View
218
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
1/24
lark University
The Roepke Lecture in Economic Geography Urban Restructuring from a DemographicPerspectiveAuthor(s): W. A. V. ClarkSource: Economic Geography, Vol. 63, No. 2 (Apr., 1987), pp. 103-125Published by: Clark UniversityStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/144149.
Accessed: 23/07/2014 10:56
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Clark Universityis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toEconomic Geography.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=clarkhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/144149?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/144149?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=clark8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
2/24
E O N O
EGR PHY
VOL.
63
APRIL,
1987 No. 2
THE
ROEPKE LECTURE IN ECONOMIC
GEOGRAPHY
URBAN
RESTRUCTURING
FROM A DEMOGRAPHIC
PERSPECTIVE
v
W. A. V. CLARK
University of California,
Los
Angeles
The central argument of this paper is that recent research has overemphasized
the notions of
urban
restructuring and undervalued the role of spatial demograph-
ics in understanding urban and region spatial patterns.
The paper examines the
notions
embedded in urban restructuring and suggests
that a focus on several
elements of
demographic processes
is
an equally important
component of under-
standing
urban and
region spatial structure.
A
specific discussion
of the Los Angeles
region indicates that there is a high level of complexity in social-spatial change.
Social-spatial change is not simply explained by reference to an unspecified urban
restructuring.
The central theme of this paper
is that
the notion
of urban
restructuring,
at least
as currently expressed, has undervalued
the
role
of demographic change
and
especially
its spatial expression. To under-
stand the changes
in
spatial patterning
it is
insufficient to
view residential structure in
class
terms alone.
The
paper
both argues
theoretically
and
demonstrates
empiri-
cally that a spatial demographic focus is
central
to
understanding regional
change,
and
the intersection
of
economic
and
demographic analyses
offers a
rich
poten-
tial for understanding spatial
patterns.
'The Roepke
Lecture in Economic Geography
was
established to honor the late
Professor
Howard
G.
Roepke
who served on the
faculty
of
the Univer-
sity
of
Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign
from 1952
until
1985. The lecturer
is
chosen
by
the
geography
faculty of that institution in consultation with the
editor
of this
journal.
The
paper was
read
at
the
Annual
Meeting of the Association
of American
Geographers,
April,
1987. The
author
would like to
thank
Art
Getis
and
David Plane
for
their
comments
at
the
presentation
of
this
paper
and Eric Moore and
David
Angel
for
comments
and
suggestions
on ear-
lier
drafts of
the
material.
The
linking
of several
social-economic
dimensions
provides
the
basis for
an
extended research
agenda, rather than an
agenda
organized
around
restructuring
per se.
And,
the
emphasis
on urban re-
structuring
as
a result of
the division of
labor obscures the
complex set of
social-
economic forces which
generate
spatial
patterns.
Even though the notions of restructur-
ing are often
related to the spatial
division
of
labor,
criticism
of urban
restructuring
is not necessarily
a criticism of the
spatial
division of labor.
Indeed,
the
notions of
the division of
labor,
the
role
of the
state,
and the
reproduction
of
labor
have
en-
riched
our
understanding
of
societal rela-
tions.
But,
at
the same
time, the
attempt to
focus
on
the
commodity
production sys-
tem
in
space
has
led
to a
denigration
of
the
important roles of
migration
and
fer-
tility,
household
composition
change, and
altered
family
lifestyles. Massey
[41] sug-
gests that
economics and
economic geog-
raphy
have been
silent on
the
central and
critical
issues
of the
division of
labor
[41];
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
3/24
104
ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY
the
contention
of this
paper
is that
the
urban
restructuring literature, by recog-
nizing only the role of production,
has
erred
in the
opposite
direction.
From
the
perspective of
this
paper,
an analysis
which can blend variables that capture
spatial
economic change and spatial
demographic
change
is the
challenge
in
creating
a richer spatial analysis.
We must
also recognize
that the
changes
that are
propelled by economic and demographic
forces
are
subject
to
policy
interven-
tions-but
the role of
the state must
be
seen as
more than a
class-based
interven-
tion.
The body of this paper reviews recent
theoretical debates,
outlines the notions
of restructuring, discusses the notion of a
demographic
imperative and demo-
graphic change, and evaluates the
impacts
of state intervention
in
urban structures.
METHODOLOGICAL DEBATES
The
rapidity
of
spatial
economic
change, city growth,
and suburbanization
following the Second World War cap-
tured the attention of economists and
geographers alike.
One of the
outcomes
was
a
more process-oriented
economic
geography.
The new economic geography
epitomized
the notion that analytical
methods devoted to understanding
eco-
nomic activities
in
space would yield real
advances
in
knowledge.
The old concern
with
describing
the
locations
of coal, iron
ore, and steel fabricating plants was re-
placed
with the search for general laws of
locational forces.
As
part
of
the
ongoing
attempt
to
develop
better theoretical
structures,
so-
cial
physicists
within
geography argued
that
human
beings obey
mathematical
rules,
resembling
in
a general way, some
of
the laws of
physics [66].
The thrust of
social
physics
and its translation
as
spatial
analysis
was
to
change
the concern
in
geography from the unique, the micro-
scopic,
and the focus on
regions,
to
a con-
cern with
models, laws,
and
systematic
geography. Throughout
the
1960s,
the
geography agenda
was
concerned
with
turning geography into a science. The
particular emphasis on
geometry (espe-
cially of central places) was
unique to
geography,
but the
use of statistical and
mathematical approaches was
paralleled
by an increasing concern with mathemat-
ics
in
anthropology, political
science, and
sociology. Thus, a major
core of geog-
raphy emphasized space, spatialrelations,
and change
in
space.
