Is Economic Integration a Historical Shock to City-size Distribution?

Engin Sorhun

doi:10.2478/cer-2018-0005

Authors

Engin Sorhun Istanbul 29 Mayis University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Economics

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2478/cer-2018-0005

Keywords:

City‑size distribution, rank‑size rule, Zipf’s Law, EU integration, new member and candidate countries, ARDL, Bound test, Granger causality test

Abstract

Based on the assumption that the economic integration process contributes, via market reforms, to the dynamics of the space distribution in candidate countries, this study examines (i) whether agglomeration forces or dispersion forces are dominant; (ii) whether EU-integration causes a structural break to the space distribution over time; (iii) whether EU-integration makes the city-size distribution more even or uneven in eight eastern European Union members (EU–8). To carry out the analysis, the Ziwot-Andrew and Cusum Square tests are used to detect structural breaks; the ARDL Bound test is used to reveal the interaction between long-run and short-run equilibrium; and the Granger test is used to determine the direction of the causality among the variables. The main results are: the integration with the EU (i) caused a structural break to the city-size distribution, (ii) made the city-size distribution more uneven and (iii) stimulated the agglomerating forces over the spreading forces in the EU–8.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anderson G. and Ge Y. (2005), The size distribution of Chinese cities, ‘Regional and Urban Economics’, No. 35.
Google Scholar

Benguigui L. and Lieberhal E.F. (2007), Beyond the power law- a new approach to analyses city size distributions, ‘Environment and Urban Systems’, No. 31. doi: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2006.11.002
Google Scholar

Bosker M., Brakman S. Garretsen H., Schramm M. (2008), A century of shocks: the evolution of the German city size distribution 1925–1999, Regional Science and Urban Economics, No. 38(4).
Google Scholar

Brakman S., Garretsen H., and van Marrewijk C. (2001), An Introduction to Geographical Economics, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press (Third edition, 2005).
Google Scholar

Combes P.P. and Overman H. (2003), The Spatial Distribution of Economic Activities in the European Union, [in:] edited by V. Henderson and J.F. Thisse Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics Volume IV.
Google Scholar

Davis D.R. and Weinstein D.E. (2002), Bones, bombs and breakpoints: the geography of economic activity, ‘American Economic Review’, No. 92. doi: 10.1257/000282802762024502
Google Scholar

Dupuch S., Jennequin H. and Mouhoud E.M. (2001), Intégration européenne, élargissement aux PECO et économie géographique, Région et Développement, No. 13.
Google Scholar

Fujita M., Krugman P. and Vanables A. (1999), The Spatial Economy: Cities, Regions, and International Trade, Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Google Scholar

Hirschman A. (1958), Strategy of Economic Development, Yale University Press, New Haven.
Google Scholar

Kooij P. (1988), Peripheral cities and their regions in the Dutch urban system until 1900, ‘Journal of Economic History’, No. 48. doi: 10.1017/S0022050700004964
Google Scholar

Krugman P. (1993), First nature, second nature and metropolitan location, ‘Journal of Regional Science’, No. 33. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9787.1993.tb00217.x
Google Scholar

Krugman P. (1995), Development, Geography, and Economic Theory, MIT Press.
Google Scholar

Krugman P. (1998), What’s New about the New Economic Geography?, ‘Oxford Review of Economic Policy’, No. 14(2).
Google Scholar

Myrdal G. (1957), Economic Theory and Underdeveloped Regions, Duckworth, London.
Google Scholar

OECD (2012), Redefining Urban: A New Way to Measure Metropolitan Areas, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Google Scholar

Perron P. (1997), Further evidence on breaking trend functions in macroeconomic variables, ‘Journal of Econometrics’, No. 80. doi: 10.1016/S0304-4076(97)00049-3
Google Scholar

Redding S. and Sturm D.M. (2005), Cost of remoteness: evidence from German division and reunification, CERP discussion paper, Vol. 5015.
Google Scholar

Rosen K.T. and Resnik M. (1980), The size distribution of cities: An examination of Pareto Law and Primacy, ‘Journal of Urban Economics’, No. 8.
Google Scholar

So K.T. (2005), Zipf’s law for cities: a cross-country investigation, ‘Regional Sciences and Urban Economics’, No. 35.
Google Scholar

Zipf G.K. (1949), Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort, Addison-Wesley Press. ThomsonISI: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000377734300011&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=b7bc2757938ac7a7a821505f8243d9f3
Google Scholar

Zivot E. and Andrews D., (1992), Further evidence of great crash, the oil price shock and unit root hypothesis, ‘Journal of Business and Economic Statistics’, No. 10.
Google Scholar

Weber A. (1909), Theory of the Location of Industries, translated in 1929 by Carl J. Friedrich, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar