Urban Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haworth, C. T.
Right arrow Articles by Rasmussen, D. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Urban Studies, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1-7 (1978)
DOI: 10.1080/713702304

Income Distribution, City Size, and Urban Growth

Charles T. Haworth

The Florida State University

James E. Long

Auburn University

David W. Rasmussen

The Florida State University

The relationship between city size, urban growth, and the metropolitan income distribution is discussed in this paper. Drawing on basic economic theory we develop the 'monopoly' hypothesis which suggests that increases in city size and urban growth will lead to greater income inequality. The monopoly hypothesis suggests that increases in size and growth raise monopoly rents earned by those insulated from competition. Regression results using the Gini concentration ratio as a measure of family and male income inequality on 1970 are consistent with the hypothesis. Our results suggest the benefits of urban growth are unevenly distributed and increase measured income inequality.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J ECON GEOGRHome page
M. Korpi
Does size of local labour markets affect wage inequality? a rank-size rule of income distribution
J. Econ. Geogr., March 1, 2008; 8(2): 211 - 237.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Environment and BehaviorHome page
M. Bonaiuto and M. Bonnes
Multiplace Analysis of the Urban Environment: A Comparison Between a Large and a Small Italian City
Environment and Behavior, November 1, 1996; 28(6): 699 - 747.
[Abstract]

Home page
 Urban Affairs ReviewHome page
S. Chakravorty
Urban Inequality Revisited: The Determinants of Income Distribution in U.S. Metropolitan Areas
Urban Affairs Review, July 1, 1996; 31(6): 759 - 777.
[Abstract]

Home page
 Urban StudHome page
L. A. Soroka
City Size and Income Distributions: The Canadian Experience
Urban Stud, November 1, 1984; 21(4): 359 - 366.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Urban StudHome page
B. Walker
Income Distribution, City Size and Urban Growth: a Rejoinder
Urban Stud, February 1, 1981; 18(1): 121 - 122.
[PDF]

Home page
 Urban StudHome page
B. Walker
Income Distribution, City Size and Urban Growth: A Comment
Urban Stud, October 1, 1979; 16(3): 341 - 343.
[PDF]