An
obvious exten-
sion was to focus on the
structuring (or
organization)
of
space-how individuals
relate through space, and how they have
organized society
in
space [46, p. 3].
Not
surprisingly, a solely
geometrical
approach to space was eventually ques-
tioned by geographers, who
were
both-
ered by
both the strict limits
of the
geomet-
rical approach and the strong assumptions
of economic man
that were often
em-
bedded
in
geography as spatial
analysis
[29; 56].
The
behaviorists
argued that the
models being developed were not very
good descriptions
of
reality,
and that
geographical theory
was
developing
slowly,
if
at
all.
To behavioral geogra-
phers, if geography deals only with points
and
lines on
maps,
it
might
utilize
geome-
try
as
its
approach.
If it
is
more
than that,
then
the laws
of
geometry
are insufficient
to build a science
of
geography.
Geome-
try
alone
is
insufficient as a basis for
explanation
and
prediction,
since no
proc-
esses are involved
in
the derivation
of
geometries
[59].
Behavioral geography was a 1970s re-
sponse to the geometrical/economic man
approach
of the 1950s
and 1960s.
In
some
ways,
it
was a continuation of
earlier
attempts
to
develop approaches
which
did
not
fit
easily
into
the
notions
of
profit
maximizing decision making or
(travel)
distance
minimization
on
which the
geo-
metrical
approaches
to
geography
had
been
built.
The
focus
on the
way
in
which
choices
are
made and
the
way
in
which
knowledge
influenced those
choices,
in
essence,
the decision
process
in
a
spatial
context,
formed
the
basis
for
a
broadened
geography.
Interest
shifted from location
in
space
to
processes
in
space
and
the
desire
to
derive
alternative theories
to
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
4/24
URBAN
RESTRUCTURING
105
those which
are based on economic man.
The concern was
more with why activi-
ties take place
and with the patterns they
produce
in
space,
rather than location per
se.
While
neoclassical
economics and
geometry were important underpinnings
for geography
as a
spatial science,
behav-
ioral geographers looked to psychology
for help
in
understanding decision mak-
ing
in
space.
These two themes, geography as
ge-
ometry
and
locational
analysis, and geog-
raphy as cognitive
process, effectively
dominated
geography
through
the
mid-
1970s.
They
were
in
some sense structural
and behavioral, or macro-contextual con-
cerns (albeit
rather
narrowly
focused),
and
micro-household foci.
But, beginning
in
the 1970s
and
continuing
to the
present,
we have had a considerable
fragmenta-
tion and a
greater
concern
with the
under-
lying philosophical
issues
of
research
in
geography
and
the
nature
of the
links
between individual action and
social
structure.
Much
of the debate was and
is still
stimulated by the desire to achieve a
broader, overarching theory of, geo-
graphic analysis.
The debates over action
and
structure
took
place
within
the cruci-
ble of
arguments
about
the role of
positiv-
ism
or,
more strictly, post-positivism. The
alternative
foci included
humanism,
real-
ism, and, most recently,
issues of structur-
alism
and the context
within
which indi-
vidual
behavior occurs. Most recently,
the concern to develop a theory of society
has revolved
around investigations of
the
structure of
capitalism,
and,
in
the
late-
1970s,
there was
a
vigorous debate
about
the value of neo-Marxist
approaches
to
understanding society
and
its
forms. Much
of the debate utilized class relations as the
point
of
departure,
and
the task
was to
work out the
links
between
production
(as
related
to
class)
and all other elements
of
society.
In
part,
this
focus
on
produc-
tion
can
be seen as a reaction to the
focus
on cities as
centers of
consumption
and on
issues of micro-behavior
rather than
macro-structures.
The debates about how
to
understand
late
twentieth
century ur-
ban patterns now emphasize cities as cen-
ters of production. The claim is that, in
order to understand society at large, we
need to understand production which
drives
the
city.
From
this
perspective,
to
understand residential communities, it is
necessary to understand the role of pro-
duction.
A
survey of this extensive literature
reveals at least three important threads
which are central
in
the development of
the theory
of
society
from the
perspective
of
a
new economic
geography.
There
is
a
concern
with the
spatial
division
of labor
which emphasizes
the
relationship
of la-
bor to industry [41; 68], the examination
of the reproduction of labor [32; 54], and
the studies of the role of the state [7; 8;
38].
These
notions,
whether
identified
as
neo-Marxist or the new economic geog-
raphy, are a coherent set of ideas aimed at
explaining society.
Of
course, they
are
not the only overarching theoretical per-
spectives. The notions embedded
in
the
new housing economics [17], the con-
strained choice concepts [51], and even
accounting approaches to societal change
are
competing
theories
[60].
THE NOTION OF
RESTRUCTURING
Out of the methodological debates,
and
particularly
the discussions of the
division
of
labor,
the ideas
of
restructur-
ing-sometimes urban restructuring-
have emerged. Restructuring
is
the ter-
minology used to describe technological
and organizational changes
in
production
and
their
spatial expression [4].
Some
have suggested
that
restructuring should
be
the central
concept
of
an economic
geography
of
contemporary capitalism
[64]. Although restructuring appears
to
have more than one meaning, at
its
most
general,
it
appears
to refer to the
complex
of
organizational changes occurring
in
industry and their spatial outcomes [3; 52;
61]. Bluestone and Harrison [3] in particu-
lar
argue that fundamental changes
in
the
organization
of
industry (which operates
largely
within
urban
regions)
have
given
rise to an overall urban restructuring.
But
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
5/24
106
ECONoMic
GEOGRAPHY
an attempt to
delve beneath
the simple
terminology
of urban
restructuring
raises
several
questions
or problems.
First,
at the most elementary
level,
are
the (present)
changes in industry
and
society anything more than a continua-
tion of processes
that began
50 to
100
years ago?
The common description
in-
vokes urban
restructuring
as a situation
or
process
in
which there
has been a series
of structural changes
which have signifi-
cantly
modified the social and economic
geography
of
the region
... a comprehen-
sive process
of urban restructuring
[64,
p. 195].
At
least implicitly,
the changes
are typified as different from ones that
have
occurred
in
the past, and
thus the
term urban
restructuring
is
designed
to
reflect
a new type
of change
or a new
social and
spatial reorganization
of
the
urban region.
(The empirical
question
of
whether
the
changes
are
different
will be
taken
up
later
in
the discussion.)
A
second
question
revolves around
the
extent
to which the
notion of
restructur-
ing appears
to be general,
that is, applies
to
both social and economic processes.
In
particular,
the focus
of the
urban
restruc-
turing
discussion
is on the way
in
which
labor
is
organized
and
how labor
inter-
sects
with capital. To
this
extent,
the new
division
of
labor [41 ]
is
the
linchpin
of the
notion of urban
restructuring.
The
impli-
cation
is
that all
processes
can
be
drawn
(ultimately)
from the
division
of labor.
A
third issue
is
that
the
discussions
of
restructuring are largely empirical with
little
theorization beyond relying
on
the
changing organization
of
industry.
In
some sense,
urban restructuring appears
almost as
an
appendage
to the
more
complex
notions of the division of
labor.
Restructuring
as a function of
the spatial
division
of labor
is
most clearly
enun-
ciated
by
Massey [41],
who
argues
that
behind
major
shifts
between
dominant
spatial
divisions
of labor
lie
changes
in
the
spatial
organization
of
capitalist
relations
of
production
which
together
produce
a
particular
form
of
spatial patterning
of
society [41, p. 8].
Massey's presentation
and a
companion presentation
by
Storper
and
Walker [68]
uses the organizing
con-
cept spatial
structures of production
as
an approach
to increase
our understand-
ing
of how
those firms with
an internal
division
of labor are
able to take advan-
tage of geographical differences within
the
labor
force. Now, the working
out of
this
structure,
at least as presented
by
Massey,
is largely firm based.
Massey
notes
that spatially
differentiated
pat-
terns of production
are one of
the
bases
of
geographical
variation
in
social
structure
and class
relations. They are
not the only
cause,
but
they
are
significant
[41,
p.
117].
In
a
substantial portion
of Massey's
book, the examples suggest that spatial
social separation
is
the outcome
of the
spatial
division
of labor. To Massey spa-
tial reorganization
is
an important
aspect
of industrial reorganization
and regions
are a product
of such processes [41,
p.
196].
There is evidence
that an
analysis of
industrial location
based on
the division
of
labor has enriched
our
understanding
of
how
changes
in
industrial organization
and
the labor
process
have reshaped
the
territoriality
of
employment
[41; 68]. But,
as
Martin
[40]
has
succinctly noted,
it
has
much
less to say on
the geography
of
labor supply
and
on the exchange process
in
the
local labor
market.
As a result, it
provides
an
incomplete conceptual
frame-
work
in
which to analyze
the complex
interplay
of demand and
supply
or of the
exchange process
in
the local labor mar-
ket [40, p. 571]. Martin goes further to
emphasize
the need
to
incorporate
con-
sideration
of
the
distinct
social and
insti-
tutional
mechanisms
that
generate
the
hierarchically
arranged secondary
asym-
metries
of
labour-market
segmentation,
mechanisms
that cannot
be simply 'read
Qff' rom or reduced
to the basic
dualism
between capital
and
labor
[40, p. 571].
Urban
restructuring
is
much more than
industrial
change,
and
there are
many
components
at the individual
level.
In
a
slightly
different
vein,
but
reflecting
a
similar
concern, Ley [37]
also
questions
the simple
notion
of a
powerful
elite
(cap-
ital)
in
the
structuring
and
restructuring
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
6/24
URBAN
RESTRUCTURING
107
of urban
land.
In
a review of
Hartman's
(1984) study of San
Francisco, he notes
that the
collusion between business
and
local-political interest
was repeatedly dis-
torted or interrupted
by idiosyncratic
events. He argues, as a result, that to
really
understand the way in
which the
structuring
and restructuring of
urban
land
occurred requires that the
black
box
of
urban culture be
opened and
its
dynamic
be
fully
assessed
[37, p. 534].
URBAN
RESTRUCTURING FROM
A
DEMOGRAPHIC PERSPECTIVE
Between the conceptual notions of the
spatial
division of
labor, the
role
of the
state,
and
the reproduction of labor
and
the ideas of
restructuring there
is
a set of
concepts
that
relate
to
processes
at a more
specific scale. These include
(among oth-
ers)
the
mobility
of labor
(to metropoli-
tan
areas), changes
in
fertility, changing
household
dynamics, local
mobility, and
the state
management
of
populations.
These have often been the
focus
of
specific
investigations within urban and economic
geography.
These
concepts are at a
differ-
ent level
of
generalization
than
the pre-
vious
discussions
of
higher level
theories
(Figure 1). In
addition,
these
concepts
involve,
explicitly or
implicitly,
descrip-
tive statements of their spatial expression.
We
need to
know about
these
phenomena,
but
they are not
a
theory
of society,
nor
do
they replace
the
search for
higher lev-
els
of
theory.
Also,
the
variables
embed-
ded
in
these
concepts
are not
exogenous.
Household
composition
and its
changes
reflect an
interplay
of
both
economic
and
geographic
forces. Now, at
the
same
time,
there is
the
possibility of
higher
level theorizing about demographic proc-
esses,
as
illustrated
by
the
attempts to
understand
population
processes,
espe-
cially
fertility
changes
at a
global
level
[15; 8]
the
use
of
spatial
demographic
accounting
as
a
process
monitoring ap-
proach to
population
change [72],
and the
attempts
to
link
population
and
resources
[19].
The
individual
processes identified
in
Figure
1
also have a
theoretical com-
ponent.
While
geographers
have
focused
largely on issues of migration [19; 13] and
Spatial
Division
Reproduction
Role
of
the
State
of
Labor
of
Labor
Changes
LclMblt
Mobility
in
Fertility
State
Management
of
Labor
Household
of
PopulAtioA
Dynamics
Migration
RESTRUCTURING
OF
POPULATION
AT
THE
LOCAL
LEVEL
Fig.
1.
Relationships
among
restructuring
and
demographic
concepts.
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
7/24
108
ECONOMIC
GEOGRAPHY
spatial interaction
[22;
53],
the decline in
mortality,
the
accelerating rate of
popula-
tion
growth,
and the
increasing
contrasts
in population structures between the 'de-
veloped
and
developing
world
have em-
phasized the role of demography and
population analysis as a critical
compo-
nent of understanding a complex
society.
Accelerating population growth rates, in-
creasing urbanization, and the associated
problems of hunger and malnutrition
and
of
environmental degradation
led to a
concern with understanding the role of
population processes and
their
intersec-
tion with
the
economic structure.
In arguing for the necessity of under-
standing urban change, the
focus of
this
paper
is
necessarily
directed
to the four
structures
in the
middle level
of
Figure
1.
Although
the
diagram suggests
a
linearity
in the
relationships,
it is obvious that
indi-
vidual
change (economic change)
can
influence population patterns just as
we
argue
here that
population processes
in-
fluence restructuring. However, the
focus here
is
on the
way
in
which
each of
these components-regional population
shifts, fertility change, household dynam-
ics, local mobility, and
state
managed
population distributions-are
central to
understanding localized population
change.
A
similar
emphasis
on
empirical/
conceptual analysis
is
suggested by
Fin-
cher
[21].
How
do
these
components
relate to local
and
to place specific
change?
The changing flows of population na-
tionally,
regionally (from frostbelt to
sunbelt), and
from
cities to
suburbs have
been
the
subject
of scores
of
articles
from
both
geographic
and economic
perspec-
tives. Suffice
it
to say that the spatial redis-
tributions
have rearranged the patterns
of
groups within
cities
and have major
im-
plications
for the
declining
and
growing
regions.
The
selective migration
of the
elderly [28]
and the
selective
in-migration
of
new immigrants [43]
have created
situations
where
in
some
parts
of the
country
there are under-utilized
or
va-
cated
facilities,
while
in
other
growth
areas, population
increases
have created
problems
for local governments
gener-
ally and
especially for local
school sys-
tems.
International
population
flows are a
good example
of multiple-determined
phenomena, which in turn create com-
plex social
spatial patterns.
Certainly, the
modern
state
influences the labor supply
needed for economic
development. In-
ternational migrations
are more
than
the
sum of individual
motivations, but we
should
not undervalue the powerful
indi-
vidual drives-individual
economic ad-
vancement,
the desire
for education, and
increases in human
welfare. Not all shifts
in population are simply tied to changing
economic conditions.
The major
immi-
gration
flows reiterate again
the necessity
of
understanding
the demographic
im-
perative
in
parallel
to economic changes.
While Greenwood
[31] has provided ex-
tensive disequilibrium
models
of popula-
tion flows, Clark
[6]
has suggested the
importance of government
programs
in
influencing the
shifts of population.
However,
Morrill [48] has raised
serious
issues about the extent to which a society,
even
in
the search
for social
justice,
can
take on the role
of
preserving
a given
geographical
structure.
The
way
in
which
policy
is
exerted
has
particular
geographic
impacts-not
all
of them welcome ones.
This
paper
addresses
the tension
between
policy
and outcome
in
a later section.
The
flows of
population
are
not
inde-
pendent
of
changing
fertility
and the
differences in fertility between native and
immigrant populations.
The
last decade
of
the twentieth
century
will be the
period
in
which
the baby boom generation
will
continue to mature. Fertility
will remain
low. Some demographers
have described
it
as the
maturation
of
the U.S.
population
[66]. Population
age pyramids
indicate
that the
passage
of the
baby
boom
popu-
lation will effectively
elongate
the
age
pyramid,
which
will become
something
closer
to a
rectangle
at
least for
the
Anglo
population.
The
U.S.
will
eventually par-
allel the
demographic
shifts
that
are well
in
place
in
Western European
nations
(Figure
2).
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
8/24
URBAN
RESTRUCTURING 109
n
2E
co
o
)
C
co
co
co
C)LL
0
a
0
c
c
0~~~~~~0
0~~~~~~~
n _
0
co
>,
0~~~~~~~~~
02 S~~~~~
)
m
m
o
CL~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ZO O
_.
zT
w
C))
D
cn~~~~~~
0)~~~~~~~~~.........
.0%....HIS...PANIC--
................
...........
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~
~
~
C
..............
...
... .........
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~0
>60%
BLACK~~~~~.............
........... ........
.....
..........
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
5
........
...
......
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
L.A. CITY
IMITS~~~~~~~~~~~~....
..
...
.....
....................
....
:
....
........
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0
L.A.......
........
CHOOL......
DISTRICTOUND
RY...
..........
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Fig. 5. Theos Angeles
School District and
its ethnic
ompos.t.on.in.1980.
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
18/24
URBAN
RESTRUCTURING
119
population.
Part
of
the decline
in
white
enrollments
is related to differential
out-
migration
(Table 8). In fact, most
of
the
very recent
increase
in
total
enrollment
(1985-1986) is due to
changes
in
the
numbers of
Hispanics and Asians
(Figure
6). While the public enrollment declined,
private enrollment
increased (part of the
white
flight
from the
public
school
sys-
tem). The
total
numbers went
from
ap-
proximately 85,000 to 107,000
n
the period
1974-1982.
Private
school enrollment is
not broken down
by race,
but it
is
largely
white.
The demographic process
of
de-
clining
school
enrollments,
principally
declining
white
enrollments,
is
related to
the decline in the number of children of
school
age.
The issue
is
whether these
losses were
unusually large
during the
years of intervention and whether
there
were spatial implications of the
interven-
tion.
TABLE 8
POPULATION ELOCATION
N SOUTHERN
ALIFORNIA,
975-1980
NET
MIGRATION
F
IIOUSEHOLDS ITH
CHILDREN,
Destination
Surrounding
Rest of
L.A.
County Counties
State
Origin [lisp. +11720 +1800 +1640
White
+6560 +7720
t5120
L.A.
City Black
+7840 +840
-8405
Source:
Public
Use
Tapes,
1980.
The
enrollment losses
and
gains
show
relatively
steady changes
over time.
However, an
analysis of rates of
loss and
gain
are more
informative with
respect
to
an
analysis
of
interventions.
Diagrams
of
rates of loss and gain show that in the
early
1970s rates of
white
enrollment
loss
were
in
the
range
of
five to ten
percent,
but
during
the
interval of
mandatory
reassignment,
the loss
rates of white
stu-
dents
exceeded 15
percent
in
some
years
330
|Ns
Other,'
CO)
280d
o
NWhite
o
Ns,,
0
3 0
Z
.
\\
1B8l0a|ck4
\-
Z
1
3 0
-
__
80-
0
1-
-- |
1
1
1
70
72
74
76
78 80 82
84
YEAR
Fig.
6. Total pupil
enrollment
in the
Los Angeles
school
system.
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
19/24
120
ECONoMIc
GEOGRAPHY
(Figure 7). As the graphs
show, while
Hispanics
increased in enrollment as well
as
percent,
whites
declined in
numbers,
and
the rates of
loss
were
greatest
during
the
period 1978-81. These
district-wide
discussions of loss rates mask the changes
in specific regions.
In some
regions and
schools, especially
in
the San
Fernando
Valley (Figure 8) where
there
were man-
datory assignments
to
central black
schools,
loss
rates of 40%
ccurred.
There
is
little
doubt that
white losses
were exacerbated
during the process of
mandatory busing. This finding is
similar
to the
finding
of
several other
authors
who have examined white enrollment
change [59].
What was the
effect on the
levels
of
integration
in
the system? The
graphs
indicate that the
indices for
all
schools
changed
from
dissimilarity
and
exposure
levels
of
approximately 0.7 to
0.6 and from
0.6
to
0.3
(Figure 9).
Thus,
there
was a ten
percent
drop
in
the dissim-
ilarity index, and an almost 30
percent
drop
in
the
exposure index. A
closer
comparison of
the white
versus
minority
(Hispanic, black,
and Asian)
and
white
versus black
indices suggests
that
the lev-
els of
separation
decreased more in
the
white versus
Hispanic
case than in the
white versus
black.
This
suggests that
despite
the
program
of
mandatory reas-
signment
of black
students, there is
greater
integration of Hispanics. This latter situa-
tion
has arisen
because of the
greater
geographic
dispersal
of
Hispanic
house-
15-
10-
ILi
444
+.,
j
bOther
5.
z
5
A., ,.'
'......'
9'''''~~~~~~~~~4
...
,>
.oA .
.
.
.
. I
, , , .
o 0
-
A
/
\Black
wL ]
-5
-0 \White
\/
-15-
-20-
-
2 5
-
1
,
,
X
- I
70
72
74
76
78
80
82
84
YEAR
Fig.
7.
Enrollment
change
in
the
total
school
system,
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
20/24
URBAN
RESTRUCTURING 121
100
80/
WD 60
| Black
60
z
Other
o
40
W
20
0
White\
/
I
-40
71
72
73
74
75
76 77
78
79
80 81
82
83 84
Fig.
8.
Enrollment
in
the
grade
schools
in the San Fernando
Valley.
0.
95
4444
0.3
_
b Pal,_
X
issimilarity
0.7
0.6- ,. .,.,.
0,5>- '-~~ ..,,,^\s-s-s---...
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
0.4~~~~~~~~s, Exposure
0.-3
............
0.1
2-
70
72
74
76
78
80 82
84
Fig.
9. Indices
of
separation (segregation)
for all schools:
(a)
dissimilarity
index for black
versus
white, (b)
dissimilarity
for white versus
all
minorities, (c) exposure
index
for
black
versus
white, (d) exposure
index
for
whites
versus
all minorities.
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
21/24
122
ECONOMIC
GEOGRAPHY
holds. (See Massey and
Denton [42] on
the relation of assimilation
to levels
of
separation.)
What can
we conclude from the results
of
this
case
study? I believe it demon-
strates the high level of complexity in spa-
tial social change, and
that even in the
instances of mandated/managed
inter-
vention,
the spatial changes
are not clearly
related to managed objectives.
In addi-
tion, it appears that the
aim of residential
integration (for blacks)
has not occurred
to any marked extent.
The white
re-
sponses,
via differential out-migration
and private school enrollment,
reveal
the
complexity of individual responses.
CONCLUSION
This
paper
began with a discussion
of
urban restructuring, which has been
a
focus
for those who have
sought
to
link
spatial
outcomes to changes
in
industrial
organization.
The paper has suggested
that the
focus has led to a situation
in
which the concern for labor has tended
to
dominate
the issues related to understand-
ing economic
and social
processes
in
space.
The notion that (suddenly)
we are
globally interconnected,
and
that there
is
an international division of
labor which
did not exist
previously,
requires
consid-
erably
more
development
if
it is
to be an
organizing
theory
for human
geography
[57].
How the
built
environment
is
continu-
ally fashioned and refashioned is the cen-
tral concern of
the
geographic enterprise,
or
at least that
part
of
the
geographic
enterprise
that
is
focused
on cities and
urbanregions. By
extension,
it is
also con-
cerned
with the associated
social
patterns
that arise from the creation
of
the built
environment.
The
creation of
that built
environment
is
the result of two forces:
the forces of
institutions and the forces
of
individuals.
It
is perhaps reasserting
the
obvious
to
postulate
that
investigations
at
both
the micro and macro
levels are
necessary
if
we are to fully
understand
the
complexity
of the urban environment.
While
it
is true
that micro-social
analysis
will
not yield an understanding
of broad
social
change, neither will
the macro insti-
tutional
forces explain the
myriad subtle
processes of
micro behavioral
decision
making.
It is this micro/macro concern
that must continue to drive our attempts
to
understand both individual
behavior
and
macro
policy
issues [12].
A number of
authors,
including John-
ston [34] and Jackson
[33]
have empha-
sized
the role of institutional intervention
in influencing
the social patterns
within
the
built environment.
In particular,
Johnston
has
argued
that zoning and
fiscal
measures have
been used to achieve
and
maintain desired levels of separation, but
the issue here
is how to assess
impacts
versus
existence.
That
zoning
and fiscal
measures existed
is indisputable, but
the
effects
are less
readily
assessed.
Even
those most committed
to
utilizing
the neo-Marxist
urban restructuring
ap-
proach
would admit that
people are
not
simply manipulated
by
the larger society.
If
the
above
is
true, we are led
to an
analytical
approach
which
gives equality
if not primary emphasis to studies of
demographic processes.
The
notions of a
restructuring perspective
which empha-
sizes deindustrialization
and a new func-
tional hierarchy
and a deconcentration
or
demographic perspective
which focuses
on residential
location preferences
has
also
been
suggested by
Frey [25].
His
empirical
analysis
offers
support
for
the
latter view.
The demographic
drives,
especiallythose related to household forma-
tion,
childbearing, and
men's and wom-
en's roles
in
society
will continue
to
change
in
the late twentieth
century.
They
are
powerful
explanatory
concepts
which can
stand as intermediate-scale
explanatory approaches
to understand-
ing
the
spatial
organization
of society.
LITERATURE
CITED
1. Berry,
B.
J.
L.
The Open
Housing Question:
Race and Housing
in Chicago 1966-1976.
Cam-
bridge,
MA:
Ballinger,
1979.
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
22/24
URBAN RESTRUCTURING 123
2. Berry,
B.
J.
L.
and
1). C.
Dahmann.
Population
Distribution in the United
States in the 1970s,
Population Redistribution
and Public Policy.
Edited
by
B.
J.
L.
Berry
and
L. P.
Silverman.
Washington 1).C.: National
Academy of Sci-
ences, 1980.
3. Bluestone,
B.
and
B.
Harrison. The
De-indus-
trialization of
America. New
York: Basic
Books,
1982.
4.
Bradbury,
J.
H.
Regional
and Industrial Re-
structuring Processes
in
the New International
Division
of
Labor,
Progress in Human
Geog-
raphy, 9 (1985), pp. 38-63.
5. Cardoza,
D.,
L.
Huddy, and
D.
0.
Sears.
The
Symbolic
Attitudes Study: Public
Attitudes
Toward
Bilingual Education. Technical
Report
R-21. Los
Alamitos, CA: Center for Bilingual
Education,
1984.
6.
Clark,
G.
L.
Interregional
Migration,
National
Policy,
and Social Justice,
Totowa, NJ: Allen-
held,
1983.
7. Clark, G. L., Judges
and the Cities. Chicago:
University
of
Chicago
Press, 1985.
8.
Clark,
G.
L.
and
M.
Dear. State
Apparatus:
Structures
and Language of Legitimacy.
Lon-
don:
George
Allen
and
Unwin,
1984.
9. Clark,
W.
A. V.
Residential
Mobility and
Neighborhood Change: Some Implications for
Racial Residential Segregation,
Urban
Geog-
raphy,
1
(1980), pp. 95-117.
10.
Clark,
W.
A.
V.
Judicial Intervention,
Busing,
and
Local
Residential
Change, Geography and
the
Urban Environment. Edited by
D.
Herbert
and
R.
J. Johnston,
1984.
11.
Clark,
W.
A.
V.
Residential Segregation
in
American
Cities:
A
Review and Interpretation,
Population
Research and Policy Review,
5
(1986),
pp. 95-127.
12.
Clark,
W. A.
V.
Theory
and Practice
in
Housing
Market
Research.
Stockholm:
Almqvist
and
Wiksell,
1987.
13.
Clark,
W.
A.
V.
