Central Place Theory and the Specialisation of Cities: a Contradiction?

Abstract

The paper scrutinises the contradiction between two theoretical approaches in planning: the strictly hierarchical central place theory and certain specialisation theories (such as polycentrism and growth poles), supported with the case study of the State of Brandenburg, Germany. As presented in the paper the central place theory still has a deterministic role in regional policy and planning in Brandenburg, which means that the planning approach has not gone through substantial transformation compared to the socialist practice dominating regional planning.

During the 1990s, more timely theories also emerged in planning practice on the state levet defining growth poles. This theory and the related planning policy focus on the specific properties of cities, using them as resources in the competition of places.

These approaches equally manifest themselves in the integrated urban development strategies of the six higher-order cities of Brandenburg. In the paper it is concluded that these strategies combine the necessity of providing services demanded by central place theory with the need to establish, maintain and most of all strengthen the unique characteristics of cities, this way matring them competitive in the globalised socio-economic context.

To sum up, different planning theories are present on the same and on different levels (state, region, city) as well. Theoretically they are in contradiction, but they seem to coexist well in the practice.