Burgess Concentric Zone Model Example

Understanding the Burgess Concentric Zone Model: Examples and Applications

The Burgess Concentric Zone Model, also known as the Burgess model, is a foundational concept in urban geography and sociology. It provides a simplified yet insightful framework for understanding the spatial structure of cities, particularly those that have experienced rapid growth and industrialization. This model, developed by Ernest Burgess in 1925, postulates that cities grow outwards from a central business district (CBD) in a series of concentric rings, each with distinct characteristics. This article will delve into the details of the Burgess model, providing real-world examples and exploring its limitations and contemporary relevance.

The Five Concentric Zones: A Detailed Look

The Burgess model proposes five concentric zones radiating outwards from the CBD:

1. Central Business District (CBD): This is the heart of the city, characterized by high land values, intense commercial activity, and a concentration of skyscrapers. The CBD is typically the most accessible point in the city and is dominated by businesses, offices, and retail establishments. Think of the bustling downtown areas of major cities like New York City's Times Square or London's West End.

2. Transitional Zone: This zone surrounds the CBD and is typically characterized by a mixture of residential and industrial land uses. It often includes older, deteriorated housing, and is frequently inhabited by recent migrants and lower-income populations. This zone experiences high levels of social and physical change, with buildings being demolished and redeveloped. Examples might include areas experiencing gentrification or those with a mix of old apartment buildings and newly built industrial spaces.

3. Zone of Workingmen's Homes: This zone consists primarily of relatively modest, older housing occupied by working-class families. It represents a more stable residential area than the transitional zone, with improved housing quality and a greater sense of community. These areas might include rows of terraced houses or smaller apartment buildings, typically further from the city center and offering more space at a lower cost compared to zones closer to the CBD.

4. Residential Zone: This zone is characterized by more spacious housing, usually occupied by middle-class families. Here, we see the emergence of larger detached houses, better infrastructure, and more amenities like parks and schools. Suburban developments often fall into this zone, showcasing larger properties with more privacy.

5. Commuter Zone: This is the outermost zone, dominated by suburban residential areas. Residents in this zone typically commute to work in the inner zones. This zone features large houses, more open spaces, and a lower population density compared to the inner zones. Think of quieter, leafy suburbs with larger gardens and a slower pace of life.

Real-World Examples of the Burgess Model

While the Burgess model is a simplification of complex urban processes, several cities exhibit characteristics that align with its concentric structure:

Chicago: Chicago, where Burgess originally developed his model, provides a strong historical example. Its downtown area (the CBD) is surrounded by a transitional zone characterized by industrial areas and older housing, followed by working-class neighborhoods, and then progressively more affluent residential areas moving outward. While Chicago's development has deviated in some areas from the strict concentric pattern, the basic structure largely aligns with the model's predictions.

London: Although significantly larger and more complex than Chicago, London also showcases aspects of the concentric zone model. The City of London (the financial center) acts as the CBD, encircled by zones reflecting social and economic gradients. The closer you get to the center, the higher the land value and commercial intensity. Outer zones show a transition to suburbs with residential areas of varying levels of affluence.

Other Cities: Many other cities around the world, particularly those with a history of rapid industrial growth, display elements of the concentric zone model. However, it's crucial to understand that the model isn't perfectly applicable to every city. The degree of conformity varies depending on factors like topography, transportation networks, historical development patterns, and planning policies.

Limitations and Criticisms of the Burgess Model

Despite its widespread application, the Burgess model has several limitations:

• Oversimplification: The model is a simplification of complex urban dynamics. It fails to fully account for factors such as transportation networks, uneven development, and the influence of political and economic policies. Real cities are rarely perfectly concentric.

• Lack of Consideration for Social Factors: While the model implicitly acknowledges social stratification, it doesn't adequately address the complexity of social interactions and segregation within urban areas. Social groups are not always neatly arranged in concentric circles.

• Limited Applicability to Contemporary Cities: The model is less applicable to modern cities that are spread out due to better transportation or where planning has actively attempted to disrupt the concentric pattern. Many contemporary cities exhibit more fragmented or dispersed patterns of development.

• Ignoring Technological Advancements: The model does not account for the impact of technological advancements, such as improved transportation systems, which have altered urban spatial structures. The influence of the internet and remote work also challenges its assumptions.

• Neglect of Suburbanization: The original model did not fully capture the significant impact of suburbanization, which has led to decentralization and the growth of satellite towns.

Beyond the Simple Rings: Modifications and Extensions

Recognizing the limitations of the Burgess model, several modifications and extensions have been proposed:

• Hoyt's Sector Model: Homer Hoyt's model suggests that cities develop in sectors radiating outwards from the CBD, reflecting the influence of factors such as transportation routes and natural features.

• Harris and Ullman's Multiple Nuclei Model: This model proposes that cities have multiple centers of activity, each with its own specialized functions, rather than a single central business district.

• Galactic City Model: This more recent model incorporates the influence of suburbanization and the emergence of edge cities, which are large concentrations of employment and commerce outside the traditional CBD.

The Burgess Model in Contemporary Urban Planning

Despite its limitations, the Burgess model remains a valuable tool in urban planning and analysis. Its simplified structure provides a useful starting point for understanding urban spatial patterns and informing decisions about land use, infrastructure development, and social policy. While not a perfect predictor of urban form, understanding its principles allows urban planners to better analyze and manage the complexities of urban growth. Knowing the possible zones and their characteristics can inform decisions about housing provision, infrastructure investment, and resource allocation.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q: What are the main criticisms of the Burgess Concentric Zone Model?

A: The main criticisms include its oversimplification of complex urban dynamics, its failure to adequately address social factors, its limited applicability to contemporary cities, its neglect of technological advancements and suburbanization, and its assumption of a uniform and homogenous city.

Q: How does the Burgess model compare to other urban models?

A: The Burgess model, a concentric zone model, contrasts with sector models (like Hoyt's) which emphasize radial growth along transportation lines and multiple nuclei models (Harris and Ullman) which acknowledge multiple centers of activity. Each model offers a different perspective on urban spatial organization.

Q: Can the Burgess model be applied to all cities?

A: No, the Burgess model is not universally applicable. Its effectiveness depends on various factors, including a city's historical development, topography, transportation networks, and planning policies. Many modern cities deviate significantly from the strict concentric pattern.

Q: What are the practical applications of the Burgess Concentric Zone Model?

A: The model helps understand urban spatial patterns, aiding in land-use planning, infrastructure development, and social policy formulation. It facilitates analyzing urban growth, resource allocation, and the distribution of social services.

Q: What is the significance of the Central Business District (CBD) in the Burgess model?

A: The CBD is the central and most important element, as all other zones radiate outwards from it. It's the heart of economic and commercial activity, driving the city's growth and development.

Conclusion: A Lasting Legacy

The Burgess Concentric Zone Model, despite its limitations, remains a cornerstone of urban geography and sociology. Its simple, visually intuitive representation of urban spatial structure provides a valuable framework for understanding the fundamental principles governing city growth and development. While not a perfect depiction of every city's reality, it serves as an excellent starting point for deeper exploration of urban complexities and remains a valuable tool for analysis and planning. Its legacy lies not just in its accuracy, but in its ability to stimulate further research and development of more nuanced urban models that build upon its foundational insights. By understanding its strengths and limitations, we can gain a more complete understanding of the intricate dynamics that shape our urban landscapes.