Recent Research
on
Migration
and Mobility:
A
Review and
Interpretation,
Progress
in
Planning,
18
(1982), pp.
1-56.
14.
Clark,
W. A.
V. and
E.
G. Moore. Residential
Mobility
and Public
Programs:
Current
Gaps
Between
Theory
and
Practice, Journal of
Social
Issues,
38
(1982), pp.
35-50.
15. Coale, A. J. The History of the Human Popula-
tion,
Scientific American,
231
(1974), pp.41-51.
16. Desbarats, J.
Thai
Migration
to Los Angeles,
Geographical Review,
69
(1979), pp.
302-18.
17. Dickens, P.,
et al.
Housing
States
and
Localities.
London:
Methuen,
1985.
18.
Easterlin,
R.
Population and Economic
Change
in
Developing Countries.
Chicago: University
of Chicago
Press, 1980.
19.
Ehrlich,
P. R.
and
A.
Ehrlich.
Population
Re-
sources and Environment.
San
Francisco:
Free-
man, 1974.
20.
Farley,
R.
The
Residential
Segregation
of
Blacks from Whites:
Trends, Causes, and
Conse-
quences, Issues
in
Housing
Discrimination,
(1985), pp. 14-28.
21.
Fincher,
R.
Social
Theory
and the
Future
of
Urban
Geography,
Professional
Geography,
39
(1987),
pp.
9-12.
22.
Fotheringhan,
S.
A
New Set
of
Spatial Interac-
tion
Models: The
Theory of
Competing Desti-
nations,
Environment and
Planning
A, 15
(1983), pp. 15-36.
23. Frey,
W.
Central
City White Flight: Racial
and
Non-Racial
Causes, American
Sociological
Review,
44
(1979),
425-48.
24.
Frey,
W.
Mover
Destination
Selectivity
and
the Changing
Suburbanization
of Metropolitan
Whites
and Blacks,
Demography, 22 (1985),
223-43.
25.
Frey,
W.
Migration
and Depopulation of
the
Metropolis: Regional
Restructuring or
Rural
Renaissance, American
Sociological
Review,
52
(1987),
pp. 240-57.
26.
Garcia,
P.
Immigration
Issues
in
Urban
Ecol-
ogy:
The
Case
of Los
Angeles,
Urban
Ethnicity
in
the
United States: New
Immigrants and
Old
Minorities. Edited
by
L.
Maldonado
and
J. Moore.
Sage
Publications, Urban
Affairs,
Annual
Reviews, Volume 29,
(1985), pp.73-100.
27.
Garcia,
P.
Immigration and
Language Issues
in
Urban
Ecology:
The Case of the Los
Angeles
Area.
Technical Report, Los
Alamitos, CA:
National
Center for
Bilingual
Research,
1985.
28.
Golant,
S.
Spatial
Context of
Residential
Moves
by
Elderly Persons,
International
Journal on
Aging and the
Environment,
8
(1977-1978), pp.
279-89.
29.
Golledge,
R.
G.,
L. A.
Brown, and
F.
William-
son.
Behavioral
Approaches
in
Geography:
A
Review, The Australian
Geographer,
12
(1972),
pp.
59-79.
30.
Gordon, P.,
H.
W.
Richardson,
and
H.
L.
Wong.
The Distribution
of
Population
and
Employ-
ment
in
a
Polycentric City: The
Case of Los
Angeles, Environment and Planning A, 18
(1986), pp.
161-73.
31.
Greenwood,
M.
Migration
and Economic
Growth in
the
United States. New York:
Aca-
demic Press. 1982.
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
23/24
124
ECONOMic
GEOGRAPHY
32.
Harris, R. A Political
Chameleon:
Class Segre-
gation
in Kingston, Ontario, 1961-1976,
Annals,
Association of American
Geographers,
74
(1984),
pp.
454-76.
33. Jackson,
P. Social Geography: Race,
and Ra-
cisiss, Progress in Human Geography, 9 (1985),
pp. 99-108.
34. Johnston,
R. J. Residential Segregation,
The
State and Constitutional
Conflict
in
American
Urban Areas.
London: Academic Press,
1984.
35.
J
ones, Ri.
C.
Patterns of
UndocumrnentedMigra-
tion: Mexico and
the United
Staies.
Totowa,
NJ:
Rowmnan
and Allenheld, 1984.
36. Kreckel,
R.
Unequal
Opportunity
Structure
and Labour
Market
Segmentation,
Sociology,
14 (1980), pp.
525-50.
37. Ley,
1). Urban
Structure
and
Urban
Restruc-
turing, Urban
Geography.
7 (1986),
pp.
530-35.
38. Long,
L.
The
Geographical Mobility
of Ameri-
cans:
An
International Comparison.
U.S.
Dept.
of
Consinerce,
Bureau
of the
Census,
Popula-
tion
Reports Special
Study Services, 64 (1978).
39.
Maldonado,
L. and J.
Moore. Urban Ethnicity
in
the United States:
New Immigrants and
Old
Minorities.
Sage Publications,
Urban Affairs,
Annual
Reviews,
Volume
29,
1985.
40. Martin, R. L. Getting the Labor Market into
Geographical
Perspective,
Environment and
Planning A,
18 (1986), pp.
569-72.
41. Massey,
1).
S. Spatial Division of
Labor: Social
Structures
and the Geography of
Production.
London: Methuen,
1984.
42. Massey,
D.
S.
and
N.
Denton.
Spatial
Assimila-
tion
as a
Socio-Economic
Outcome,
American
Sociological
Review,
50
(1985), pp.
94-106.
43. McCarthy,
K.
