Networks and Spatial Economics

, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp 469–496 | Cite as

The Multiregional Core-periphery Model: The Role of the Spatial Topology

  • Javier BarberoEmail author
  • José L. Zofío


We use the multiregional core-periphery model of the new economic geography to analyze and compare the agglomeration and dispersion forces shaping the location of economic activity for a continuum of network topologies — spatial or geographic configuration — characterized by their degree of centrality, and comprised between two extremes represented by the homogenous (ring) and the heterogeneous (star) configurations. Resorting to graph theory, we systematically extend the analytical tools and graphical representations of the core-periphery model for alternative spatial configuration, and study the sustain and break points. We study new phenomena such as the infeasibility of the dispersed equilibrium in the heterogeneous space, resulting in the introduction of the concept pseudo flat-earth as a long-run equilibrium corresponding to an uneven distribution of economic activity between regions.


New economic geography Space topology Transport costs Networks 



We are grateful to Martijn Smit, Andrés Rodriguez-Pose, Kristian Behrens and two anonymous referee for useful comments and suggestions. A previous version of this paper was presented at the 52nd European Congress of the RSAI (Bratislavia, Slovakia), the 59th Annual Northe Amatican meetings of the RSAI, (Ottawa, Canada) and in the seminar series at New York University. This work was supported by Madrid’s Directorate-General of Universities and Research (S2007-HUM-0467), the Spanish Ministry of Education (AP2010-1401), and the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (ECO2010-21643 and ECO2013-46980-P).


  1. Ago T, Isono I, Tabuchi T (2006) Locational disadvantage of the hub. Annals of Regional Science 40:819–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akamatsu T, Takayama Y (2009) Simplified approach to analyzing multi-regional core-periphery models. Tech. rep., Munich Personal RePEc Archive, mPRA PaperGoogle Scholar
  3. Akamatsu T, Takayama Y, Ikeda K (2012) Spatial discounting, fourier, and racetrack economy: A recipe for the analysis of spatial agglomeration models. J Econ Dyn Control 36(11):1729–1759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baldwin R, Forslid R, Martin P, Ottaviano G (2005) Economic Geography & Public Policy. Princeton University Press, Robert-Nicoud FGoogle Scholar
  5. Barthélemy M, Flammini A (2009) Co-evolution of density and topology in a simple model of city formation. Networks and Spatial Economics 9(3):401–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Behrens K, Lamorgese AR, Ottaviano GI, Tabuchi T (2009) Beyond the home market effect: Market size and specialization in a multi-country world. J Int Econ 79(2):259–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blumenfeld-Lieberthal E (2009) The topology of transportation networks: A comparison between different economies. Networks and Spatial Economics 9(3):427–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brakman S, Garretsen H, van Marrewijk C (2009) The New Introduction to Geographical Economics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Castro SB, da Silva JC, Mossay P (2012) The core-periphery model with three regions and more. Pap Reg Sci 91:401–418Google Scholar
  10. Charlot S, Gaignè C, Robert-Nicoud F, Thisse J (2006) Agglomeration and welfare: The core-periphery model in the light of bentham, kaldor and rawls. J. Public Econ 83:325–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cronon W (1991) Nature’s Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West. W.W. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Ducruet C, Beauguitte L (2014) Spatial science and network science: Review and outcomes of a complex relationship. Networks and Spatial Economics 14(3-4):297–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fujita M, Krugman P, Venables A (1999) The Spatial Economy: Cities, Regions, and International Trade. MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  14. Harary F (1969) Graph Theory. Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar
  15. Ikeda K, Akamatsu T, Kono T (2012) Spatial period-doubling agglomeration of a core-periphery model with a system of cities. J Econ Dyn Control 36(5):754–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Krugman P (1991) Increasing returns and economic-geography. J Polit Econ 99:483–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Krugman P (1993) On the number and location of cities. Eur Econ Rev 37:293–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Krugman P, Obstfeld M (2011) Melitz M. Pearson Addison-Wesley, International Economics: Theory & PolicyGoogle Scholar
  19. Kuroda T (2014) A model of stratified production process and spatial risk. Networks and Spatial Economics ForthcomingGoogle Scholar
  20. Levinson D (2009) Introduction to the special issue on the evolution of transportation network infrastructure. Networks and Spatial Economics 9(3):289–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Opsahl T, Agneessens F, Skvoretz J (2010) Node centrality in weighted networks: Generalizing degree and shortest paths. Social Networks 32:245–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ottaviano G, Tabuchi T, Thisse J (2002) Agglomeration and trade revisited. International Economic Review 43:409–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Patuelli R, Reggiani A, Gorman S, Nijkamp P, Bade FJ (2007) Network analysis of commuting flows: A comparative static approach to german data. Networks and Spatial Economics 7(4):315–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Picard P, Tabuchi T (2010) Self-organized agglomerations and transport costs. Economic Theory 42(3):565–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Picard P, Zeng DZ (2010) A harmonization of first and second nature advantages. J Reg Sci 50:973–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Puga D, Venables A (1995) Preferential trading arrangements and industrial location. Discussion paper 267, Centre for Economic Performance, London School of EconomicsGoogle Scholar
  27. Robert-Nicoud F (2005) The structure of simple ‘new economic geography’ models (or, on identical twins). J Econ Geogr 5:201–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tabuchi T, Thisse JF, Zhu X (2014) Technological Progress and Economic Geography. CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-915, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of TokyoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversidad Autónoma de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations