing a degree in Public Administration and Economics at Syracuse University,
she moved to Cambridge, MA, and enrolled for a Ph.D. in Economics at Harvard,
working under the direction of Wassily Leontief. Polenske was awarded her Ph.D.
in 1966. She remained at Harvard as an instructor, lecturer, and research associate
(centered on the Harvard Economic Research Project, HERP) before moving across
town to MIT in 1972 as Associate Professor in Urban Studies and Planning; she was
promoted to Professor in 1981 and retired as Peter de Florez Professor of Regional
Political Economy, now retaining the title of Professor Emerita. I have always gained
the impression that Polenske was proud of this trajectory and has never tried to hide
her early career path; it is still rather amazing to imagine this journey from rural Idaho
to becoming a research associate of a Nobel Prize winner in economics (awarded to
Leontief in 1973).

3 Major Accomplishments

Polenske’s main research contributions and intellectual achievements will form the
basis of the next section. Here, a summary will be provided of the way that two
academic organizations in which she worked have recognized her work.
It would be a mistake to look back at the 1960s and 1970s through the lens of
today’s academic world in which, in most countries, there are significant legal and
institutional pressures and incentives to encourage the hiring, promotion, and career
development of women and people of color. This was certainly not the case at the
time Polenske graduated. Negotiating a career in academia as a single woman in a
fiercely competitive and decidedly misogynistic atmosphere was a major challenge
and accomplishment. Notwithstanding these challenges, she became a pioneer in the
development and application of regional and interregional models—and especially
in promoting regional, environmental, and innovation modeling in China. Polenske
supervised a large number of Ph.D. and M.S. students at MIT, demonstrating her
strong commitment to the training of succeeding generations of scholars.
216 G. J. D. Hewings

In 1996, she received the Walter Isard Distinguished Scholar Award from the
North American Regional Science Council, reflecting the sustained level of her schol-
arship over many decades. In addition to being active in the Regional Science Asso-
ciation International (RSAI), she was equally committed to the International Input–
Output Association (IIOA); she assumed the presidency of the IIOA between 1997
and 2000, becoming the second woman to hold this position (Anne Carter was the
inaugural President). Both RSAI and IIOA elected Polenske as a Fellow (RSAI in
2005 and IIOA in 2007). She was the first woman in RSAI to achieve this distinction
and shared, with Anne Carter, this same distinction in IIOA.

4 Research Foci

It was while at Harvard, working on HERP, that Polenske initiated the main research
activity on which her intellectual contributions were initially based. One has the
impression that she was essentially able to create a bubble around her close colleagues
and herself that inured her from the carping and criticism that may have prevailed as
a result of having a woman is such a senior position. Her accomplishments are all the
more impressive given that she was a single woman during a decidedly difficult time
in American academia; it speaks volumes to her commitment and self-motivation
that she was able to achieve so much. It was also a time in which she product-
differentiated herself from Leontief’s work, although the linkage to his contributions
was readily apparent.

4.1 Multiregional and Enterprise Input–Output Accounts

and Models

This is probably the area in which Polenske’s initial and sustaining reputation was
formed. After completing her Ph.D. in 1966, she joined the HERP that same year
and remained in that research association position until 1972 when she moved to
MIT. Her primary responsibility was a multiregional input–output (MRIO) study of
the U.S. economy, funded in part by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Up to that
point, most input–output accounts were developed for single national or regional
economies; a few scholars ventured as far as a two- or three-region system, but
Polenske embarked on a system for the whole USA, building on the pioneering
work of Leontief and Strout (LS) in the development of MRIOs under conditions of
limited information. However, the empirical implementation, testing, and evaluation
of alternative formulations differentiated her work from LS. What is amazing about
this initiative is that, in the early stages of one’s career, there is a tendency to be
risk averse and to move in a more incremental fashion in building a portfolio of
publications. In contrast, Polenske jumped into the most comprehensive modeling
Karen R. Polenske (1937–): A Journey from Rural Idaho to MIT 217

project of its time! The MRIO project dominated her activities (and life) and resulted
in a series of books published between 1972 and 1974 by Heath-Lexington (see
Polenske 1972b, c, d, 1973a; Rogers 1972). These books were complemented by
an article in the American Economic Review (Polenske 1970) and chapters in books
published after the United Nations–sponsored IO conferences (precursors to the
International Input–Output Association), edited by Bródy and Carter (Polenske 1969,
1972a), and the influential book Planning over Space and Time, edited by Judge and
Takayama (Polenske 1973a, b).
In the development of the U.S. MRIO modeling system, Polenske turned to
Japanese data to help in model selection. The Japanese agency, Ministry of Interna-
tional Trade and Industry (MITI), had been producing survey-based, multiregional
input–output tables for the Japanese economy for a number of years. These data
and associated models afforded Polenske the opportunity to test some alternative
methods for estimating the U.S. model. Her findings were reported in an American
Economic Review article (Polenske 1970). Table 1 shows estimation based on three
models: a row coefficient model, a column coefficient model, and a gravity model.
Since that time, of course, other formulations have been proposed; Wilson’s (1970)
entropy formulations were just appearing in print, and alternative specifications of the
gravity model were still in development. Essentially, the row and column coefficient
approach may be seen as a partial adjustment balancing in only one dimension.
Once again, in 2022, the testing of alternative specifications in modeling is de
rigueur; computer time, storage, and processing capacity are not issues. However,
in the 1970s, the primary motivation in terms of the application to the U.S. model
was to make a choice: the cost of solving the full MRIO costs thousands of dollars,
and multiple runs/alternative specifications had to be severely rationed. Polenske
had to be somewhat parsimonious in the choice of formulations. The test using the
Japanse data was accomplished by developing a base model for nine regions for
1960; regional final demands for 1963 were used to estimate 1963 regional outputs
and interregional trade flows.
The absolute errors for the row coefficient model always exceeded those for the
other two; the row model performed a little better in relative terms, but the other
two models were still superior—with little difference between them. Substitution
of the 1963 technology reduced errors, but there were still some challenges as a
result of changes in interregional trade (subsequent work has shown this dimension
is more variable, as evident from the recent literature on fragmentation and global
value chains). This work was conducted during a period (in the late 1960s and 1970s)
when there was a great deal of attention to being paid to the efficacy on non-survey
methods of input–output construction and updating, especially at the regional and
interregional level (see an excellent review by Round 1983).
Early work with the U.S. MRIO focused on gravity and column coefficient
approaches; convergence turned out to be more difficult with the gravity formulation,
so attention becomes restricted to the column coefficient model. A complementary
project, funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation, explored the structure of
trade flows in physical goods. In the initial formulations, no information was available
on modal choice. Polenske claims that estimating the trade flows within an MRIO
 218

Table 1 Summary of multiregional input–output models

Row coefficient model Column coefficient model Gravity modea
go
gh gh gh gh g xi xioh gh
Trade coefficient equation xi = ri x o xi = ci xioh xi h = xioo
· qi

R ' ΔX = AΔX + ΔY ΔX = C( AΔX + ΔY ) T ' ΔX = S( AΔX + ΔY )

( ) ( )
Equation system in matrix form R ' − A ΔX = ΔF (I − CA)ΔX = CΔY T ' − S A ΔX = SΔY
' −1 ( )−1
ΔX = (R − A) ΔY ΔX = (I − C A)−1 CΔY ΔX = T ' − S A SΔY

Source Polenske (1970)

a The system of equations for the gravity model incorporates a simplified version of the basic gravity trade coefficient equation. The elements of S and T ' in the

gravity model are defined as:

[ ]
gh go x oo x oh gh
si = xi 1 − igo igh for g /= k si = 1 for g = k
xi xi
[ hg
]
gh og xioo xi gh
ti = xi 1− og for g /= k ti =1 for g = k
xiho xi

where k can be assigned arbitrarily

G. J. D. Hewings
Karen R. Polenske (1937–): A Journey from Rural Idaho to MIT 219

framework provides the opportunity to ensure that the national aggregates are consis-
tent with census data.1 Further, unlike many linear programming approaches, the
MRIO-based methodology facilitates cross-hauling (an attractive feature of entropy-
based modeling estimation). Looking at this work from the 2020s, it is surprising to
realize how the combination of faster computer capability together with the collec-
tion of additional information by various government agencies (e.g., regional gross
products and their components, regional output, income and employment, and the
five-year Census of Commodity Flows that at least provide the basis for initial esti-
mation of interstate physical flows by mode) has made the development of an MRIO
less arduous. Yet, there have been few serious attempts since Polenske’s work. In
part, in the intervening years, MRIO systems have been embedded in, or replaced by,
multiregional computable general equilibrium modeling (e.g., USAGE developed by
the Australian team at Victoria University) where more attention is placed on cali-
bration rather than estimation. The Harvard MRIO program was innovative for its
time, with the major innovations coming from the testing of alternative approaches,
even if the tests were based on Japanese data that were far more comprehensive.
Leontief was very committed to applied work, and this perspective was clearly
instilled in Polenske’s research activities. One of the first papers published with
Polenske’s name as a co-author was a study (Leontief et al. 1965) of the economic
impact, regional and industrial, of an arms’ cut. This work was conducted at a time
when received wisdom suggested that defense spending was such an important stim-
ulus to economic growth that cuts would likely create significant negative impacts. In
the spirit of more recent impact analyses that stress the need to explore compensating
or net effects, the 20% decrease in military spending was partially compensated by
a 2% increase in civilian purchases. Even so, the sectoral and regional net impacts
were unevenly distributed, providing a precursor of the heterogeneity of other trans-
formative changes—both planned and unplanned—in U.S. economic policy. While
the paper challenged conventional wisdom that any reduction in defense spending
would be bad for the U.S. economy, empirical evidence has never stood in the way
of political decision-making!
In 1972, Polenske was offered a position at MIT, where she moved to the urban
studies and planning department and became an associate professor with tenure. Nine
years later, in 1981, she was promoted to professor, and she remained in that position
until her retirement. The move also afforded her an opportunity to further product-
differentiate her work from Leontief. Polenske’s leadership in subsequent research
focused on a variety of development issues. Her work in China, in particular, is
noteworthy, since it combined her interest in development and input–output analysis,
and this will form the basis of discussion in Sect. 4.5. However, she did continue
to explore different methodological issues in input–output analysis. For example,
continuing her interest in estimation issues, Polenske (1997a) provided a review of

1I recall a conversation with her in which she described how she had estimated national GDP by
summing estimates provided by states; total GDP turned out to be several orders of magnitude
higher than the official estimates for a variety of reasons, including double counting and incorrect
assignment of establishment activity to individual states.
220 G. J. D. Hewings

the RAS technique, including her own contributions, such as Polenske et al. (1987)
where she used a linear programming approach to solve infeasible RAS problems.

4.2 Trade Flows

With Shiqiang He, Polenske revisited the discussion of the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek

(H-O-V) Theorem and the Leontief Paradox (He and Polenske 2001). The paper
provides an excellent summary of the work conducted at both the national and inter-
regional levels and highlights the apparent inconsistency of findings at both levels
(e.g., finding support for H-O-V for interregional trade but support for the Leontief
paradox at the national level). Once again, the empirical tests were conducted with
Japanese data, and there is a comment in the paper that their availability electronically
displaced the potential use of the U.S. MRIO data on which Polenske had worked
so long to assemble (see, for example, Polenske 1974, 1980).
The Japanese tests used a 9-region aggregation with 10 sectors based on 1985
data. One of the innovations of the paper was to look at trade not only between one
region and all other aggregated regions (Rest of Japan, ROJ) but between pairs of
regions. To provide a comparison of their work with prior testing, trials of the 2-
region context (a single region and the ROJ) were first conducted. HO propositions
only were tested:2
• A region with the higher capital/labor ration of the two (region and ROJ) should
have a higher capital intensity in its outflows than its inflows.
• This region should also have a lower labor intensity in its outflows than its inflows.
The results revealed that for 6 of the 9 regions, there was no support for the proposition
regarding capital, and for 4 of the 9, the proposition regarding labor was not supported.
The Tohoku region supported both propositions, while Kanto and Shikoku supported
neither.
The authors speculated that these findings might be a result of aggregation bias in
the definition of the ROJ region—with the possibility that a region may be simulta-
neously trading with regions that have both higher and lower capital/labor (k/l) ratios
than the region of interest—but this distinction would be lost in an aggregated ROJ
definition.
Consider the case of a region with higher than average (k/l) ratio: The aggregated
results support the Leontief paradox, but this may not hold for individual region pairs.
What is needed is some trade-weighted analysis that captures both factor intensities
and the share of total trade from a region to the others. Upon further examination of
the trade between 72 pairs of regions, they found:
• 37 cases supporting the Leontief paradox with respect to capital.
• 30 cases supporting the paradox with respect to labor.

2 Vanek’s reconsiderations for multigood/multifactor cases were left for future work.
Karen R. Polenske (1937–): A Journey from Rural Idaho to MIT 221

Tests of migration flows failed to support or contradict HO (and, subsequently, Borts

and Stein’s expectations for factor price equalization).
This paper illustrates Polenske’s lifelong commitment to hypothesis testing, as
well as the creative use of data to challenge expectations. This approach is even more
apparent in her research on regional and industrial restructuring.

4.3 Regional and Industrial Restructuring

Polenske’s work in innovation (to be discussed in Sect. 4.6) grew out of an interest
in economic development strategies. In her contribution to a collection of essays
in honor of François Perroux, Polenske (1988) explored the role of growth-pole
theory, focusing on four issues. This paper is highlighted since Porter’s (1989) work
on clustering seems to have eclipsed many important prior contributions that, in
addition to Perroux, would include the work on industrial complex analysis and
clustering associated with Isard et al. (1959), Czamanski and Czamanski (1977),
and Czamanski and Ablas (1979). First, few analysts provide the historical context
for Perroux’s work. Second, most of the reviews do not cover current development
theories and strategies, as they were written in the early 1970s when current views of
development, such as the dependency concept, were just being formulated, and there
was tension between growth-pole strategy (what Hirschman refers to as unbalanced
growth) and equity concerns. (Perroux would maintain that the spillover effects would
address these problems but the empirical evidence to date, bolstered by the theoretical
foundations laid by the New Economic Geography, would seriously challenge this
expectation). Third, focus on a single region or city, and not a multiregional or
multinational setting, generated important biases since much of the analysis and
evaluation of the implementation of the growth-pole development strategy did not
look at this broader spatial context. Fourth, relevant measures had not been devised to
determine whether or not the growth-pole strategy has succeeded; consequently, most
analysts were not able to arrive at clear conclusions as to the actual consequences
of the strategy. In the current (2022) regional development environment, the same
comment has been made about smart specialization strategies.
In considering Perroux’s contributions, Polenske focused on three issues: domi-
nation, linkages, and distribution. Her evaluation highlights the historical context of
Perroux’s thinking—especially his focus on the network of spaces associated with
the firm rather than formal regions (as Polenske notes, he never made a distinction
between the notion of growth pole and growth center). She further notes:
Perroux recognized the interregional interdependencies that were developing in the European
countries, and he was concerned with the effect interregional trade had on the terms of trade
with the developing countries. (Polenske 1988).

The issue of domination (in terms of firms, cities, regions, and nations) pervades
both the literature on growth poles and that on dependency. The perspective of the two
schools of development theory is, of course, vastly different: growth-pole theorists
222 G. J. D. Hewings

maintain that the domination of certain firms is a positive factor in the development
process, required to help the mass of the population, while dependency theorists
argue that domination leads to expropriation of the surplus product, not for use by
the masses, but for use by the capitalists.
Linkages are interpreted in many different ways in the development literature.
The most frequent interpretation is in terms of interindustrial linkages, as shown
through input–output tables, but reference is also made to interregional and inter-
national linkages. However, most growth-pole analysts have concentrated only on
regional, rather than multiregional or multinational, growth. (Perroux is one of the
few exceptions.) On the other hand, dependency theorists have had the exact opposite
concentration, with primary emphasis being given to the growth of the international
economy.
As noted earlier, Perroux maintained that investment centered on dominant firms
was a necessary condition to obtain sufficient growth to benefit the masses. The
spreading of these benefits, he said, would occur the fastest if investment was devoted
to the dominant firms that had the greatest backward and forward linkages. He argued
that if a country implemented this growth-pole strategy of development, the invest-
ment would generate increased output (employment and income) not only in the
initial firm, but, because of the strong backward and forward linkages, a multiplier
effect would transmit these increases to other firms as well.
Contrasting views are prevalent but with the same factual evidence used by both
sides to support their opposing points of view! Perroux maintains that domination
and interindustrial linkages are necessary, but not sufficient, conditions for rapid
economic growth; at the same time, increases in the rate of economic growth are
required for improved income distribution. Dependency theorists maintain that domi-
nation and linkages not only limit the increases in per capita income, but also augment
the gap between the rich and the poor, both within and between countries. As Polenske
(1988) notes:
A thorough quantitative analysis to support either set of arguments is missing, but would be
an important, even though difficult, task to undertake.

A great deal of discussion is currently taking place about the impacts of devel-
opment strategies, incentive programs, and free trade on interpersonal and interre-
gional equality. While there has been an increase in the use of modeling to address
these issues, there have been a much smaller number of papers looking at what
Miyazawa (1976) referred to as the structure of income formation, relying on the
Gini or Herfindahl indices. These are dimensions on which further attention would
be welcomed.

4.4 Enterprise Analysis

Polenske (1997a, b) revisited an issue (or one might say an opportunity) to inte-
grate the more macro-representation of the economy as manifested in input–output
Karen R. Polenske (1937–): A Journey from Rural Idaho to MIT 223

accounts with the operations of individual enterprises or sectors. Some years earlier,
Tiebout (1967) advanced the idea of such an integration, in part to address the issue of
product mix at the sector level; even with disaggregation to 500 or more sectors, there
would still be evidence of bias and lack of representativeness for individual firms or
for the product mix within different regions. However, it is not just the output side
that may generate biases; a different product mix may also generate a different set of
input requirements. The issue was taken up by Hewings (1971), Greytak (1972), and
Morrison (1973), but it was Polenske (1997b) who offered a more considered strategy
to accomplish this task. In essence, her proposals mirrored the spirit of Eliasson’s
(1978) micro-to-macro-model of the Swedish economy in which the Volvo enter-
prise was modeled separately and in great detail from the rest of the economy but
with strong linkages between both. Polenske considered a spatial hierarchy in which
enterprises, with some important exceptions, occupied the bottom layer of modeling
that moved from international-national-regional-city.
The goal was not just spatial (and sectoral) disaggregation but an attempt to
further integrate managerial and input–output accounts in such a way that it would
be possible to assess the short-term and longer-term consequence of macroeconomic
policy on individual enterprises and, in the other direction, the impact of managerial
decisions, resource allocations, and potential changes in product mix on the macro-
economy. The last two years (2020–2022), during the COVID-19 pandemic, have
provided an excellent illustration of the value of such a system. Consumers have
been perplexed at shortages of key products, while enterprises have struggled with
reallocations of products from commercial needs to domestic household needs in an
era in which working from home has become more dominant. Polenske noted that
managerial accounts, with their focus on internal operation and the promotion of
efficiency of operations, offer a different (although complementary) role to financial
accounts that are used for investment decisions. From her work in China, she was
able to learn about a third set of accounts, essentially enterprise accounts. Here,
the system linked managerial and financial accounts, presenting information in both
physical and value terms. Data were also available on inputs and outputs within units
within the enterprise, information that would be of considerable value in assessing the
nature and extent of production and spatial fragmentation of production. In China, the
accounts were used for targeting and quotas, often with the assistance of optimization
algorithms and with strong links to the more macro-input–output accounts. This
work provided a case study using the Anshan Iron and Steel; Fig. 1 shows the way
in which these accounts are integrated. Having access to such detailed data—in
China, for this study, and in Sweden, for Eliasson’s work—one can see enormous
potential in the ability to link micro- and macro-levels of analysis and to further
integrate and optimize planning and allocation decisions, especially during periods
when unexpected events interrupt the operation of markets.
224 G. J. D. Hewings

Fig. 1 Integration of accounts. Source Zhang (1991)

4.5 The Role of Input–Output Analysis in Chinese Economic

Planning

The enterprise analysis described earlier was part of a broader focus of Polenske’s
work centered on China that began with a two-month visit in 1986. Her jointly edited
book (Polenske and Chen 1991) contains a rich collection of articles that revealed
the enormous range and sophistication of the applications of input–output analysis
Karen R. Polenske (1937–): A Journey from Rural Idaho to MIT 225

in China.3 In fact, the third part of the book has a series of case studies of enterprise
input–output analyses; the rest of the book illustrates the variety of application,
ranging from price reforms, dynamic input–output, a focus on agriculture and energy,
and six chapters of regional modeling.
The innovation of the book was that Polenske was the only non-Chinese contrib-
utor; obviously, a great deal of work went into the selection of authors and the
careful editing of their contributions. Looking back now, it is easy to underestimate
this challenge, and the uniqueness of the contribution was that it established Chinese
scholarship in this field at the forefront of the international spectrum.
Polenske (2006) continued her work in China and her interest in steel-making
and related industries with a volume that explored the intersection of technology-
energy-environment and health, focusing on coke-making in Shanxi Province. Once
again, Polenske engaged with Chinese scholars, supplemented by other interna-
tional specialists. Attention was directed to a number of specific issues ranging from
the choice of technologies and the role of energy efficiency and profitability. Here,
production ranged from state enterprises to smaller units run by townships and even
villages. The intersection of interest was the local economic dependence on these
smaller village-level enterprises, but which came with a “cost” in terms of high levels
of pollution and a concomitant negative effect on the environment and, ultimately,
health. Local residents (as well as the workers in these enterprises) were exposed
to ultrafine particles that comprised their health. Several chapters in the collection
address these issues, with a broad focus on the socioeconomic-health-environment
impacts. This work continued her longtime interest in linking input–output accounts
and models with the environment (e.g., Forssell and Polenske 1988).

4.6 Innovation

Polenske’s interest in economic development continued throughout her career; even

the work in China had strong overtones of engagement with development issues.
In 2007, she edited a book, The Economic Geography of Innovation. The motiva-
tion came in large part from a special seminar she organized for her students. They
assisted in identifying scholars whose work they wanted to explore, and the selected
scholars were subsequently invited to MIT to deliver lectures on their chosen topic.
There, they were grilled and interrogated by very well-prepared graduate students.
Subsequently, chapters were submitted, and Polenske, with assistance from some of
the more senior students, assembled the book. I think that her work in China has
highlighted the enormous variations in technology, innovation, and spatial diffusion

3 Professor Chen Xikang, Polenske’s co-editor of the 1991 book, became Fellow of the International
Input–Output Association primarily for his work in Input–Output Occupancy Analysis in which
the usual I-O accounts were extended to include the use (occupancy) of assets.
226 G. J. D. Hewings

of technologies. Hence, the authors were asked to focus on how technology, innova-
tion, and alternative means of transferring knowledge changed the spatial relation-
ships among firms. In fact, the role of space plays a dominant role throughout the
book, providing a counterbalance to other collections that looked at the process in an
aspatial context. In her introductory remarks, Polenske (2007) highlighted the enor-
mous intellectual debt owed to the work of Schumpeter. A further example of this
interest is her work on clustering versus dispersal in space (Polenske 2008), in which
she explored the role of economies of scale and innovation and the way they helped
make regional development sustainable. This paper built on an earlier exploration
of regional supply chains, both internal and external, and the way they enhance the
competitive advantage of regions.
In the next section, some of Polenske’s contributions to the organization of science
will be acknowledged, a recognition of the fact that her work embraced not only
science but the organization of science, mentoring, and, especially, the training of
the next generation of students.

5 Organization of Science and Mentoring4

Karen Polenske was among the key individuals in the creation of the North Amer-
ican Regional Science Council at the time that the Regional Science Association
was morphing into the Regional Science Association International. Whereas in both
Europe and the Pacific Rim autonomous organizational structures were already in
place to oversee conferences, the North American Meetings had through the 1980s
been hosted under the auspices of the RSA itself, with David Boyce of the University
of Pennsylvania as the lead organizer. Under the new, umbrella RSAI structure, a
third “super-” or “supra-”regional organization was needed.
Professor Boyce convened a day-long constitutional convention prior to the
opening of the 35th North American Meetings in Toronto in 1988. The goal was
to brainstorm a new system for hosting the meetings and for affiliating, under a
common structure, the five independent North American regional organizations that
pre-existed the new organization as member sections of the RSA. Polenske was
among the invited delegates, and she contributed wise counsel regarding a number
of the ideas that were ultimately incorporated into the NARSC Constitution. Among
those was what came to be called the “Polenske Clause” regarding the role of
the NARSC President. It was decided that the President should serve in a mostly
honorary role, with primary responsibility for presenting a Presidential Address to
open the conference. The President, appointed by the NARSC Council, was to be a
scholar from the region of the North American member organization whose turn it
was to host the meetings but, Polenske argued, should be an individual who did not

4 Part of this section was prepared by David Plane who was able to observe these contributions
at first hand.
Karen R. Polenske (1937–): A Journey from Rural Idaho to MIT 227

have organizational responsibilities for organizing the conference or for chairing the
council during the year in office.
The NARSC Constitution resulting from the Toronto discussions, and as drafted
by a sub-committee chaired by David Plane, was agreed to by the five member
organizations at the subsequent 36th North American Meetings in Santa Barbara, as
well as being approved in 1989 by a mail-ballot vote of the members of RSAI based
in North America. The same ballot contained the names of nominees for the first
at-large members of NARSC Council, with Professor Polenske’s among those. She
was elected and subsequently served for a term extending from 1990 through 1993.
The newly created organization would experience some birthing pangs during her
tenure on the council. Contentious issues about finances, procedures for running the
meetings, and the autonomy of member organizations vis-à-vis NARSC—as well as
the relationship of NARSC vis-à-vis RSAI—would be resolved, thanks in no small
measure, to Professor Polenske’s sensible, wise counsel and her vision of what is
most central to the mission of science and scholarly organizations.
Polenske was devoted to her students; she was enormously proud of them and
their accomplishments, and the research they worked on was embedded in her work.
It has been difficult to collect an accurate number of the doctoral students she super-
vised (I have an incomplete listing of 10),5 but colleagues estimate that she has
supervised over 200 in the master’s and doctoral programs at MIT. Many of these
students are from China, and, in Polenske’s honor, they have funded a student prize,
The ACSP/AACP Karen Polenske Best Student Paper Award, for an outstanding
paper on a China planning topic. This award is given annually to International Asso-
ciation of China Planning (IACP) student members who present excellent research
at the conferences of the Association of Collegiate Schools for Planning (ACSP).
Given Polenske’s huge investment of time and resources in research on China—she
was Visiting Scholar in the Chinese Academy of Sciences at least six times and a
frequent visitor on other occasions—it is a suitable acknowledgment of her sustained
contributions.

6 Summary Evaluation

Polenske was appointed as Peter de Florez Professor of Regional Political Economy

at MIT in 2009. I think her designation as an endowed professor of political economy
is really appropriate. While her early work was deeply involved in the construction
and testing of models, for the last three decades, or more, she has worked at the
interface between economy and society, with a primary spatial focus in the USA and
China. However, I think that she would also agree to a label as an applied regional
economist: see for example, Polenske (2004), where she shows the delight she took in
proselytizing on behalf of Leontief’s “magnificent machine.” The China experience

5 The list includes Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala (Ph.D., 1981), who assumed Director General’s position
in the World Trade Organization in March, 2021.
228 G. J. D. Hewings

provided the opportunity to modify, enhance, and expand the focus on this machine,
and it engendered her transformation to a regional political economist. Her last ten
publications explore topics such as land recycling in China, bioenergy, energy in
the food system, clustering, impacts of dust storms, and innovation, while only one
focuses exclusively on input–output analysis.
Polenske has been very imaginative in extending the scope of the “magnifi-
cent machine.” As well as addressing important problems, Polenske has shown
that having an effective analytical framework can raise the quality of contribu-
tions to policy formulation and evaluation. Her regional science focus, like her
input–output perspectives, has been manifested in extending research to consider
spatial dimensions. I think she felt equally at home among input–output and regional
science perspectives because she was intellectually bilingual, often merging the two
successfully.
Professor Polenske’s intellectual contributions are matched by her commitment to
professional organizations and by the time and care she has expended in encouraging
women to not only participate but assume leadership roles. Her early experiences in
less than tolerant environments made her acutely aware of the need to change the
attitudes toward female participation. Through her sustained intellectual leadership
and devotion to mentoring, she encouraged successive generations of women to
“stay the course.” The honors she has received from RSAI and IIOA bear eloquent
testimony to her contributions that embrace scholarship, the organization of science,
and a lifelong commitment to students. The journey from her birth in rural Idaho and
childhood in an agricultural region of Washington State was a long and difficult one
at times, but colleagues in regional science and input–output analysis are grateful
that she took this path and was so successful.

Acknowledgments The comments of Amy Glasmeier, Faye Duchin, Nicolas Rockler, and David
Plane are gratefully acknowledged.

References

Czamanski, S., and L.A. de Q. Ablas. 1979. Identification of industrial clusters and complexes: A
comparison of methods and findings. Urban Studies 16: 61–80.
Czamanski, D.Z., and S. Czamanski. 1977. Industrial complexes: Their typology structure and
relation to economic development. Papers of the Regional Science Association 38: 93–111.
Eliasson, G. 1978. A micro-macro model of the Swedish economy. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.
Forssell, O., and K.R. Polenske (eds). 1998. Special issue: Input-output and the environment.
Economic Systems Research 10 (2): 91–98.
Greytak, D. 1972. The firm in regional input-output analysis. Regional Studies 6: 327–329.
He, S., and K.R. Polenske (2001) Interregional trade, the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek theorem, and
Leontief’s paradox. In Input-output analysis: Frontiers and extensions, eds. M.L. Lahr and E.
Dietzenbacher, 161–186. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Hewings, G.J.D. 1971. Regional input-output models in the U.K.: Some problems and prospects
for the use of nonsurvey techniques. Regional Studies 5: 11–22.
Karen R. Polenske (1937–): A Journey from Rural Idaho to MIT 229

Isard, W., E.W. Schooler, and T. Vietorisz. 1959. Industrial complex analysis and regional devel-
opment: A case study of refinery-petrochemical-synthetic fiber complexes and Puerto Rico.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Leontief, W., A. Morgan, K.R. Polenske, D. Simpson, and E. Tower. 1965. The economic impact—
industrial and regional—of an arms cut. Review of Economics and Statistics 47 (3): 217–241.
Miyazawa, K. 1976. Input-output analysis and the structure of income distribution. Heidelberg:
Springer-Verlag.
Morrison, W.I. 1973. Input-output and the firm: Some comments. Regional Studies 7 (3): 253–256.
Polenske, K.R. 1969. Empirical implementation of a multiregional input-output gravity trade model.
In Contributions to input-output analysis, vol. 1, eds. A. Bródy and A.P. Carter, 143–163.
Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Polenske, K.R. 1970. An empirical test of interregional input-output models: Estimation of 1963
Japanese production. American Economic Review 60 (2): 76–82.
Polenske, K.R. 1972a. The implementation of a multiregional input-output model for the United
States, In Input-output techniques, eds. A. Bródy and A.P. Carter, 171–189. Amsterdam: North-
Holland.
Polenske, K.R. (ed.) 1972b. Multiregional Input-output analysis, Vol. 1. Lexington, MA: Lexington
Books, D.C. Heath and Company.
Polenske, K.R. (ed.) 1972c. Multiregional input-output analysis, Vol. 2. Lexington, MA: Lexington
Books, D.C. Heath and Company.
Polenske, K.R. 1972d. State estimates of the gross national product, 1947, 1958, 1963. Lexington,
MA: Lexington Books, D.C. Heath and Company.
Polenske, K.R. (ed.) 1973a. Multiregional input-output analysis, Vol. 3. Lexington, MA: Lexington
Books, D.C. Heath and Company.
Polenske, K.R. 1973b. An analysis of the United States commodity freight shipments. In Planning
over time and space, eds. G. G. Judge and T. Takayama, 163–179. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Polenske, K.R. 1974. State estimates of technology, 1963. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, D.C.
Heath and Company.
Polenske, K.R. 1980. The U.S. Multiregional input-output accounts and model. Lexington, MA:
Lexington Books, D.C. Heath and Company.
Polenske, K.R. 1988. Growth-pole theory and strategy reconsidered: Domination, linkages, and
distribution. In Competing approaches to regional economic development: Essays in honour of
François Perroux, eds. B. Higgins and D.J. Savoie, 91–111. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
Polenske, K.R. 1997a. Current uses of the RAS technique: A critical review. In Prices, growth, and
cycles, eds. A. Simonovits and A.E. Steenge, 58–88. London: The Macmillan Press.
Polenske, K.R. 1997b. Linked system of enterprise, regional, and national input-output accounts
for policy analysis. In Perspectives for the future of regional science, ed. Manas Chatterji, 17–42.
London: The Macmillan Press.
Polenske, K.R. 2004. Leontief’s magnificent machine and other contributions to applied economics.
In Wassily Leontief and input-output economics, eds. E. Dietzenbacher and M.L. Lahr, 9–26.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Polenske, K.R. 2006. The technology-energy-environmental-health (TEEH) chain in China.
Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. [Chinese translation published in December 2006 by
Higher Education Press, Beijing.]
Polenske, K.R. (ed.). 2007. The economic geography of innovation. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. [Chinese translation published in August 2009 by Higher Education Press,
Beijing.]
Polenske, K.R. 2008. Clustering in space versus dispersing over space. In Handbook of Research
on Cluster Theory, ed. C. Karlsson. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Polenske, K.R., and X. Chen. 1991. Chinese economic planning and input-output analysis. Hong
Kong: Oxford University Press.
Polenske, K.R., M. Möhr, and W.H. Crown. 1987. A linear-programming approach to solving
infeasible RAS problems. Journal of Regional Science 27 (4): 587–603.
230 G. J. D. Hewings

Porter, M.E. 1989. The competitive advantage of nations. New York: The Free Press.
Rogers, J.M. 1972 State estimates of outputs, employment, and payrolls, 1947, 1958, 1963.
Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, D.C. Heath and Company.
Round, J.I. 1983. Nonsurvey techniques: A critical review of the theory and the evidence.
International Regional Science Review 8 (3): 189–212.
Tiebout, C.M. 1967. Input-output and the firm: A technique for using national and regional tables.
Review of Economics and Statistics 49 (2): 260–262.
Wilson, A.G. 1970. Entropy in urban and regional modelling. London: Pion. (Reprinted in 2012 by
Routledge).
Zhang, R. 1991. Application of input-output method to Anshan Iron and Steel Company. In Chinese
economic planning and input-output research, eds. K.R. Polenske and C. Xikang. Hong Kong:
Oxford University Press.
Wolfgang Weidlich (1931–2015):
A Pioneer in Sociophysics

Denise Pumain

Wolfgang Weidlich. Source Shoolman (2015) by permission of Harvey Shoolman

D. Pumain (B)
University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne, Paris, France
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 231
P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_11
232 D. Pumain

1 Introduction

I had the immense pleasure to work with Wolfgang Weidlich in the 1980s and 1990s.
The theoretical approach and the models he proposed were at that time well in
line with the expectations of geographers interested in dynamic formalizations to
represent socio-spatial transformations. The work of this physicist inspired many
people and marked an important moment in the opening of regional science to system
dynamics. It will undoubtedly have profound repercussions in the coming decades for
advancing our understanding of the evolution of opinions as revealed from handling
the massive data generated by various uses of mobile sensors and social networks.
Wolfgang Weidlich was a luminous speaker and a smiling, caring person, a man
deeply imbued with humanism and culture. I would claim with Shoolman (2015)
that:
...it may well be that succeeding generations will realize that Weidlich was one of the
great intellects of the 20th century. Weidlich is recognized as the founder of a relatively
new discipline which he called ‘Sociodynamics’, the attempt to treat social and cultural
phenomena in the same way that we model physical systems.

Indeed, I shall try to show that his contribution was more than that and, perhaps
moreover, different.

2 A Life With Bifurcations

Wolfgang Weidlich was born in Germany, in the city of Dresden, on April 14, 1931.
He studied at the Technical University of Berlin and then at the Free University with
a marked predilection and talent for mathematics and physics. He completed his
“Habilitation” in relativistic quantum field theory in 1963. The outstanding quality
of his work led to his being recruited by the University of Stuttgart as a lecturer
in 1963 where he became Professor in 1966. He lived in Stuttgart with his wife,
Ursula, and his two daughters, Sophia and Irene, until his death on September 21,
2015. This seemingly straightforward path to an exemplary career in theoretical
physics at a major German university was, on the contrary, bifurcated by two factors,
geographical and thematic.
The decision of Wolfgang’s parents to move from eastern to western Germany
when he was 13 years old was indeed not geographically trivial at the time and
probably changed the course of his life. The semantic bifurcation in his research
interest may appear paradoxical but is linked with his changing places, since it was
when he discovered laser physics and Haken’s (1977) synergetics in Stuttgart that
Wolfgang Weidlich embarked on the path of demonstrating its possible applications
to the human and social sciences. The physical theory of synergetics shows how
the numerous particles of a system can under certain conditions interact, exhibiting
correlations over long distances relative to their dimensions, to generate, in a mathe-
matically predictable way, more complex structures at a higher level of organization.
Wolfgang Weidlich (1931–2015): A Pioneer in Sociophysics 233

This is the case in lasers when the usually chaotic course of photons “self-organize”
for becoming an intense beam of energy. By no means would Wolfgang Weidlich
consider human beings as unconscious particles, but he believed that the mathemat-
ical models inspired from synergetics could help in understanding some intriguing
regularities in human mobility and collective behavior.
Above all, the theory predicts that several configurations are possible for a state
of the system at the macroscopic level from the same description of the microscopic
states. The dynamics of these systems combine stable trajectories and moments of
instability, during which the macroscopic state of the system can evolve toward
different forms of organization, in an unpredictable way, according to bifurcations.
It thus includes hypotheses of the irreversibility of time, of the unpredictability of the
future and of the uniqueness of the “historical” trajectories of each system, made up
of an original succession of bifurcations. These are proposals that make applications
from physics reconcilable with the universe of social sciences, where these ideas
are not inherently novel in their own right! In fact, if these ideas are attractive, it
is because they are accompanied by mathematical models, which simulate social
processes and which are capable of generating with the same equations a very great
diversity of forms and evolutions. Not only are their hypotheses less reductive than
those of deterministic or linear models, they also allow social scientists to indulge in
the asceticism of model testing with a better conscience!
In the perspective of modeling social interactions that can lead incrementally
to abrupt changes, Wolfgang Weidlich discovered a way to answer a question that
had nagged him all his life, to understand how German opinions were able to align
together at the time of Nazism. Harvey Shoolman explains, with more detail than I
knew, the initial motivating trauma:
Behind such an intellectual project lay Weidlich’s intense discomfort and shame at the
enormities Germany had perpetrated in his youth. As a 12 year old member of the Dresdner
Kreuzchor, Weidlich indelibly recalled a concert the choir gave in Silesia in fall 1943.
Just 2 kilometers away in the distance he could see a complex of squat wooden buildings
and black smoke emanating from tall chimney stacks. This was Auschwitz at full working
capacity. That same day the choir visited the I. G. Farben chemical works (the company that
manufactured Zyklon B gas, used to kill millions at Auschwitz and other camps) and there
the boys were witness to the meaninglessly cruel toil of pin-striped slave labourers from the
nearby camp. Weidlich never forgot such scenes. That experience planted the seeds of the
unremitting determination he came to feel that such things should never happen again and
that he shouldered a moral responsibility to devote his intellectual energies to finding out
precisely how and why they came to pass in the Germany of his youth and in the culture
whose artistic and scientific heritage he venerated. (Shoolman 2015)

Before my first encounter with Wolfgang Weidlich, I attended several meetings

organized in France by the Association Française pour la Cybernétique Economique
et Technique (AFCET), led by an economist, Bernard Paulré. I also participated in
two international conferences marking my entry into a universe of systemic refer-
ences: the first organized in Boston at MIT in 1981—still largely dominated by
Forrester-type systems analysis—and the second in Brussels in June 1982 (AFCET-
SOGESCI 1982) organized by the Prigogine’s laboratory and which was already
234 D. Pumain

largely devoted to self-organization theories. For the record, it was during a confer-
ence on entropy organized in Créteil University in March 1982 that I had met Peter
Allen and discovered through Prigogine’s theory of self-organized systems a more
general formalization of the observations we had made about the socio-economic
evolution of French cities with Saint-Julien (Pumain and Saint-Julien 1979). We
had started a collaboration with the Brussel’s team for applying the model devel-
oped by Allen and Sanglier (Allen et al. 1981) to the socio-spatial evolution of
Rouen’s urban agglomeration (Pumain et al. 1983) and later on to five other large
French urban regions (Pumain et al. 1986, 1989). I had this in mind when I attended
the NATO Advanced Studies Institute “Transformations through space and time”
that the American geographer, Dan Griffith, organized in July 1982 in San Miniato
(Tuscany, Italy). Listening to Günter Haag’s presentation “A dynamic model for the
non-linear migration of human populations” extracted from the Weidlich and Haag’s
book on quantitative sociology (1983),1 I could easily recognize the same kind of
paradigm that was, however, not yet familiar to most of our colleagues from North
America. Wolfgang Weidlich and Günter Haag were at the time already fully involved
in the field of human sciences, mainly geography and regional science, because their
dynamic quantitative sociology used the spatial dimension for representing social
transformation. They started working intensively with scientists interested in social
applications in different parts of the world.
The San Miniato two-week workshop was remarkable in having attracted many
young regional scientists and geographers together with mathematicians and physi-
cists who started interacting from that first meeting and whose names would become
famous in the following decades.2 After that meeting, Wolfgang Weidlich and
Günter Haag spent a few months at the Institute of Physics at Cleveland’s Case
Western Reserve University. While in North America, they encountered Yorgo Papa-
georgiou at McMaster University in Hamilton and discovered they could enrich the
migration model that had been presented in San Miniato with regional attractiveness
parameters. This refinement, together with an empirical application to Canadian
data, resulted in a paper published in Geographical Analysis (Haag and Weidlich
1984). They also met in the USA with another San Miniato participant, Dimitri
Dendrinos, who invited Günter Haag to Kansas. The two subsequently published
a pair of papers on the dynamics of interacting processes leading either to limit
cycles or, in more dimensions, to chaotic development (Haag and Dendrinos 1983;
Dendrinos and Haag 1984). During this same period, Wolfgang Weidlich was invited
to IIASA in Laxenburg (close to Vienna) where he met Michael Sonis, another San
Miniato participant.

1 This book is prefaced by Herman Haken, and both authors dedicate it to their parents, “who
conveyed their experience from more difficult times to their sons.”
2 Among others: Robert Bennett, Cesare Bertuglia, Roberto Camagni, William A. V. Clark, Leslie

Curry, Dimitrios Dendrinos, Lidia Diappi, Günter Haag, Robert Haining, Giorgio Leonardi, Silvana
Lombardo, Bernard Marchand, Peter Nijkamp, Silvia Occelli, Jean Paelinck, Yorgo Papageorgiou,
Denise Pumain, Giovanni Rabino, Aura Reggiani, Lena Sanders, Eric Sheppard, Michael Sonis,
and Harry Timmermans.
Wolfgang Weidlich (1931–2015): A Pioneer in Sociophysics 235

The ground-breaking event in San Miniato was followed by a second NATO

summer school in Hantsholm, Denmark, in 1985, where Wolfgang Weidlich and
Günter Haag were both present. There Wolfgang Weidlich presented on “A phase
transition model of spatial agglomeration processes” and his discussants were David
Plane (University of Arizona) and Dominique Peeters (Université de Louvain). Wolf-
gang Weidlich and Günter Haag made a new presentation of their migration model
using the master equation and invited colleagues to experiment with it for comparative
research on the dynamics of interregional migration. They organized a small meeting
with Michael Sonis, Giovanni Rabino, Ingvar Holmberg, Jacques Ledent (recom-
mended by Yorgo Papagiorgiou), Nikias Sarafoglou, Rolf Rainer, Martin Munz, and
Denise Pumain. We all together discussed a possible book that would apply the same
Weidlich-Haag migration model to interregional migrations in eleven different coun-
tries. The kick-off meeting was launched in 1986 at Blindenmannshäusle, Günter
Haag’s family second home in the countryside near Stuttgart, and, after many stays
there, as well as international data exchanges through pioneer electronic devices
(precursors of the Internet),3 the book comparing the evolution of the interregional
migration patterns in eleven countries was published in 1988 (Weidlich and Haag
1988). Many co-authors participated at the ceremony organized in 1991 at the Univer-
sity of Stuttgart to celebrate Wolfgang Weidlich’s 60th birthday (Fig. 1). Wolfgang
Weidlich met for the first time Peter Allen in 1989 in the 6th European Colloquium
of Theoretical and Quantitative Geography (ECTQG) that we organized at Chan-
tilly. That conference was also attended by another Great Mind, Peter Haggett, who
published the photograph of the attendees in his book, The Geographer’s Art (Haggett
1990). Later on, I invited Wolfgang Weidlich to participate in the 18th ECTQG
meeting in Dourdan near Paris in 2013 where he discussed the theme “Geography
and Complexity” with Peter Allen and Michael Batty.
At a time when oral presentations were not yet based on slide projections, Wolf-
gang Weidlich’s lectures impressed all his listeners by their extraordinary clarity
and precision. In spite of the difficulty of the physical and mathematical notions
he was enunciating, his speech was always articulated according to a great logic,
without any rhetorical effect or superfluous detail: It was a delight of conciseness
and intelligence, and thus, you could not help but understand the ideas!

3 After reading the software that was written in Fortran, I was able to solve the mystery of the contra-
dictory interpretation we had about migration preferences, because while geographers understood
in migration matrices a M ij flow as a movement from region i to region j, physicists were used to
the reverse notation, interpreting it as migration from region j to region i.
236 D. Pumain

Fig. 1 Celebration of Wolfgang Weidlich’s 60th birthday in 1991 at Stuttgart University with
Giovanni Rabino (to his right), Günter Haag (to his left), and Denise Pumain behind. Photo source
Günter Haag, published with his permission

3 Applications of the Master Equation to Geographical

Movements and Social Interactions

What really mattered to Wolfgang Weidlich was a political question that he tried
to investigate from the perspectives of all fields in the social sciences through the
powerful instruments of theoretical physics. As early as 1971, he wrote in a British
statistical journal his views about the roots of polarization in societies (Weidlich
1971). That topic is examined again in the book he published in 1983 with Günter
Haag on quantitative sociology (Weidlich and Haag 1983). The chapters deal with
opinion formation, attitude space, migrations and birth/death processes in popula-
tions, non-equilibrium theory of investment (“the Schumpeter clock”), and inter-
actions between competitive societies, applying to each topic a “master-equation”
framework that is first explained in a natural sciences context. Having said that “syn-
ergetics is the science of collective static or dynamic phenomena in closed or open
multicomponent systems with ‘cooperative’ interactions between the units of the
system” (p. 1) the authors develop a probabilistic theory of the evolution of such
Wolfgang Weidlich (1931–2015): A Pioneer in Sociophysics 237

systems. At the micro-level, an equation of motion describes the transition proba-

bilities from one state to the next and how their outcome can display a diversity of
configurations in the statistical distribution at the macro-level.
The master-equation method relies upon theoretical principles used in the field of
synergetics. It is potentially of great interest to regional and urban research because it
links explicitly the state transition probabilities of individuals at a micro-level and the
evolution of some variables describing a macroscopic structure. The master equation
describes the variation in time of the probability of the possible configurations in the
space of the state variables. This probability of transition from one configuration to
another depends on the assumptions made about the number and nature of parameters
affecting the individual transition probabilities. This stochastic formulation is then
used to derive a deterministic equation for the evolution of the mean values, which,
in turn, allows the estimation of the parameters on empirical data.
The method can be illustrated with the Haag and Weidlich (1984) model of inter-
regional migrations. Individual transition probabilities from one spatial subdivision
to another are defined as functions of the difference in the attractivity of regions
(interpreted sometimes as individual utilities). These flows are aggregated to define
an equation of movement of the probability of states of the system (e.g., all possible
configurations of population repartition among regions). The dynamics of the spatial
system is then related to trend parameters whose values may be compared from one
country to another,4 or over time (a global mobility rate; a “co-operation,” i.e., an
agglomeration effect, and a saturation effect), and results in a set of preferences for
each region. The socio-economic variables that could explain these preferences are
not included in the dynamic model. However, when fitted by a regression model
upon a temporal series of preferences as established from the model (from annual
or several periods’ migration tables), they allow a prediction of future migration
patterns and of the further evolution of the spatial configuration of population. The
dynamic model, moreover, makes it possible to evaluate the gap between the current
and future distribution of the population and the one that would result from the contin-
uation of current migration trends. A correlation coefficient is calculated between the
distribution of the population in the regions at each date and a fictitious distribution
which is obtained by letting the migration process develop with the same pattern of
territorial preferences (that of the period under consideration), over a long period of
time. For the first time, the Weidlich and Haag (1988) book provided comparable
figures quantifying the migratory trends in eleven countries that are very different in
scope, in number of territorial subdivisions, and in mobility rates.
In addition to the fact that it is a dynamic model, Weidlich and Haag’s model
deviates from previous spatial interaction models (such as the gravity model) in one
essential aspect: The physical distance between regions does not explicitly act as a
brake on movement; a coefficient playing this role is estimated for each pair of regions
based on observed migrant flows (Pumain 1988). It is assumed to have a symmetric
effect for any pair of regions, so it is only the non-symmetric part of the flows

4This is clearly an improvement to previous experiments with gravitation models whose estimated
parameters are dependent on the number of spatial subdivisions and do not enable such comparisons.
238 D. Pumain

that is used to define regional preferences and identify residual flows. This model
therefore does not imply the assumption of a uniform level of interregional mobility,
and it substitutes for physical distance a more phenomenological expression of the
separation between regions estimated on the basis of observed migratory flows (Haag
and Pumain 1991; Pumain and Haag 1994).
Sanders (1992) applied this model to a large set of French cities observed between
1954 and 1982. She related the shift of the migratory preferences from the north-
eastern cities to the southern ones to the emergence of business services as a major
source of differentiation in the contemporary dynamics of the system of cities. She
also provides various scenarios of possible further evolution, which can be obtained
from different hypotheses about the future migratory trends (Haag et al. 1992).
The formalism of the master equation was also introduced by Wolfgang Weidlich
in at least two other major fields of interest for regional scientists. A model of
nonlinear economics simulates the dynamics of competing firms:
A configuration of macro-economic variables whose probabilistic evolution is coupled to
the decision making of agents is described by a master equation where transition rates are
modelled in terms of utility measures of the agents. Beyond a critical value of a “competitivity
parameter” a homogenous market will develop into an inhomogeneous one with winning
and losing firms. (Weidlich 1991, p. 233).

The master-equation framework was also used for developing a dynamic theory of
settlement formation that was published in the Annals of Regional Science (Weidlich
and Munz 1990) deploying a model using synthetic data; the theory, to my knowledge,
was never experimented upon with empirical data.

4 A Flourishing Interdisciplinary Context for Complex

Systems Science

Wolfgang Weidlich’s work is part of the emergence of new forms of dialog between
the disciplines of the physical, biological, and social sciences, which, from the 1950s
onward, schematically led to the succession of three currents in systems thinking. A
first step was a cybernetic approach, named “system dynamics,” developed at MIT
by Forrester (1969), which questioned the autonomy of open systems in relation
to their environment and proposed simulations of interactions in terms of stocks
and flows using a dedicated computer language, Dynamo. A second approach,
mainly developed in Europe, consisted of theories of self-organization that were
independently proposed in Belgian chemist Ilya Prigogine’s dissipative structures
(Prigogine and Nicolis 1967) and in German physicist Haken’s (1977) synergetics.
Both designed models describing the two levels of transition between behaviors of
individual elements and attributes of collective organizations by means of systems
of nonlinear differential equations. The evolutions of these systems lead to stable
trajectories, oriented by attractors, and to moments of bifurcation; the latter are
abrupt modifications of the trajectories under the effect of internal fluctuations or
Wolfgang Weidlich (1931–2015): A Pioneer in Sociophysics 239

external perturbations which make the trajectory jump from one attractor to another
with several possible solutions according to variable probabilities. The third approach
is global and covers the complexity sciences developed in Italy at ISI (Institute for
Scientific Interchange, founded in 1983), in the USA at the Santa Fe Institute (founded
in 1984), and in Europe with the Complex System Society launched by Bourgine
and Lesne (2010) and Johnson et al. (2017),5 and in many other laboratories for
complex systems in the world. The complexity paradigm encompasses the previous
theories and models and emphasizes the notion of emergence or novelty in systems,
elaborating mainly agent-based computer simulation models for testing a variety of
theories in all scientific fields.
According to physical theories such as the dissipative structures of Prigogine or
synergetic theory as developed by Haken, phenomena of self-organization and bifur-
cation may occur in open systems when they are maintained under an influx of energy.
These systems may organize themselves into structures that are created or destroyed
during the evolution of the system. This evolution is both deterministic—according
to a trajectory that can be predicted using the equations of a model describing inter-
dependencies between variables—and random, or undetermined, during periods of
instability when a change in structure (or a phase transition) can occur. The equa-
tions of the model may therefore admit several solutions that are different dynamic
equilibria. The state variables of the system may follow one or another possible trajec-
tories corresponding to qualitatively different structures. The system may be driven
toward one branch or another, toward a given form of organization, sometimes by the
huge amplification of a very small change in the value of one variable or one param-
eter. Many sources of instability intervene in the evolution of such open systems when
they are situated far from equilibrium. On the one hand, they continually undergo
internal fluctuations, variations in the level of their characteristic variables (which
may result from changes in the micro-states of the elements of the system); on the
other hand, they are always subject to external perturbations stemming from their
environment. An open system is thus continually adjusting the level of its variables
or the size of its subsystems. It maintains a relative structural persistence only when
this structure constitutes, under the given conditions, a stable state for the system:
that is, a state toward which the system returns after having distanced itself a little.
The structure is then viewed as an attractor on the system’s trajectory. The dynamical
instability may induce a passage from one trajectory to another, from one structure
to another structure, i.e., from a given qualitative behavior of the system to another,
through a bifurcation point.
The models of spatial interaction and regional dynamics developed at Leeds under
Wilson’s (1981) direction are explicitly inspired by the mathematical catastrophe
theory of Thom (1974). Obviously, they are also linked to the above-mentioned
analytical approach since they can be subdivided into sub-models generating travel-
to-work or residential shopping patterns of flows, allowing for some analytical
descriptions of the morphogenesis of the location pattern of places of residence

5 https://cssociety.org/community.
240 D. Pumain

or of shopping centers. Bifurcations and equilibrium points may be studied analyti-

cally for variations of one parameter, the others being held constant. The determining
effect of the sensitivity of people to travel costs in shaping the pattern of residences
and the strong impact of a parameter describing the sensitivity of consumers to scale
economies in generating a concentrated or dispersed pattern of shopping centers
illustrate the concept of bifurcation. Above a critical value of the parameter, the city
evolves toward a concentrated pattern, whereas below this value, the pattern will
become fully dispersed. For more complex formulations of the models, linking the
supply side and the demand side of the urban dynamics, and disaggregating the vari-
ables into various income groups, types of housing, or kinds of economic activities,
the global dynamics of the system can be studied by means of simulations.
Weidlich’s ideas together with the self-organization paradigm percolated more
deeply in Europe than in the USA among geographers and regional scientists.
The Weidlich and Haag (1988) book on migration is not quoted in papers on spatial
migration patterns in the USA (for instance, Plane and Mulligan 1997) nor in reviews
of migration research in regional science from a North American perspective (Green-
wood et al. 1991; Newbold 2012). Wolfgang Weidlich’s impact was rather great
among Italian regional scientists and partly inspired many publications such as those
of Camagni et al. (1986); Bertuglia et al. (1987, 1990); Diappi (2004); Haag and
Lombardo (1991); and Lombardo and Rabino (1984). Nijkamp and Reggiani (1988a,
1991, 1993) designed many models for analyzing regional dynamics through spatial
interaction, referring to “chaos theory” and linking that with models of discrete choice
(Nijkamp and Reggiani 1988b). Nijkamp also developed that field with the Austrian
geographer Fischer (Fischer and Nijkamp 1985; Fischer et al. 1988). Notably, Wolf-
gang Weidlich’s work was quoted by the North American Brian Arthur (1994) in his
seminal book on increasing returns and path dependence in the economy. Wolfgang
Weidlich and Herman Haken’s synergetic theory also were major sources of inspi-
ration for Portugali (1999), who was interested in designing models of urban socio-
spatial segregation and models of spatial cognition. Synergetics is a fundamental
reference for analyzing how social processes of avoidance, isolation, or conquest lead
to more or less pronounced spatial segregation of certain social categories (Haken
and Portugali 2003).
From my point of view, Wolfgang Weidlich’s influence in his chosen domain
of social physics may have been limited by the German academic system, which
overvalued the status and function of the “Herr Professor,” but for a long time left
brilliant assistants in relatively precarious condition. The latter occupied contractual
positions and had the greatest difficulty in being admitted to the full academic staff.
This limitation was probably even more restrictive in thwarting the development of
innovative disciplines located at the margins of the most recognized sectors and espe-
cially those that transgressed the boundaries between natural and social sciences. We
have thus deplored the fact that the German participants in the first European collo-
quia on theoretical and quantitative geography—those who represented a third of
the participants in Strasbourg in 1978, who were still present in Cambridge in 1980,
and who organized the next one in Augsburg in 1982—have subsequently practically
disappeared, as this specialty has been countered by the establishment. Among the
Wolfgang Weidlich (1931–2015): A Pioneer in Sociophysics 241

most well-known and accomplished disciples of Wolfgang Weidlich, Günter Haag

never obtained an academic position at the University of Stuttgart despite his strong
international recognition and his participation in the teaching of theoretical physics
and synergetics. Haag was able to innovate in a different way by creating a research
and consulting firm that used master-equation models and developed neural network
applications to urban planning issues for Stuttgart and regional planning for the land
of Baden Württemberg. Aware of this situation, Wolfgang Weidlich asked me to
propose a thesis topic in France to Pierre Frankhauser, although Pierre had already
obtained a doctoral gradation in physics (with a thesis applying entropy measure-
ments to the development of a system of cities) but was still without a permanent
position and being paid on contracts at the age of 40. When one knows the rest
of his career—the international recognition of his work with a French doctorate on
fractals (Frankhauser 1994) and then his obtaining a position as University Professor
in Besançon and a senior position at the Institut Universitaire de France—one can
measure the loss for this German system among the potential successors of Wolfgang
Weidlich.

5 Current Relevance of Weidlich’s Work

The models that are derived from the theory pioneered for the social sciences by
Weidlich are operational. They enable exploring possible futures starting from more
realistic scenarios than those generally resulting from speculations because they
incorporate the past dynamics of the system being considered. Further progress is to
be expected from a more explicit integration in these models of the relations between
individual behaviors captured in their variety, the interactions between these behav-
iors, and the transformations of the consecutive spatial forms. The “multi-level”
models linking the diversity and evolution of individual characteristics at micro-
level with the configuration and evolution of urban and regional patterns are now
much more feasible thanks to the big data deluge and high-performance computing
(Raimbault 2021). The relationship to be established between the variables, the cate-
gories which reflect at micro-level the intentions or the strategies of the individuals,
as often derived from their observed behavior, and the variables that describe at
macro-level the aggregate structures, that is, the categories that make sense at the
level of regional entities, remains however, a very delicate passage in these models,
especially because it also implies to integrate different scales of time (Pumain and
Sanders 2013).
In contrast to the models of the New Geographical Economy, Wolfgang Weidlich’s
work does not refer to a general principle of spatial equilibrium, but, on the contrary,
describes systems far from equilibrium. In addition, it does not rely on a simple
rule such as that of increasing returns or random proportional growth to explain
differences in economic concentration according to location. On the other hand, his
models fully incorporate the idea of “path dependency,” of the persistence over time
242 D. Pumain

of geographical locations and concentrations, which evolve much more slowly than
the factors that change their content (Haag 2017).
In the applications of systems theory to urban systems, a noticeable evolution can
be observed in the scientific domains where analogies are drawn. The first uses of
a concept such as entropy, for instance, was in reference to statistical mechanics,
and then to information theory. The dynamics of cities as open systems far from
equilibrium was first conceived with reference to “dissipative structures” or “syner-
getics,” conveying analogies with physical systems. An alternative way of thinking
is now more and more guiding the work of urban theorists and modelers. They
still use the mathematical tools first proposed by physicists (or mathematicians) for
building and testing their models, but their theoretical analogies are more often made
to living systems. A shift has taken place from the pure concept of “dynamics” to the
concept of “evolution” (Allen 1997), and, especially, “co-evolution” (Pumain 2021).
Although urban systems can be described as largely self-organized open systems,
whose structure and evolution depend upon internal fluctuations as well as external
perturbations, they also have a historical and evolutionary behavior, as well as an
adaptive hierarchical structure and a power of creativity, which invites to develop
more analogies with living systems. Nevertheless, the more recent publications by
Wolfgang Weidlich maintain an interest for mathematical modeling in the social
sciences (Weidlich 2006), the formation of political opinions (Weidlich and Hubner
2008), and quantitative sociology conceived from social interactions (Weidlich and
Haag 2012).

6 Scientific Recognition in the Literature

Wolfgang Weidlich’s influence is remarkable because it is mainly transdisciplinary.

An obituary praised his outstanding research contributions in theoretical physics,
inside the Stuttgart team:
Among other things, they recognized the laser transition as a cooperative phenomenon,
revealed the statistical properties of light near the laser threshold and laid the foundations
of the modern theory of quantum statistical master and Langevin equations. (Grabert et al.
2015, p. 50)

Indeed, more than 5000 citations now appear on Google Scholar, but most of the titles
are not in physics, they are in the social sciences! You have to wait until the sixth
page to find references related to physics (such as Weidlich 1976). As early as 1991,
Wolfgang Weidlich shared his interest in transferring models from physical statistics
to social sciences in an article in a famous journal of physics (Weidlich 1991). The
influence of synergetics seems widely recognized in sociology where 635 citations
are found for his book on Sociodynamics (Weidlich 2006) and 867 for the book he
published with Günter Haag on Quantitative Sociology (Weidlich and Haag 2012).
The citation counts, however, are not so numerous for topics of interest in regional
Wolfgang Weidlich (1931–2015): A Pioneer in Sociophysics 243

science or geography: 275 citations for the collective work on interregional migra-
tion Weidlich and Haag edited in 1988, 81 for explaining agglomeration processes
as phase transition in an article in the Journal of Regional Science (Weidlich and
Haag 1987), 114 citations for a paper in economics (Weidlich and Braun 1992),
44 for a paper on settlement formation in a regional science journal (Weidlich and
Münz 1990), and only 37 for an article about the evolution of settlement systems
(Weidlich 1999). A few papers in transdisciplinary journals, such as Weidlich (1997)
or Weidlich and Helbing (1998), did not receive much attention.
The story of scientific recognition for Wolfgang Weidlich’s work is not
finished however: For instance, in a recent call for a Ph.D. in geography,6 Olivier
Bonin announced a modeling exercise for urban transition in connection with trans-
portation systems and quoted the “creators of complexity theories: soliton for the
passage from scholasticism to humanism (Thom 1974) and laser physics for voting
behavior in social groups (Weidlich 2006).” I can add that Wolfgang Weidlich’s spirit
could fruitfully inspire deep-learning analyses of the massive data about opinion
shifts that are more and more produced from social networks, as attested to by
his being quoted this past year in a journal of physics article dealing with opinion
formation (Gaudiano and Revelli 2021).

7 Policy and Societal Impact of Weidlich’s Studies

I cannot survey the practical impact of Weidlich’s research on matters of regional

analysis and planning, but his principal intellectual heir, Günter Haag, must be
mentioned for his remarkable creation of a rather large consulting firm applying
and developing Wolfgang Weidlich’s theories: the STASA firm in Stuttgart. This
firm operates many applications in urban and regional dynamics and transport activ-
ities (five EU-projects instituted to date) based on the master-equation approach.
Analysis and modeling of population dynamics, demographic change, and unem-
ployment activities have been carried out for projects funded by the EU, the German
government, the German Federal Employment Agency, and other institutions. Mass
data analysis, visualization of data, modeling, simulation, and software development
are also currently in the firm’s focus. Applications are being developed in different
fields, including regional science, demography, and transport, but also in the anal-
ysis of production data, production modeling for the auto industry, unexploded bomb
detection, and so on.7 The software STASA QC is based on an algorithm that Günter
Haag developed in 1992 for self-organized neural networks. As Senior Research
Fellow, Günter Haag is a member of the FSTI (Ferdinand-Steinbeis-Institut,8 with
its focus on distributed ledger, digital twins, deep learning, and IIC (industrial internet
consortium).

6 From an announcement on the geotamtam list of a call for Ph.D. candidates at the IFFSTAR
laboratory of the Gustave Eiffel University, March 5, 2021.
7 www.stasa.de.
8 www.steinbeis-fsti.de.
244 D. Pumain

8 Conclusion

Great Minds are sometimes difficult to deal with. This was not at all the case with
Wolfgang Weidlich. His open and warm personality and deep humanity are empha-
sized by all those who came into contact with him. Harvey Shoolman describes him
as: “A truly remarkable human being whose spiritual largesse and gift for warm
and sustained friendship profoundly endeared him to everyone he met” (Shoolman
2015). Passionate about theology, Wolfgang Weidlich was also a brilliant musician,
a pianist of the highest order. He was a bon vivant who loved wine and food. He
loved to laugh, and, among his good stories, he told me one that made him very
happy: While visiting the Neuschwanstein palace, a Japanese colleague specializing
in pattern recognition exclaimed, “What a huge goose” while contemplating the
fresco of Lohengrin’s swan on the ceiling. Humor, kindness, and generosity were
not the least of the qualities of this Great Mind.
Let us take away insight from Wolfgang Weidlich’s life-long engagement with
understanding how individuals’ opinion may become socially oriented in harmful
directions and from his deep concern for finding tools helping to avoid intolerance
and brutality. Let’s put these attitudes into practice! A great impact on the social
sciences and more applications of Wolfgang Weidlich’s findings can be expected
with the coming of massive individual data and researches on opinions, sensations,
and socio-spatial interactions.

Acknowledgment I am grateful to Günter Haag who sent me a much information and several
pictures for preparing this chapter.

References

AFCET-SOGESCI. 1982. Des sciences physiques aux sciences sociales. Bruxelles, 7e conférence
internationale de dynamique des systèmes, 2 vol.
Allen, P., F. Boon, J. L. Deneubourg, A. de Palma, and M. Sanglier. 1981. Models of urban settle-
ment and structure as dynamic self-organizing systems. Washington, DC: US Department of
Transportation.
Allen, P.M. 1997. Cities and regions as self-organizing systems; models of complexity. Amsterdam:
Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.
Arthur, W.B. 1994. Increasing returns and path dependence in the economy. Ann Arbor: University
of Michigan Press.
Bertuglia, C.S., G. Leonardi, S. Occelli, G.A. Rabino, R. Tadei, and A.G. Wilson. 1987. Urban
systems. London: Croom Helm.
Bertuglia, C.S., G. Leonardi, and A.G. Wilson. 1990. Urban dynamics. London: Routledge.
Bourgine, P., and A. Lesne, eds. 2010. Morphogenesis: Origins of patterns and shapes. Berlin:
Springer Science & Business Media.
Camagni, R., L. Diappi, and G. Leonardi. 1986. Urban growth and decline in hierarchical systems:
A supply-oriented dynamic approach. Regional Science and Urban Economics 16 (1): 145–160.
Dendrinos, D.S., and G. Haag. 1984. Toward a stochastic theory of location: Empirical evidence.
Geographical Analysis 16 (4): 287–300.
Wolfgang Weidlich (1931–2015): A Pioneer in Sociophysics 245

Diappi, L., ed. 2004. Evolving cities: Geocomputation in planning process. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Fischer, M., G. Haag, M. Sonis, and W. Weidlich. 1988. Account of different views in dynamic choice
processes. Vienna: Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien, Institut für Wirtschaft und Sozialgeographie,
Discussion papers.
Fischer, M.M., and P. Nijkamp. 1985. Developments in explanatory discrete spatial data and choice
analysis. Progress in Human Geography 9 (4): 515–551.
Forrester, J.W. 1969. Urban dynamics. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.
Frankhauser, P. 1994. La fractalité des structures urbaines. Paris: Anthropos-Economica.
Gaudiano, M.E., and J.A. Revelli. 2021. Entropical analysis of an opinion formation model
presenting a spontaneous third position emergence. Physics of Condensed Matter 94 (4). https://
doi.org/10.1140/epjb/s10051-021-00098-8.
Grabert, H., G. Haag, F. Haake, and U. Weiss. 2015. Nachruf auf Wolfgang Weidlich. Physik Journal
14 (12): 50.
Greenwood, M.J., P.M. Mueser, D.A. Plane, and A.M. Schlottmann. 1991. New directions in migra-
tion research: Perspectives from some North American regional science disciplines. The Annals
of Regional Science 25 (4): 237–270.
Haag, G. 2017. Modelling with the master equation. Solution methods and applications in social
and natural sciences. Cham: Springer.
Haag, G., and D.S. Dendrinos. 1983. Toward a stochastic dynamical theory of location: A nonlinear
migration process. Geographical Analysis 15 (4): 269–286.
Haag, G., and S. Lombardo. 1991. Innovation in information technology and spatial organization of
urban systems: A dynamic simulation model. In Models of self-organization in complex systems,
eds. W. Ebeling, M. Peschel, and W. Weidlich. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Haag, G., M. Münz, D. Pumain, L. Sanders, and T. Saint-Julien. 1992. Inter-urban migration and
the dynamics of a system of cities. Part 1: The stochastic framework with an application to the
French urban system. Environment and Planning 24 (2): 181–188.
Haag, G., and D. Pumain. 1991. Urban and regional dynamics, an integrated approach. Environment
and Planning A 23 (9): 1301–1313.
Haag, G., and W. Weidlich. 1984. A stochastic theory of interregional migration. Geographical
Analysis 16 (4): 331–357.
Haggett, P. 1990. The geographer’s art. London: Blackwell.
Haken, H. 1977. Synergetics, an introduction. Berlin: Springer.
Haken, H., and J. Portugali. 2003. The face of the city is its information. Journal of Environmental
Psychology 23 (4): 385–408.
Johnson J., P. Ormerod, B. Rosewell, A. Nowak, and Y.C. Zhang, eds. 2017. Non-equilibrium social
science and policy. Cham: Springer International.
Lombardo, S.T., and G.A. Rabino. 1984. Nonlinear dynamic models for spatial interaction: The
results of some empirical experiments. Papers of the Regional Science Association 55 (1): 83–101.
Newbold, K.B. 2012. Migration and regional science: Opportunities and challenges in a changing
environment. The Annals of Regional Science 48 (2): 451–468.
Nijkamp, P., and A. Reggiani. 1988a. Dynamic spatial interaction models: New directions.
Environment and Planning A 20 (11): 1449–1460.
Nijkamp, P., and A. Reggiani. 1988b. Entropy, spatial interaction models and discrete choice
analysis: Static and dynamic analogies. European Journal of Operational Research 36 (2):
186–196.
Nijkamp, P., and A. Reggiani. 1991. Chaos theory and spatial dynamics. Journal of Transport
Economics and Policy 24 (1): 81–96.
Nijkamp, P., and A. Reggiani, eds. 1993. Nonlinear evolution of spatial economic systems. Berlin:
Springer.
Plane, D.A., and G.F. Mulligan. 1997. Measuring spatial focusing in a migration system.
Demography 34 (2): 251–262.
Portugali, J. 1999. Self-organization and the city. Berlin: Springer.
246 D. Pumain

Prigogine, I., and G. Nicolis. 1967. On symmetry-breaking instabilities in dissipative systems. The
Journal of Chemical Physics 46 (9): 3542–3550.
Pumain, D. 1988. France. In Interregional migrations. Dynamic theory and comparative analysis,
eds. W. Weidlich and G. Haag, 131–148. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Pumain, D. 2021. Co-evolution as the secret of urban complexity. In Handbook on complexity and
cities, ed. J. Portugali, 136–153. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Pumain, D., and G. Haag. 1994. Spatial patterns of urban systems and multifractality. In Evolution of
natural structures, 3rd International Symposium of the Sonderforschungsbereich 230, Universität
Stuttgart, 4–7 Oct., Natürliche Konstruktionen, Mitteilungen des SFB 230, Heft 9, 243–252.
Pumain, D., and T. Saint-Julien. 1979. Les transformations récentes du système urbain français.
L’espace Géographique 7 (3): 203–211.
Pumain, D., and L. Sanders. 2013. Theoretical principles in inter-urban simulation models: A
comparison. Environment and Planning A 45 (9): 2243–2260.
Pumain, D., B. Roehner, L. Sanders, and T. Saint-Julien. 1983. Are French metropolitan areas
evolving as self-organizing systems? In Proceedings of the first international conference of the
system dynamics society, eds. J. D. Morecroft, D. F. Andersen, and J. D. Sterman. Chestnut Hill,
MA. https://proceedings.systemdynamics.org/1983/proceed/index.htm.
Pumain, D., T. Saint-Julien, and L. Sanders. 1986. Urban dynamics of some French cities. European
Journal of Operational Research 25 (1): 3–10.
Pumain, D., T. Saint-Julien, and L. Sanders. 1989. Villes et auto-organisation. Paris: Economica.
Raimbault, J. 2021. Strong coupling between scales in a multi-scalar model of urban dynamics.
arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.12725.
Sanders, L. 1992. Système de villes et synergétique. Paris: Anthropos-Economica.
Shoolman, H. 2015. Wolfgang Weidlich obituary. https://www.academia.edu/16517062/Prof_Wolf
gang_Weidlich_The_Father_of_Social_Physics.
Thom, R. 1974. Modèles mathématiques de la morphogénèse. Paris: Union générale d’éditions.
Weidlich, W. 1971. The statistical description of polarization phenomena in society. British Journal
of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 24 (2): 251–266.
Weidlich, W. 1976. Thermodynamik und Statistische Mechanik. Wiesbaden: Akademische
Verlagsanstalt.
Weidlich, W. 1991. Physics and social science—the approach of synergetics. Physics Reports 204
(1): 1–163.
Weidlich, W. 1997. Sociodynamics applied to the evolution of urban and regional structures. Discrete
Dynamics in Nature and Society 1 (2): 85–98.
Weidlich, W. 1999. From fast to slow processes in the evolution of urban and regional settlement
structures. Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society 3 (2–3): 137–147.
Weidlich, W. 2006. Sociodynamics: A systematic approach to mathematical modelling in the social
sciences. North Chelmsford, MA: Courier Corporation.
Weidlich, W., and M. Braun. 1992. The master equation approach to nonlinear economics. Journal
of Evolutionary Economics 2 (3): 233–265.
Weidlich, W., and G. Haag. 1983. Concepts and models of a quantitative sociology: The dynamics
of interacting populations. Heidelberg, Berlin: Springer.
Weidlich, W., and G. Haag. 1987. A dynamic phase transition model for spatial agglomeration
processes. Journal of Regional Science 27 (4): 529–569.
Weidlich, W., and G. Haag, eds. 1988. Interregional migration: Dynamic theory and comparative
analysis, vol. 4. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Weidlich, W., and G. Haag. 2012. Concepts and models of a quantitative sociology: The dynamics
of interacting populations (Vol. 14). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media.
Weidlich, W., and D. Helbing. 1998. A mathematical model of group dynamics including the effects
of solidarity. In The problem of solidarity: Theories and models, eds. P. Doreian and T.J. Fararo,
139–196. London: Gordon and Breach.
Weidlich, W., and H. Huebner. 2008. Dynamics of political opinion formation including catastrophe
theory. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 67: 1–26.
Wolfgang Weidlich (1931–2015): A Pioneer in Sociophysics 247

Weidlich, W., and M. Munz. 1990. Settlement formation. The Annals of Regional Science 24 (2):
83–106.
Wilson, A.G. 1981. Catastrophe theory and bifurcation: Application to urban and regional systems.
London: Croom Helm.
Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man
in Regional Science

Laurie A. Schintler

Alan Wilson

L. A. Schintler (B)
Schar School of Policy and Government, George Mason University, Arlington, VA 22201, USA
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 249
P. Batey and D. Plane (eds.), Great Minds in Regional Science, Vol. 2,
Footprints of Regional Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13440-1_12
250 L. A. Schintler

1 Overview

We build too many walls and not enough bridges.

—Sir Isaac Newton

Sir Alan Geoffrey Wilson is not an ordinary regional scientist. Some sixty years
ago, he began his career as a mathematician and theoretical physicist analyzing
bubble chamber events at the Rutherford Laboratory in Harwell, England. However,
he soon realized that his ambition was to study and model people in cities rather
than particles in gas chambers. His move to work with a transportation planning
research group in Oxford in 1963 would mark the beginning of a long, productive,
and impactful (and still very active!) career in regional science. Yet, he did not entirely
abandon physics: Concepts, theories, and mathematics from physics would serve as
a basis and motivation for many of his ideas and innovations, including his signature
entropy-based, spatial interaction framework.
Over the years, Alan Wilson’s “sphere of interest” has remained relatively focused
on cities and systems of cities, and, particularly, the modeling of spatial interaction,
location activity, and urban evolution. In these areas, he has made significant theo-
retical and methodological contributions, which are spotlighted in several articles
and special issues (Gombrich and Oléron-Evans 2019; Clarke 2009, 2011; Waldorf
et al. 2004; Johnston 2019). He has published countless papers, books, reports, and
commentaries, drawing upon and impacting various disciplines and subdisciplines,
including outside the conventional walls of regional science. However, Alan Wilson is
not just a scientific giant. In his lifetime, he has worn many badges: educator, admin-
istrator, philanthropist, planner, politician, businessman, and entrepreneur, and in all
these roles, he has been highly successful. But Alan Wilson is even more than that:
He is also an artist and a philosopher.
Truly transformative scientific advancements and revelations are the product of
two interrelated forces: “…curiosity, which drives one on toward discovery, and a
love of play (gout de jeu) or sheer enjoyment of the game itself, which encourages
inventive thought” (Le Lionnais 1969). These are the defining features of a creative
genius—a scientific artist—and the essence of Alan Wilson. Wilson is engaged “with
the world of ideas” (Grombrich and Oléron-Evans 2019), intellectually curious about
everything from how cities evolve and morph over short and long periods to how
concepts and methods from the natural sciences transfer and translate to a regional
science context. His scholarly adventures often begin with an idea from another
field, an analogy—or a mystery worth pursuing. Alan Wilson also has a love of play,
i.e., a “genius for synthesis.” He has a creative capacity to harness and combine
seemingly disparate approaches, principles, and perspectives and to “connect-the-
dots” in novel and metaphoric ways. In the process, he builds on the “shoulders
of giants,” exploiting the work of other Great Minds who have already begun to
“pave the way” or who “planted a seed.” Moreover, he is continually taking stock of,
synthesizing, and clarifying the state of knowledge—painting an ongoing portrait of
the scientific landscape.
Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man in Regional Science 251

All of this is encapsulated in Wilson’s philosophy of science, which he follows

himself and communicates to the regional science community regularly. For theory
and model development, as well as planning and education—and problem-solving,
more generally—the “Wilsonian” philosophy emphasizes a systems perspective and
algorithmic and systematic approaches infused with creativity and imagination. To
this end, inter- and cross-disciplinary ideas and viewpoints, along with cooperation
and coordination between researchers, planners, policymakers, and even politicians,
are imperative. According to Wilson, such bridges are crucial for engendering analyt-
ical frameworks and theoretical advancements that are unifying, universal, versatile,
and, ultimately, transdisciplinary. In fact, as Wilson notes, to arrive at “a general
paradigm, eclecticism and integration are the order of the day” (Wilson 1972).
This chapter provides an up-to-date tour d’horizon of Alan Wilson’s long list
of contributions to science and society, highlighting his ingenuity for bringing
together and bridging people, disciplines, concepts, and techniques systematically,
deliberately, and creatively to solve a broad spectrum of problems.

2 Personal and Professional Journey

You have to make the rules, not follow them.

—Sir Isaac Newton

On the surface, Alan Wilson’s personal and professional trajectory appears to be

a “random walk”—i.e., a path consisting of a succession of indiscriminate steps.
However, his trajectory has been more like a thermodynamic system, characterized
by critical junctures and transitions, with each phase bringing new opportunities,
roles, focal points, experiences, and accomplishments that build on and leverage
those of the prior stages. While Alan Wilson has faced enormous barriers and chal-
lenges throughout his life and career, he has been able to overcome them “simply by
being smart enough to rise above them” (Kelly 2003). In doing so, he sets his own
rules, intervening proactively to steer his course in desirable directions—to facilitate
positive phase transitions—which has contributed to great successes and accolades
and to a life and career that has been anything but conventional.
Alan Wilson was born in Bradford, Yorkshire, on January 8, 1939. His upbringing
was relatively modest, but supportive. In his own words, “I was brought up in the
poorest part of Bradford: Laisterdyke. My father was a wool-sorter at Whitehead’s.
Both my parents had left school at 14 but were determined that I got a good educa-
tion.” (Kelly 2003). When his family moved from Bradford to Darlington, Alan
enrolled in the Queen Elizabeth Grammar School, which would be a pivotal initial
condition in his career. According to Wilson, unlike Bradford, which had several
schools, Darlington was a one-grammar-school town that sought to send a handful
of students to Oxford or Cambridge (Kelly 2003). Alan Wilson was one of them; he
was accepted to Cambridge at Corpus Christi, and off he went.
252 L. A. Schintler

In 1960, Alan Wilson graduated from Cambridge with training in mathematics and
theoretical physics. He then went on to join the Rutherford Laboratory, a laboratory
involved in analyzing real-time particle physics experiments at CERN in Switzerland
(Kelly 2003). Wilson’s duty was to carry out computer-based statistical analysis and
testing, which, as he says, “was an unbelievable responsibility. If my bit didn’t work,
a multimillion-pound experiment didn’t get analyzed” (Kelly 2003).
Yet, Alan Wilson aspired to pursue a more “social” and “useful” field while
still being a mathematician (Wilson 2021). After “hawking” himself around Oxford
to secure a research position that could enable him to transition from the physical
sciences to the social sciences (Kelly 2003)—and a series of rejections along the way
(Wilson 2021)—he took a different route, accepting an elected position as Labour
Councillor in Oxford. As he notes about that job, it “was an important early experi-
ence for me, functioning in a political environment, convinced that it was possible
to change things for the better” (Reisz 2017). Wilson then successfully landed a
research-oriented appointment at the Institute of Economics and Statistics in Oxford
to work with a transport group comprised of economists, marking another turning
point in his professional journey, setting in motion his career in regional science.
After two years in this role, he went on to serve as Head of the Mathematical Advi-
sory Unit, Ministry of Transport (1966–1968). On being hired as a mathematician
rather than a social scientist, Wilson remarked, “The civil service flew into a flap
because he couldn’t be admitted as an economic adviser because he wasn’t officially
an economist. They asked me what I was. I said a mathematician. So they made me a
mathematical adviser…” (Kelly 2003). Wilson then served as Assistant Director of
the Centre for Environmental Studies in London (1968–1970). In 1969, Alan Wilson
founded the journal Environment and Planning A, serving as an editor until 1991,
and since then, as Honorary Editor.
In this phase of his career, Alan Wilson’s passion for urban modeling and plan-
ning—and reputation as a regional scientist—began to blossom and take off. At the
Institute of Economics and Statistics, he “was given the job of modeling person
flows, such as the journey-to-work, in cities” (Wilson 2021), which was a valuable
and inspirational experience for him. As he notes about the job, “The deal was that
I did all their maths and computing, and they taught me economics along the way! I
was lucky enough to solve a problem that was waiting to be solved—how to model
transport flows in cities—and I was accepted as a social scientist” (Reisz 2017).
Reflecting on what he had learned about the physics of gases, Wilson developed the
idea of using entropy maximization to model trip distribution—i.e., the allocation
of travelers between origins and destinations. The work took him only a couple of
weeks, an effort well worth it, as it launched “his name internationally in a field he
had only just entered” (Kelly 2003). At the Ministry of Transport, Alan Wilson had
an opportunity to apply this framework in a real-world context, specifically to the
United Kingdom. In his role at the Centre for Environmental Studies, he was given
“the freedom to shift towards attempting to build a comprehensive urban model,”
which, he has said, “ended up being a life’s work!” (Wilson 2021).
Alan Wilson’s professional journey then branched off in a different but related
direction. In 1970, he was appointed Professor of Urban and Regional Geography at
Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man in Regional Science 253

the University of Leeds, a quite impressive feat given that he did not have a geography
degree or a Ph.D. While at Leeds, he was “one of a small number of academics with
a genuinely international reputation.” He also served as Pro-Vice Chancellor (1989)
and Vice Chancellor (1991–2004) at the university. In this administrative capacity, he
was highly successful, increasing enrollment and research income in magnitudes or
order (Grombrich and Oléron-Evans 2019). Wilson had essentially transformed the
university from a “sleepy and underfunded” institution to a vibrant and prosperous
epicenter of intellectual and scholastic activity (Riesz 2017).
In the late 1980s, Alan Wilson (with geographer Martin Clarke) founded the
company Geographical Modeling and Planning (GMAP) Ltd., which used entropy-
based modeling to advise retailers on where to locate their stores. It ended up being
one of the most successful ventures to spin out of Leeds University. The company had
“major blue-chip clients,” including “Ford, Exxon/Mobil, BP, Barclays, Sainsbury’s,
Asda, Thomas Cook, and HBOS” and was “the largest geographical consultancy in
the world” at the time (Clarke 2009).
In 2004, Alan Wilson once again altered his career trajectory, accepting the
appointment of Director-General for Higher Education in the United Kingdom. Not
only was he the first to serve in this post, but he broke the mold of a typical politician.
As Kelly (2003) wrote soon after Wilson took the job, “In Wilson, the government
will have an adviser who, for once, does not spring from that cadre of bureaucrats who
have little working knowledge of poverty.” Alan Wilson played a “critical role in the
government’s drive to promote inclusion and diversity in higher education” during
his term. In this regard, he was highly successful. For instance, he was responsible for
establishing the Office for Fair Access, which opened new avenues for underserved
communities to access a college education. Wilson was also instrumental in cutting
“red tape” in the UK government (Riesz 2017).
In 2006, Alan Wilson briefly returned to his alma mater, Cambridge, at Corpus
Christi, after being elected Master of the school. One year later, he joined the
spatial complexity powerhouse, the Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (CASA)
at University College London (UCL), as Professor of Urban and Regional Systems.
In this period, Wilson also served as Chair of the Arts and Humanities Research
Council (2007–2013), Chair of the Home Office Science Advisory Council (2013–
2015), and Chair of the Lead Expert Group for the Government Office for Science
Foresight Project on The Future of Cities.
From 2016 to 2018, Alan Wilson served as founding CEO of the Alan Turing
Institute. He was then appointed Executive Chair of the Ada Lovelace Institute,
where he is now actively involved in leading research teams in big data, machine
learning, and artificial intelligence (Gombrich and Oléron-Evans 2019). Emphasizing
the importance of convening different people and perspectives to advance data science
in a transformative, ethical, and inclusive way, Alan Wilson remarked after joining
the Ada Lovelace Institute that:
A key component of the Institute’s mission is to convene diverse voices to create a shared
understanding of ethical issues in data and AI, and my first priority as Chair will be to recruit a
Board that reflects this diversity. We are seeking people from different sectors and disciplines
to set the strategy and remit of the Ada Lovelace Institute and to actively participate in its
254 L. A. Schintler

work. The Board will connect academic fields such as philosophy, data science, and social
science, with civil society and public deliberation, policy and regulation, and international
perspectives.1

In recognition of his impressive scholarly and professional achievements and

successes, Alan Wilson has received numerous awards, medals, and honors. He is
a Fellow of both the distinguished Royal Society and the British Academy and was
awarded the Laureate d’Honneur by the International Geographical Union and the
Prize in Regional Science by the European Regional Science Association (ERSA).
In 2001, he was knighted by the Queen of England, approximately three centuries
after the first scientist to be bestowed that honor, Sir Isaac Newton.

3 Research Trajectories, and Transitions

I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a
boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble
or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before
me.

—Sir Isaac Newton

Like his professional journey, Alan Wilson’s research trajectory is characterized

by well-defined transitions and phases that build on each other. In chronological
order, these areas generally include the modeling and analysis of (1) bubble chamber
events, (2) spatial interaction and location behavior using entropy maximization
and mathematical optimization, (3) complex urban structure and dynamics using
nonlinear dynamic equations, dynamic systems theory, and microsimulation, and (4)
global networks and comprehensive urban systems using big data, machine learning,
and other related analytical tools. Wilson has also written extensively about higher
education, urban and regional planning, and science philosophy. The word cloud
in Fig. 1 highlights the evolving and expanding universe of Alan Wilson’s areas of
interest in greater detail.2

1 https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/news/sir-alan-wilson-appointed-executive-chair-of-the-ada-
lovelace-institute (Last accessed 22 April 2022).
2 The word cloud is based on a bipartite network of terms from the titles of his publications to

the years in which they were published (using data from Google Scholar). A community detection
algorithm was employed to group terms and years to delineate in some detail the phases of his
research. Colors (shown in the on-line version only) pertain to communities and node sizes to the
overall frequencies of the terms.
Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man in Regional Science 255

Fig. 1 Evolving and expanding universe of Alan Wilson’s research

3.1 Entropy Maximization, Spatial Interaction Modeling,

and Location Analysis

If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.

—Sir Isaac Newton

The 1950s ushered in the era of large-scale urban transport and land-use modeling,
particularly in the USA. In this context, the gravity model adapted from Newton’s
law of gravitation, as well as the intervening opportunities model and “back-of-the-
envelope” approaches (i.e., lookup tables and diversion curves), was en vogue, used
as the primary vehicles for predicting the flows of people and goods within cities.
Yet, there was no consensus on which theory or method was most appropriate, nor
on specific questions about how to incorporate the effects of policies, appropriately
calibrate the deterrence function to account for distance decay, and disaggregate
the framework to account for the varying characteristics of trips and individuals
(Williams 2019). Moreover, as Alan Wilson noted, there was a mathematical incon-
sistency in the gravity model. Specifically, it did not “conform to the method of
bounds,” and it could “generate nonsense predictions,” such as more people trav-
eling to a destination than realistically possible. Thus, the equations required “fudge
factors” to get the right answers, corrections that he recognized from “the statistical
mechanics of gases” (Kelly 2003). Wilson also had concerns about the gravity model
lacking a behavioral foundation (Clarke 2009).
256 L. A. Schintler

In the mid-1960s, Alan Wilson set out to develop an analytical framework that
could address these issues and shortcomings (Clarke 2009). In doing so, Wilson was
influenced by complexity scientist Warren Weaver. Weaver (1948) distinguished
between three types of problems or systems: simple, disorganized complexity, and
organized complexity, suggesting the appropriateness of methods for analyzing each
type of system. Alan Wilson saw large numbers of people moving around in a
city, such as via commuting activity, as interacting only weakly, constituting a
system of disorganized complexity. Thus, according to Weaver (1948), statistical
mechanics and probability theory were the most appropriate means for modeling
such phenomena (Wilson 2021). Wilson was also inspired by economist and regional
planner Gerald Carrothers, who provided a “germ of the idea,” but one that had not
been acted upon (Wilson 1972). Carrothers (1956) wrote:
The behavior of molecules, individually, is not normally predictable, while in large numbers
their behavior is predictable based on mathematical probability. Similarly, while it may not
be possible to describe the action and reactions of the individual human in mathematical
terms, it is quite conceivable that interactions of groups of people may be described in this
way.

Another source of inspiration came from Edwin Thompson Jaynes and others (see,
e.g., Jaynes 1957), who were applying entropy maximization to various problems
outside of physics (Wilson 2021).
The stars aligned, and Alan Wilson had a “eureka” moment. He realized that the
gravity model’s balancing constraints were analogous to partition functions from
statistical mechanics. Using Boltzmann methods and maximizing an entropy func-
tion, Wilson formulated a spatial interaction framework that remarkably addressed
all the concerns raised about the gravity model and other approaches being used
for transportation and land use planning at the time (Williams 2019). Wilson had
creatively applied the “laws that predict the average behavior of atoms to the average
behavior of the population of cities” (Kelly 2003).
In 1967, Alan Wilson unveiled his entropy-based spatial interaction model (SIM)
in “A Statistical Theory of Spatial Distribution Models” using trip distribution as
an archetypal illustration (Wilson 1967). This paper, which has ended up being
one of his most cited manuscripts, was published on a whim (without peer review)
in Transportation Research to fill a gap in the journal’s first issue (Wilson 2021).
A few years later, Wilson demonstrated that an entire family of spatial interaction
models could be derived from entropy maximization through accounting principles
and mere adjustments of the production and attraction constraints (Wilson 1971).
The singly constrained model was significant for regional science in that it added a
“locational dimension to the spatial interaction model” (Wilson 2010a, b).
Wilson’s early work on entropy maximization was summarized in the
book Entropy in urban and regional modelling, which is recognized as a classic
and trail-blazing book in regional science (Waldorf et al. 2004). As Gould (1972)
wrote soon after its publication, “The book not only presents an extraordinarily valu-
able approach to solving relevant spatial and social problems at the very time we
need every approach we can muster, but stands as one of the most imaginative and
Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man in Regional Science 257

thought-provoking works in geographic literature.” In another monograph, Urban

and Regional Models in Geography and Planning (1974), Alan Wilson gave a “much
more complete account and organized the field’s technical apparatus.” In his review
of the book, Michael Batty wrote: “Alan Wilson is an acknowledged master of the
field and his individuality, brilliance and style are stamped on this book, like on all of
his works. He is bringing to urban studies what people like Chomsky have brought
to Linguistics and Rashevsky to mathematical biology and this book is worthy of his
contribution” (Batty 1975).
Alan Wilson’s entropy maximization framework brought many innovations
in urban and regional modeling, planning, and evaluation (Boyce and Williams
2015; Williams 2019; O’Kelly 2010). First, it improved spatial interaction and
transportation models by introducing:
1. “balancing” factors related to the Lagrange multipliers in optimization, which
translated to standard accessibility indices
2. a generalized cost function for characterizing spatial separation between origins
and destinations (going beyond simple distance-based metrics) and that can
capture travelers’ perceptions of impedance
3. a negative exponential function of generalized cost to capture friction decay
4. the capacity for disaggregation by types of activities and groups and different
levels of spatial resolution.
Additionally, entropy maximization was found to be consistent with utility maximiza-
tion, thus providing a behavioral foundation to the method (Wilson 1971; Reggiani
et al. 2021). Moreover, as a statistical averaging or probability maximizing process,
the method was consistent with Bayesian inference and, accordingly, could be used
in situations where there is a paucity of information or data (Wilson 1970). Thus,
Wilson’s entropy maximization framework provided a statistically grounded, theo-
retically based, and policy-sensitive method (Williams 2019), creating new and
expanding opportunities for urban regional modeling and analysis.
Indeed, the work was revolutionary in both a practical and scientific sense. It
catalyzed a paradigm shift in “theoretical and methodological perspectives on spatial
flows in cities,” essentially replacing sole use of Newtonian principles for spatial
interaction modeling, much like how Newton’s physics paradigm upended the view
of the world developed by Aristotle thousands of years before him. Furthermore,
similar to how Newton’s cosmological synthesis provided a universal and unifying
exposition of the earth and the cosmos enabling others to stand on his shoulders
(including regional scientists!), entropy maximization was an integrated and versatile
foundational methodology upon which other creative individuals could build. As
Wilson himself notes, entropy maximization “opened up a set of ideas that could
be applied more widely … it was a high-level methodology that had applications
in many disciplines” to address a spectrum of problems (Wilson 2010a). Entropy
maximization was also germane to a “wide range of SI phenomena” and “person
movements for different reasons—e.g., commuting, migration, goods movement,
telephone calls, marriage selection, newspaper circulation, bank cheques, and spread
258 L. A. Schintler

of innovation,” and frankly, any system involving spatial interaction and location
behavior (Wilson 1971).
As Morton O’Kelly wrote about Wilson’s book Entropy in urban and regional
modelling: if it “was an initial stock offering, the original units would now have split
many times and the original investors no doubt handsomely rewarded!” (O’Kelly
2010). In fact, many Great Minds (including Alan Wilson) have built on the method,
contributing to various theoretical and methodological advances, including “exten-
sions of the core model, links to mathematical programming, the relationship to
economics, and the introduction of a dynamic spatial structure hypothesis” (Wilson
2010a). Moreover, Wilson’s entropy maximization framework has been applied in
various domains, disciplines, and contexts, including geography, transport, urban
studies, economics, business, migration, criminal justice, defense, security, interna-
tional trade, education, archeology, history, economics, healthcare policy, and polit-
ical science. It has even been referenced in the computational mechanics literature
on modeling stress distributions in rocks (see, e.g., Mishnaevsky 1998).
Figures 2 and 3 provide visual perspectives of the “offspring” of Alan Wilson’s
entropy maximization framework based on citations to his book Entropy in urban and
regional modelling. Figure 2 highlights individuals who have referenced Wilson’s
book, while Fig. 3 shows journals in which these individuals published. In each case,
only the giant component—the largest connected subgraph—is shown. The colors
(shown in the online version only) reflect communities of authors and journals, and
the sizes of the nodes indicate the number of times an author or journal has referenced
the book.

Fig. 2 Main offspring of Alan Wilson’s entropy maximization framework (Authors)

Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man in Regional Science 259

Fig. 3 Main offspring of Alan Wilson’s entropy maximization framework (Journals)

3.2 Evolutionary Dynamics of Complex Urban Systems

An object in motion tends to remain in motion along a straight line unless acted upon by an
outside force.

—Sir Isaac Newton

In the late 1970s, Alan Wilson began to shift gears, reorienting his focus from fast
dynamics in cities to longer-term urban evolution and the “spatial distribution of
people and organizations and corresponding physical structures”—or slow dynamics
(Clarke and Wilson 1983). At this juncture, he was also determined to develop a
“kitbag of techniques” that “could be useful in real-world settings”—from business
to planning (Clarke 2009). Part of his motivation to go off in this direction was to
address a growing number of criticisms of large-scale urban modeling, including that
such models were not practical or accessible (Clarke 2009). Additionally, acceler-
ating improvements in computing capabilities made using microsimulation, cellular
automata, network analysis, agent-based modeling—and computer-simulated solu-
tions to large models—feasible, enabling a shift from simpler to more complex urban
modeling.
Wilson’s first major contribution in this area (with urban planner Britton Harris)
was to demonstrate how the exemplar problem of retail location could be embedded
in a dynamic equilibrium framework (Harris and Wilson 1978). Once again, he
was influenced by Weaver (1948). Specifically, Wilson saw retail competition as a
problem of organized complexity, in which retail outlets are interacting strongly to
compete for customers and revenue. Thus, the appropriate methodological founda-
tions for modeling such phenomena were not in statistical mechanics but instead in
applied nonlinear dynamics (and differential equations) (Harris and Wilson 1978),
260 L. A. Schintler

tools that Sir Isaac Newton had developed and used centuries before Wilson to
characterize spatial dynamics in our universe. Wilson also saw an analogy with
the prey-predatory problem, particularly that “species competing for resources were
similar” to retailers’ rivalry and competitive behavior, thus making Lotka-Volterra
(L-V) equations a suitable basis for model formulation. This work was significant
in that it demonstrated that “nonlinearities and interdependencies can lead to bifur-
cation properties in system development” and, consequently, “the possibility for
multiple equilibria” in urban models. It also marked the beginnings of “a method for
modelling the evolution of cities, using the urban analogue of the equivalent issue in
developmental biology” (Wilson 2018).
Wilson (with geographer Martin Clarke) then moved on to modeling cities in
disequilibrium, recognizing that “systems of organized complexity tend to be out of
equilibrium because the interacting subsystems each have different rates of change”
(Clarke and Wilson 1981; Harris and Wilson 1978). This work’s analytical and math-
ematical underpinnings were in dynamic systems theory and catastrophe theory, as
summarized in his book Catastrophe theory and bifurcation: applications to urban
and regional systems (Wilson 1981). Beginning again with retail location as an
archetypal example, Wilson demonstrated how complex interdependencies between
urban subsystems introduce “new bifurcation properties, which can lead to tran-
sitions at critical values of new parameters from stable solutions to periodic solu-
tions” (Wilson 1981; Clarke and Wilson 1983, 1985). Thus, slight parameter changes
could “flip systems from one state to another,” leading to profoundly different urban
dynamics and structures (Clarke 2009). During this phase of his research, Wilson also
showed how a dynamic systems approach could be integrated with other methods
such as spatial interaction modeling and microsimulation to model interrelated urban
subsystems, including agriculture, industrial location, retailing, residential location,
housing (Clarke and Wilson 1985).
Later, Wilson re-connected with statistical mechanics and thermodynamics. He
realized that Boltzmann’s methods could be applied to a broader range of systems
and disciplines than what was recognized at the time (Wilson 2008). He demon-
strated how Boltzmann techniques and Lotka and Volterra (BLV) equations could
be integrated to model spatial interaction and structural evolution, providing a richer
modeling framework than that based on scale-free networks (Wilson 2009). Addi-
tionally, recognizing that the “use of Ising models in physics represented a kind of
locational structure problem” with dynamics in the form of phase transitions, Wilson
developed a set of analytical frameworks for modeling discontinuous change and
related dynamics in urban systems (Wilson 2009). These models, along with visu-
alization techniques, provided planners with the tools for assessing how to “avoid
undesirable phase transitions” or how to “invest bring about desirable ones” (Wilson
and Dearden 2011).
Alan Wilson was instrumental in bringing microsimulation—including in a
Geographic Information System (GIS) context—to regional science. According to
Wilson, analytical methods are not appropriate for modeling certain kinds of systems,
Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man in Regional Science 261

particularly those for which “there is a lot of heterogeneity amongst components”—

e.g., in healthcare systems involving patients with different characteristics and needs.
In such situations, systems should ideally be modeled from the bottom up.

4 The “Wilsonian” Philosophy

We are certainly not to relinquish the evidence of experiments for the sake of dreams and
vain fictions of our own devising; nor are we to recede from the analogy of Nature, which is
wont to be simple and always consonant to itself.

—Sir Isaac Newton

As highlighted, Alan Wilson has an affinity and flair for solving complex problems.
His philosophy of science, which he began to nurture and articulate in the early
stages of his career (Wilson 1968, 1969a, b, 1972) and continues to follow reli-
giously, is essentially a grand roadmap for problem-solving. In Knowledge power:
Interdisciplinary education for a complex world, he summarizes key aspects of this
philosophy, referred to here as the Wilsonian philosophy. In essence, it is a frame-
work—or “intellectual toolkit”—for engendering the capabilities—or “knowledge
power”—to address complicated and seemingly intractable problems within and
across systems, disciplines, and domains—from research to education to planning
and beyond (Wilson 2010b). In this regard, super-concepts that transcend disci-
plinary boundaries are crucial for developing the breadth and depth of knowledge
necessary for tackling complex problems, as are generalized frameworks and models
for addressing generic issues—i.e., super-problems.
The Wilsonian philosophy exploits concepts and theoretical principles from
complexity as a strategy for handling difficulty and complexity. Thus, to address
problems, a dynamic, systems approach is in order, precisely one that encompasses
the following3 :
1. Systematic and algorithmic approaches, coupled and integrated with abstraction,
artistry, and inquisitiveness (coding, computation, creativity, curiosity)
2. Diversity of methods, perspectives, and strategies along with sensing mecha-
nisms to promote desirable phase transitions and avoid negative ones (control,
consciousness)
3. Sharing of knowledge across and between different groups (i.e., policymakers,
planners, politicians, researchers, administrators, business persons, educa-
tors, and citizens), fields and disciplines, and even humans and machines!
(communication, coordination, collaboration)
4. Lifelong learning to facilitate knowledge accumulation, pattern recognition, and
situational awareness (cognition, classification, culture).

