ABSTRACT
This paper investigates changes in the spatial structure and explores the link between the initial shape and other characteristics of city-regions of Poland and heterogeneity in the changes of urban structure. Shifting attention to the former socialist country offers an opportunity to illuminate the link between a rapid and systemic political–economic transition and the development of city-regions. The results suggest that increasing polycentricity is not the main trend in Poland, and show that the context and initial stage of spatial structure indeed matter in shaping trajectories of urban change. Irrespective of the systemic transition, the spatial structure of city-regions is relatively slow to change.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. The modularity measure assesses the proportion of the connections (edges) in the network that connect nodes of the same type (i.e., within-community nodes) minus the expected value of the same quantity in a network with the same community divisions, but with random connections between the nodes. If the number of within-community connections is no better than random, the modularity score is 0. Values approaching 1, the maximum modularity score, indicate a strong community structure (Newman & Girvan, Citation2004).
2. , where
represents total employment; and
represents the land area within a municipality (municipalities are ordered from the lowest to the highest employment density). The Gini measures the degree to which employment is concentrated within the most densified spatial entities of the urban region. It takes on values between 0 and 1.
3. , where
represents total employment; and
represents the land area within a municipality (municipalities are ordered by increasing distance from the main city). The ACI measures the degree to which urban region employment lies near the urban core. It takes on values between −1 and 1.
4. Along with the introduction of the new administrative division of Poland in 1998, the former 49 voivodships were abolished and replaced with 16 larger regions. The main effect of this administrative reform was that more than 30 medium-sized (or small) towns lost their status of provincial capital and, thus, many important administrative functions.