Qs
and
As
About
the
Future of
the
Three
Rs: A
Demographer's Perspective.
Santa
Monica,
CA: Rand Corporation,
P.
6972,
1984.
44.
McKinney,
S.
and
A. B.
Schnare. Trends
in
Residential Segregation
by Race,
1960-1980.
Washington,
lD.C.:
The Urban Institute,
1986.
45.
Moore,
E.
G. Mobility
Intention and
Subse-
quent
Relocation,
Urban
Geography,
7
(1986),
pp.
497-514.
46.
Moore,
E.
G.
and
.A.
V.
Clark.
Stable
Struc-
ture and
Local
Variation:
A
Comparison
of
Household Flows
in
Four
Metropolitan
Areas,
Urban Studies,
23
(1985),
pp.
185-96.
47.
Morrill,
R. The
Spatial Orgarisatiorn
of Society.
Belmont,
CA:
Wadsworth,
1970.
48.
Morrill,
R.
Review of International
Migration,
National
Policy
and Social
Justice,
Economic
Geography,
60
(1984),
pp.
253.
49. Nelson,
H.
J. and W.
A. V. Clark. Los
Angeles:
The
Metropolitan
Experience. Cambridge,
MA:
Ballinger, 1974.
50.
Oliver, M. and J. Johnson.
Interethnic Conflict
in an
Urban Ghetto: The
Case of Blacks
and
Latinos, Research, Social Movements, Con-
flict,
and Change.
Edited by
R. L. Radcliffe.
New
York:
JAI,
1986.
51. Pahl,
R.
Whose City. London:
Penguin
1975.
52. Piore,
M.
J.
and
C.
F.
Sabel.
The
Second Indus-
trial Divide.
New York: Basic
Books,
1984.
53. Plane,
D. Migration Space:
Doubly
Constrained
Gravity Model Mapping
of
Relative
Interstate
Separation, Annals,
Association of
American
Geographers,
74 (1984), pp.
244-56.
54. Pratt, G. Class Analysis and Urban Domestic
Property:
A
Critical Re-examination,
Interna-
tional
Journal of
Urban and
Regional
Research,
6
(1980), pp.
481-502.
55. Pratt,
G.
and
S.
Hanson. Gender,
Class and
Space, '
orthcoming,
Environment
and
Planning
D, Society
and
Space,
1988.
56.
Pred,
A.
Behavior and Location.
University of
Lund, Lund Studies
in Geography, Gleerup,
1967.
57. Rees,
J. Editorial: What
Happened to Macro-
economics, Environment and Planning A, 19
(1987), pp.
139-41.
58.
Rogers,
A.
Introduction to
Multiregional
Math-
ematical
Demography.
New York:
Wiley,
1975.
59.
Rossell,
C.
A
Review
of
the Empirical Research
in
Desegregation.
Institute for Public
Policy
Studies,
Vanderbilt University, Nashville,
Ten-
nessee,
1981.
60. Sack,
R.
Geography,
Geometry,
and Explana-
tion, Annals, Association
of American Geog-
raphers,
62
(1972), pp.
61-78.
61.
Scott,
A. and M.
Storper.
Production
Work and
Territory. Winchester,
MA:
George
Allen and
Unwin,
1986.
62.
Schelling,
T.
Microeconomics
and
Macrobe-
havior.
New
York:
W. W. Norton and Com-
pany,
1978.
63. Schnare,
A. B.
Residential
Segregation by
Race
and
U.S.
Metropolitan
Areas:
Analysis
Across
Cities and Over
Time. Washington,
D.C.: The
Urban
Institute,
1977.
64.
Soja, E.,
R.
Morales,
and
G.
Wolff. Urban Re-
structuring:
An
Analysis
of
Social
and
Spatial
Change
in
Los
Angeles,
Economic
Geography,
60
(1984),
pp.
195-230.
65.
Stapleton,
C.
Reformulation
of the
Family
Life
This content downloaded from 143.106.201.10 on Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:56:04 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/12/2019 Reestruturao Urbana e Demografia
24/24
URBAN RESTRUCTURING
125
Cycle Concept,
Environment
and Planning A,
12 (1980),
pp. 1103-18.
66.
Sternlieb, G., J. W.
Hughes, and
C. 0.
Hughes.
Demographic
Trends and
Economic Reality.
New
Brunswick, NJ:
Center for Urban
Policy
Research, The State University of New Jersey,
1982.
67. Stewart, J.
Q.
and
W.
Warntz. Macrogeog-
raphy and Social
Science, Geographical
Re-
view,
48
(1958), pp.
167-84.
68. Storper, M. and
R.
Walker.
The
Spatial
Di-
vision
of Labor: Labor
and the Location
of
Industries, Sunbelt,
Snowbelt,
Urban
Devel-
opment
and Regional
Restructuring.
Edited
by
L. Sawyers and
W.
Tabb.
Oxford,
1984.
69.
Taeuber,
K. housingg,
Schools,
and
Incremen-
tal
Segregative
Effects,
Annals
AAPSS,
441
(1979),
pp.
157-67.
70. Taeuber,
K., F.
Monfort, and
P.
Massey.
The
Trend
in
Metropolitan
Racial
Residential
Seg-
regation, paper read to Population Association
of America,
1984.
71.
Van Valey,
T. L.,
W.
C. Roof, and
J.
Wilcox.
Trends
in Residential
Segregation:
1960's and
1970's,
American
Journal of' Sociology,
82
(1977),
pp.
826-44.
72.
Woods,
R. and
P.
Rees. Population
Structures
and
Models.
London:
George
Allen and
Unwin,
1986.
Recommended