Keywords
Patterns of geographic concentration of the population
Hypothesis of concentrated deconcentration
Internal migration
How to Cite
Abstract
This article studies the hypothesis of “concentrated deconcentration”, which posits that the loss of demographic and economic gravitation of metropolitan areas is due to short-distance internal migratory movements, which can expand their hinterland and their functional relationships, maintaining or even reinforcing its importance within the national urban system. To verify this hypothesis, a methodological proposal is offered that operationalizes the concept of concentrated deconcentration by using two analytical dimensions: i) relative weight of the metropolitan area in the total population and in the urban population of the country, and ii) movements of recent internal migration between the metropolitan area and its near and far environments. This proposal applies to five metropolitan areas in Latin America. The results suggest that the change in the territorial distribution of the population is diverse, since in some cases there is no loss of the demographic weight of the big city, while in others this loss is reduced, or in others there are signs of deconcentration. concentrated.
References
Aguilar, G. (1999). Mexico City’s growth and regional dispersion. G. Aguilar e I. Escamilla (Eds.), Problems of Megacities: Social Inequalities, Environmental Risk and Urban Governance (pp. 557-575). Ciudad de México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; Commission of Urban Development and Urban Life.
´Anderson, B. (2015). World Population Dynamics. Boston: Pearson.Bluestone, B., Stevenson, M. y Williams, R. (2008). The Urban Experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Champion, A. (2001). A changing demographic regime and evolving polycentric urban regions: consequences for the size, composition and distribution of city populations. Urban Studies, 38(4), 657-677.
Chávez, A., Acuña, M., Barquero, J., Cunha, J., Macadar, D., Rodríguez J. y Sobrino, J. (2016). Migración interna y cambios metropolitanos: ¿qué está pasando en las grandes ciudades de América Latina? Revista Latinoamericana de Población, 10(1), 7-41. http://revistarelap.org/ojs/index.php/relap/article/view/137/145
Consejo Nacional de Población. (2012). Catálogo sistema urbano nacional 2012. Secretaría de Gobernación. http://www.conapo.gob.mx/en/CONAPO/Catalogo_Sistema_Urbano_Nacional_2012
Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. (2019). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision (ST/ESA/SER.A/420). New York: United Nations. https://population.un.org/wup/
Geyer, H. y Kontuly, T. (1993). A theoretical foundation for the concept of differential urbanization. International Regional Science Review, 15(2), 157-277.
Geyer, H. y Kontuly, T. (Eds.). (1996). Differential Urbanization. Integrating Spatial Models. Londres: Arnold.Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, Brasil.
Censos Demográficos [Microdatos de 1991, 2000 y 2010]. https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/sociais/rendimento-despesa-e-consumo/25089-censo-1991-6.html?edicao=25090&t=microdados Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Uruguay. Censo Nacional de Población y Vivienda [Microdatos censales de 1985, 1996 y 2011].
Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos, Costa Rica. Censo Nacional de Población y Vivienda de Costa Rica [Bases de datos del Sistema PDQdel Centro Centroamericano de Población de 1984, 2000 y 2011].
Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas, Chile. Censo Nacional de Población y Vivienda [Bases de microdatos en formato Redatam de 1982, 1992, 2002 y 2017].
Instituto Nacional de Geografía y Estadística, México. Tabulados básicos del Censo de Población y Vivienda [Microdatos del cuestionario complementario del Censo de Población y Vivienda de 2000 y 2010].
Instituto Nacional de Geografía y Estadística, México. (2015). Encuesta Intercensal [Microdatos].
Lencioni, S. (2013). Metropolização do espaço: processos e dinâmicas. A. Ferreira et al., Metropolização do espaço: gestão territorial e relações urbano-rurais (pp. 17-34). Rio de Janeiro: Consequência.
Lesthaeghe, R. (2010). The unfolding story of the second demographic transition. Population and Development Review, 36(2), 211-251.
Pinto Da Cunha, J. M. (2013). Questions and challenges in studies on Latin-American cities. P. Kresl y J. Sobrino (Eds.), Handbook of Methods and Applications in Urban Economies (pp. 127-152). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Rodríguez, J. (2009). La captación de la migración interna mediante censos de población: la experiencia de la ronda de 2000 y sus lecciones para la ronda de 2010 en América Latina y el Caribe. Notas de Población (88), 63-95.
Rodríguez, J. (2016). Urbanización, ciudades y migración en el siglo XXI: continuidad y cambio en América Latina. M. E. Negrete (Coord.), Urbanización y política urbana en Iberoamérica (pp. 19-59). Ciudad de México: El Colegio de México.
Rodríguez, J. y Rowe, F. (2018). How is internal migration reshaping metropolitan populations in Latin America? A new method and new evidence. Population Studies, 72(2), 253-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2017.1416155
Sobrino, J. (2016). Dinámica y distribución territorial de la población en México. M. E. Negrete (Coord.), Urbanización y política urbana en Iberoamérica (pp. 61-105). Ciudad de México: El Colegio de México.
United Nations Human Settlements Programme. (2008). State of the World’s Cities 2010/2011. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT. https://unhabitat.org/state-of-the-worlds-cities-20102011-cities-for-all-bridging-the-urban-divide
White, M. (Ed.). (2016). International Handbook of Migration and Population Distribution. Nueva York: Springer.
Zelinsky, W. (1971). The hypothesis of the Mobility Transition. Geographical Review, 61, 219-249.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2022 Revista Latinoamericana de Población