3 Following Andersson’s criteria for a successful society, Wilson believes three C’s—cognitive,
creative, and communication—are necessary for producing knowledge power (Wilson 2010b). I
see a broader set of C’s as necessary ingredients in Wilson’s philosophy.
262 L. A. Schintler

Alan Wilson stresses the importance of abstract thinking, including analytical and
symbolic reasoning, along with systematic and algorithmic approaches, for framing
issues and understanding problems and systems through model-building, testing,
analysis, and evaluation. As a scientific method, he favors hypothetico-deductive
reasoning, which uses theory and abstraction to develop mathematical models that
can be used for systematic testing to draw inferences about a specific example. In
particular, Wilson believes that the “the essence of scientific activity is the making
of hypotheses or theories and the testing of predictions of these against empirical
information and observations” (Wilson 1972), in contrast to the Newtonian inductive
approach, which draws broad generalizations through statistical testing on specific
examples or observations. As he points out, it is impossible to “derive general truths
from facts,” as Newton’s method seems to imply. Theories only represent “the best
approximation to truth at any time” and are, therefore, always subject to change and
the possibility of being invalidated altogether (Wilson 1972).
In fact, Alan Wilson can be credited for bringing the hypothetico-deductive
approach to regional science, particularly at the height of the quantitative geographic
revolution. At the time, he argued that geographers were placing far too much
emphasis on inductive reasoning and empirically driven, statistically based research.
Thus, they were disusing “imagination, invention, deduction, and the various other
mental faculties that contribute to the attainment of a well-tested explanation.”
Quoting Davis and Johnson (1909), Wilson remarks, it is like “walking on one foot,
or looking with one eye, to exclude from geography the ‘theoretical’ half of the
brainpower, upon which other sciences call as well as the ‘practical’” (Wilson 1972).
At the same time, he does not advocate for the complete dismissal of the inductive
approach; both types of reasoning are essential elements of the toolkit to be used
appropriately (Wilson 2010b).
Wilson’s “process of invention” provides a recipe for developing universal analyt-
ical frameworks that can be modified to address and study particular problems at hand.
The process begins with a “good idea”—an analogy from another field or discipline,
which he notes requires “exercises of creative imagination of the highest order,”
although he recognizes that ingenuity is not easily or automatically manufactured.
(As he points out, we do not even yet fully understand how such processes work
and transpire in the human mind!). The next step is to engage model builders from
another field or discipline and apply the model to a new context. The last stage is
to modify models through disaggregation and shifts in scale or level of resolution,
where the nature of the problem under consideration dictates an appropriate lens—
e.g., modeling a household or a neighborhood or sector versus an entire transportation
and land system in a city.
While indeed the use of analogies and metaphors in the regional sciences has a
long tradition (e.g., Newtonian laws of gravitation for modeling spatial interaction),
Alan Wilson can be credited for popularizing and expanding their utilization for
urban modeling and planning (Sui 2010). Wilson believes that analogies are not only
essential for developing novel ideas and solutions, but they also provide a critical
link to urban systems modeling. Here, he distinguishes between direct and formal
analogies, where the former applies to systems with common physical characteristics
Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man in Regional Science 263

and the latter to situations where “there are similarities of form, but not of physical
characteristics.” Formal analogies are the basis of systems science, thus providing
the foundations and motivation for dynamic systems approaches in urban planning
(Clarke and Wilson 1985).
However, as Wilson emphasizes, it is critical to exercise caution when transferring
concepts, methods, and theoretical principles from the natural sciences to the social
sciences. In regional science, analogies must be framed in relevant geographic and
spatial economic theory and offer new interpretations of existing theories of cities
and regions (Wilson 1969a, b). Moreover, models borrowed from other fields must be
tailored to the particular problem being modeled or analyzed which. At the end of the
day, the analogy must be tossed out, and one should arrive at concepts that cut across
disciplinary boundaries—i.e., “super-concepts.” According to Wilson, entropy is one
of those super-concepts. Specifically, entropy maximization is not a “strict” analogy
from physics but rather a higher-level model and conceptual frame of reference that
can be applied broadly across disparate disciplines and contexts (Wilson 2021).4
The Wilsonian philosophy emphasizes the vital role that technology (especially
the computer) plays in understanding and solving complex problems across different
domains. In this regard, it is imperative to always be on the frontier of new computing
capacities and capabilities, to assess and exploit what can be done with the state of
technology at any point in time. Modeling large, complex systems requires using
computers for simulation purposes and solving the equations, as opposed to simpler
systems, which are handled analytically in algebraic or other terms (Wilson 2010a, b).
However, Wilson does not view computers as mere calculating machines; computers
also provide a powerful mode of communication and artistry. For example, with the
advent of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in the 1970s, he immediately saw
the potential of computerized mapping to visualize the inputs and outputs of analysis
and modeling, ultimately making them more palatable and compelling to end-users.
Moreover, according to Wilson, computer-based visualization is also a way to “see”
cities and regions in ways not possible with the raw data alone. As he remarks,
“A colour map is worth a thousand lines of code!” In all these ways, “there is a
critical interaction between computer power and mind power”—i.e., human–machine
synergy, is a dimension of knowledge power (Wilson 2010b).
One of the primary tasks of the planner is to anticipate and control the trajectory
of a system of interest—e.g., a city or institute of higher education. Yet, this poses
an array of challenges, especially for systems of organized complexity, which are
subject to path-dependent processes, nonlinearities, and phase transitions, artifacts
that are difficult to predict. Additional challenges relate to the fact that the same
events do not recur over time in social and economic systems, unlike natural systems
where similar events are repeated, making their future paths easier to anticipate.
As maintained by Alan Wilson, modeling and visualization are essential tools for
understanding and managing these complexities and ultimately steering the course
of a system in a desirable direction. In particular, models enable one to conduct

4This is a point Wilson made in reaction to a leading article in a planning journal (“People are not
Particles”), which asserted that he was using a rigid analogy from physics (Wilson 2021).
264 L. A. Schintler

“what if” forecasting scenarios to assess how different interventions might impact
the structure and dynamics of a system. Through sensitivity analysis, it is possible
to assess the spectrum of possible outcomes given different parameter settings and
initial conditions and generate what Wilson refers to as “possibility cones,” an idea
inspired by hurricane prediction cones. For urban planning, the “DNA” of a city can
be used “to explore and visualize the possibilities of transition given the structural
starting point,” which, as Wilson notes, is a sort of “genetic medicine’ approach”
(Wilson 2009). This tactic is beneficial in that it limits the “space of development
possibilities by focusing on a set of starting conditions.”
According to Wilson, cyberneticist and psychologist Ross Ashby’s Law of Requi-
site Variety, which specifies that the controlling system “must have at least as much
variety as the system it is trying to control in order to be effective,” provides addi-
tional insight on how to manage complex systems (Wilson 2010b). In this regard,
a maximum diversity of approaches—integrating “the best of the ideas from this
variety”—is imperative, especially for ensuring that “a variety of attacks on prob-
lems is possible” (Wilson 1968). Further, inspired by the work of neuroscientists
Karl Friston and Klaus Stephan, Wilson envisages the planning system as a human
brain. He argues that planners can intervene in an urban system to promote desirable
outcomes, similar to how the brain minimizes free energy to avoid phase transitions
(Wilson 2009; Deardon and Wilson 2011). Combining this idea with Ashby’s Law,
he concludes, “If the brain is replaced by ‘urban planning system’ and its environ-
ment by ‘the city,’” then “the planning system has to model the city in order to have
a chance of success”—i.e., modeling is key to effectively controlling a complex,
urban system (Wilson 2009). Moreover, as Wilson observes, Ashby’s Law of Requi-
site Variety and Friston’s free energy model are two sides of the same coin: They
both come down to entropy maximization!
Finally, the Wilsonian philosophy stresses the importance of coordination, collab-
oration, and communication between all partners in the “knowledge space” (i.e.,
scientists, educators, administrators, planners, policymakers, politicians) (Wilson
2010b). Each entity has unique knowledge to bear, and thus through the exchange of
knowledge, the knowledge power of each entity can be maximized. Planners must
have a solid understanding of policy to articulate objectives and decide what the plan-
ning process should ultimately achieve (Wilson 1968). Planners and policymakers
should be cognizant of the political process, as it dictates what plans are eventu-
ally implemented (Wilson 1968). In this respect, performance indicators are helpful;
they provide a way for communicating effectively with politicians to argue for the
best alternatives (Wilson 1968). There should also be a two-way exchange between
researchers and planners, both of whom have an action focus. Research is necessary
for stimulating innovations in modeling, and planning provides a real-world labora-
tory for testing and evaluating models (Wilson 1968). Lastly, educators play a crucial
role in the entire system, especially in shaping the minds of future regional scientists
and practitioners by providing them with the skills and tools, along with the creative
capacities necessary for solving complicated problems through knowledge power
(Wilson 1968, 2010b).
Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man in Regional Science 265

5 Concluding Remarks

In one person he combined the experimenter, the theorist, the mechanist—and, not the least,
the artist in exposition.

—Albert Einstein writing about Newton

Alan Wilson is a gravitational force in regional science. He is a great attractor,

bringing together ideas and people to advance our knowledge of cities and regions
and enhance our ability to analyze, model, and predict such systems, not unlike how
Sir Isaac Newton integrated and unified the body of knowledge at his time, revolu-
tionizing our understanding of the celestial and terrestrial worlds and our capacity to
model such phenomena mathematically. However, contrary to Newton, who quipped,
“I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people,” Alan
Wilson has expanded our ability to model “people in motion,” especially in an urban
and regional context.
Indeed, Alan Wilson is a person of many talents, including those of an artistic
and creative nature. He is a polymath with breadth and depth of knowledge and
insight across and within a spectrum of disciplines, domains, and contexts. He has
an insatiable curiosity about cities and regions—how they work, how they can be
modeled, and how they can be disrupted in ways that advance societal interests. He
also exhibits determination and perseverance in all of his endeavors. These are the
traits common to all Renaissance Men in history (Elfmar and Griffiths 2012)—from
Aristotle to Sir Isaac Newton to Ada Lovelace to Albert Einstein to Alan Turing.
Accordingly, Alan Wilson is aptly referred to as a Renaissance Man in Regional
Science.

References

Batty, M. 1975. Book review: Urban and regional models in geography and planning by AG Wilson.
Chichester: Wiley. 1974 418pp. Urban Studies 12 (2): 235–236.
Boyce, D.E., and H.C. Williams. 2015. Forecasting urban travel: Past, present and future.
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Carrothers, G.A. 1956. An historical review of the gravity and potential concepts of human
interaction. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 22 (2): 94–102.
Clarke, G. 2011. Alan Wilson. In Key thinkers on space and place, 2nd ed., eds. P. Hubbard and R.
Kitchin, 477–482. New York: Sage.
Clarke, M., and A.G. Wilson. 1981. The dynamics of urban spatial structure: Some exploratory
results using difference equations and bifurcation theory. Environment and Planning A 13 (12):
1473–1483.
Clarke, M., and A.G. Wilson. 1983. The dynamics of urban spatial structure: Progress and problems.
Journal of Regional Science 23 (1): 1–18.
Clarke, M., and A.G. Wilson. 1985. The dynamics of urban spatial structure: The progress of a
research programme. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 10: 427–451.
Clarke, G. 2009. A. Wilson. In International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, eds. R. Kitchin
and N. Thrift, 260–261. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
266 L. A. Schintler

Davis, W.M., and D.W. Johnson. 1909. Geographical essays. Boston: Ginn.
Elfmar, E., and S. Griffiths. 2012. Beyond genius: The 12 essential traits of today’s Renaissance
Men. Bloomington, IN: Author House.
Gombrich, C., and T.P. Oléron-Evans. 2019. Introduction: Interdisciplinary research and its impacts:
From entropy to education in the work of Alan Wilson. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 44 (3–4):
227–231.
Gould, P. 1972. Pedagogic review. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 62 (4):
689–700.
Harris, B., and A.G. Wilson. 1978. Equilibrium values and dynamics of attractiveness terms in
production-constrained spatial-interaction models. Environment and Planning A 10 (4): 371–388.
Jaynes, E.T. 1957. Information theory and statistical mechanics. Physical Review 106: 620–630.
Johnston, R. 2019. Encountering Alan Wilson, filling the gaps in data sets (from the knowns to
the unknowns)…and disciplinary history/progress. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 44 (3–4):
301–318.
Kelly, J. 2003. Top man: Mathematician, geographer, vice chancellor, Sir Alan Wilson, the new
director general of higher education at the DfES, has a reputation for solving complicated
problems. He talks to Jim Kelly (No. PRESSCUT-2003–449, p. 12).
Le Lionnais, F. 1969. Science is an art. Leonardo 2 (1): 73–78.
Mishnaevsky, L., Jr. 1998. Rock fragmentation and optimization of drilling tools. In Fracture of
rock, ed. L.H. Adiabadi, 167–203. Computational Mechanics Publications.
O’Kelly, M.E. 2010. Entropy-based spatial interaction models for trip distribution. Geographical
Analysis 42 (4): 472–487.
Reggiani, A., L.A. Schintler, D. Czamanski, and R. Patuelli, 2021. Handbook of entropy, complexity
and spatial dynamics: A rebirth of theory? Cheltenham, UK, and Northhampton, MA, USA:
Edward-Elgar.
Riesz, M. 2017. An interview with Alan Wilson. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/people/
interview-sir-alan-wilson-alan-turing-institute (Last accessed 23 April 2022).
Sui, D. 2010. The spatial century and the renaissance of geography. GeoWorld 23 (3): 14.
Waldorf, B.S., M. Batty, M. Chatterji, K. Donaghy, A. Fingleton, A. Getis, M.J. Greenwood, D.P.
McMillen, G. Mulligan, J. Oosterhaven, P. Schaeffer, and D. Shefer. 2004. Path-breaking books
in regional science. Papers in Regional Science 83 (1): 59–89.
Weaver, W. 1948. Science and complexity. American Scientist 36 (4): 536–544.
Williams, H. 2019. The contribution of Sir Alan Wilson to spatial interaction and transport
modelling. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 44 (3–4): 232–248.
Wilson, A. 1967. A statistical theory of spatial distribution models. Transportation Research 1 (3):
253–269.
Wilson, A. 1968. Models in urban planning: A synoptic review of recent literature. Urban Studies
5 (3): 249–276.
Wilson, A.G. 1971. A family of spatial interaction models, and associated developments.
Environment and Planning A 3 (1): 1–32.
Wilson, A.G. 1972. Theoretical geography: Some speculations. Transactions of the Institute of
British Geographers 57: 31–44.
Wilson, A. 1981. Catastrophe theory and bifurcation: Applications to urban and regional systems.
Abington, UK: Routledge.
Wilson, A. 2008. Boltzmann, Lotka and Volterra and spatial structural evolution: An integrated
methodology for some dynamical systems. Journal of the Royal Society Interface 5 (25): 865–871.
Wilson, A. 2009. The “thermodynamics” of the city. In Complexity and spatial networks, eds. A.
Reggiani and P. Nijkamp, 11–31. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer.
Wilson, A. 2010a. Entropy in urban and regional modelling: Retrospect and prospect. Geographical
Analysis 42 (4): 364–394.
Wilson, A. 2010b. Knowledge power: Interdisciplinary education for a complex world. Abington,
UK: Routledge.
Alan Wilson (1939–): A Renaissance Man in Regional Science 267

Wilson, A. 2018. The future of urban modelling. Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy 11 (4):
647–655.
Wilson, A. 1969a. Notes on some concepts in social physics. Papers of the Regional Science
Association 22 (1): 159-193.
Wilson, A. 1969b. The use of analogies in geography. Geographical Analysis 1 (3): 225-233.
Wilson, A. 1970. Entropy in urban and regional modelling. London: Pion. (Reprinted in 2012 by
Routledge.)
Wilson, A. 2021. Entropy in urban and regional modelling. In Handbook of entropy, complexity and
spatial dynamics: A rebirth of theory? eds. A. Reggiani, L.A. Schintler, D. Czamanski, and R.
Patuelli, 20–31. Cheltenham, UK, and Northhampton, MA, USA: Edward-Elgar.
Wilson, A., and J. Dearden. 2011. Phase transitions and path dependence in urban evolution. Journal
of Geographical Systems 13 (1): 1–16.