GeoJournal

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 301–308 | Cite as

African urbanization in Metropolitan South Africa — differential urbanization perspectives

  • Geyer Hermanus S. 
Article

Abstract

The supersession of the process of urbanization by what has been termed “polarization reversal” and “counterurbanization” in advanced developing and developed countries has become a much debated issue over the past 15 years. Disaggregated migration studies indicate that in addition to mainstream population migration patterns, undercurrent migration patterns may be evident which could differ quite substantially from the former. Such divergent migratory patterns occurring at the same time in the same country are called “differential urbanization”. As a potentially important urban development policy consideration, attention is focused in this paper on differential urbanization trends in South Africa at the metropolitan level. Recent informal urban settlement patterns of the African population within the major metropolitan areas are contrasted against these differential urbanization trends to determine the implications of both for residential development in the metropolitan areas during the post-apartheid era.

Keywords

Metropolitan Area Polarization Reversal Migration Pattern African Population Settlement Pattern 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Central Witwatersrand Metropolitan Chamber: Land availability study, Volume 1. Rosmarin and Associates (CWMC) Inc., Johannesburg 1992.Google Scholar
  2. Clark, C.: Population Growth and Land Use. St. Martin's Press, New York 1967.Google Scholar
  3. Couchrane, S. G.; Vinig, D. R.: Recent trends in migration between core and peripheral regions in developed and advanced developing countries. International Regional Science Review 11, 215–243 (1988)Google Scholar
  4. Geyer, H. S.: On urbanization in South Africa. The South African Journal of Economics 56, 154–172 (1988)Google Scholar
  5. Geyer, H. S.: Differential urbanization in South Africa and its consequences for spatial development policy. African Urban Quaterly 4, 276–293 (1989)Google Scholar
  6. Geyer, H. S.: The integration of the formal and informal urban sectors in South Africa. Development Southern Africa 6, 29–42 (1989 a)Google Scholar
  7. Geyer, H. S.: Implications of differential urbanization on deconcentration in the Pretoria-Witwatersrand-Vaal Triangle metropolitan area South Africa. Geoforum 21, 385–396 (1990)Google Scholar
  8. Geyer, H. S.; Kontuly, T. M.: A theoretical foundation for the concept of differential urbanization. International Regional Science Review (1993)Google Scholar
  9. Geyer, H. S.; Steyn, H. S.; Uys, S.; van der Walt, F.: Development management regions in South Africa: an empirical evaluation. Development Southern Africa 5, 286–306 (1988)Google Scholar
  10. Gordon, P.: Deconcentration without a “clean break”. Environment and Planning A 11, 281–290 (1979)Google Scholar
  11. Richardson, H. W.: City Size and National Spatial Strategies in Developing Countries. World Bank Staff Working Paper, No. 252, Washington (1977)Google Scholar
  12. Richardson, H. W.: Polarization reversal in developing countries. Papers of the Regional Science Association 45, 67–85 (1980)Google Scholar
  13. South Africa, Republic of, Department of Statistics: Gross Geographic Product by Magisterial District, 1968, Report No. 09-14-01. Government Printer, Pretoria (1974)Google Scholar
  14. South Africa, Republic of, Department of Statistics: Gross Geographic Product at Factor Incomes by Magisterial District, 1978, Report No. 09-14-05. Government Printer, Pretoria (1985)Google Scholar
  15. South Africa, Republic of, Department of Statistics: Population with a Review for 1960–1985, Report No. 02-85-01. Government Printer, Pretoria (1986)Google Scholar
  16. South Africa, Republic of, Department of Statistics: Gross Geographic Product at Factor Incomes, 1981, Report No. 04-01-01 Government Printer, Pretoria (1988)Google Scholar
  17. South Africa, Republic of, Central Statistical Services: Population census 1991, Summarised results after adjustment for undercount, Report No. 03-01-01 Government Printer, Pretoria (1992)Google Scholar
  18. Urban Foundation: Informal housing, Part 1: The current situation. Urban Foundation, Johannesburg 1991.Google Scholar
  19. Vining, D.R.: Population distribution towards core areas of less developed countries, 1950–1980. International Regional Science Review 10, 1–45 (1986)Google Scholar
  20. Vining, D.R.; Kontuly, T.: Population dispersal from major metropolitan regions: an international comparison International Regional Science Review 3, 49–73 (1978)Google Scholar
  21. Vining, D.R.; Pallone, R.: Migration between core and peripheral regions: a description and tentative explanation of the patterns in 22 countries. Geoforum 13, 339–410 (1982)Google Scholar
  22. Vining, D.R.; Strauss, A.: A demonstration that the current deconcentration of population in the United States is a clean break with the past. Environment and Planning A 9, 751–758 (1977)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Geyer Hermanus S. 
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Urban and Regional PlanningUniversity of PotchefstroomPotchefstroomSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations