AN EMPIRICAL EXAMINATION OF MEGALOPOLITAN STRUCTl'RE

ROBERT H. WELLER *

RESUMEN

Recientemente, ha atraido considerable atenci/n; la aparicion de una nueva forma de Comunidad.Gottman ha escrito sobrela "megalopolis," y otros han escriio sobreel desarrollode "campos urbanos,"terminos que reemplazarian a los conceptos tradicionales de "ciudad" y "metropolis." La creenciaque sustenia estos esjuerzos es que una crecienie division intermetropolitana del trabajo, estd originan­do un nuevo tipo de comunidad. Ahora, si [ueramos a entender el proceso de urbanizaci/ni en unasociedad industrializada, la cual estd caracterizada por una constante reduccion de las barrerasespacio-temporales, parace necesario determinar si en realidad se presenta una nueva forma decomunidad.

Este estudio de la zona metropolitana noresie de los Estados Unidos, utiliza datos censales sobre lacomposicion industrial de la [uerza del trabajo en 1950 y 1960, y compara la varianza de los cuocientesde localizacion. en varias industrias con el de la venta de alimentos al por menor, en un esjuerzo paradeterminar si ha habido una creciente diferenciacion economica. El autor encuentra ligera evidenciade una creciente division intermetropolitana del trabajo y pone en duda la validez de la "megalopolis"como una forma de comunidad.

SUMMARY

Recently, the emergence of a new community form has attracted considerable attention. Gottmannhas written of the "megalopolis," and others have written of the development of "urban fields" whichwill replace the traditional concepts of "city" and "metropolis." The belief underlying these efforts isthat an increasing intermetropolitan division of labor is bringing about a new type of community.Now, if we are to understand the process of urbanization in an industrialized society which is char­acterized by constantly shrinking spatio-temporal barriers, it seems necessary to determine if a newcommunity form actually is present.

This study of the metropolitan northeastern portion of the United States utilizes Census data on theindustrial composition of the labor force in 1950 and 1960, and compares the variance of locationquotients in various industries with that in retail food in an effort to determine whether there has beenincreasing economic differentiation. The author finds scant evidenceof an increasing intermetropolitandivision of labor and questions the validity of "megalopolis" as a community form.

Recently, the emergence of a new com­munity form has attracted considerableattention. Gottmann has written of the"megalopolis" in referring to the urban­ized Atlantic seaboard from southern NewHampshire to northern Virginia.' Mega­lopolis is conceptualized as a chain of con­tiguous metropolitan communities boundtogether by a web of variegated interrela­tionships. Its major feature is a vast con­centration and variety of people, thingsand functions; and it is viewed as the eco-

• Department of Sociology, Brown University.The author is indebted to Professor Allan Feldtof Cornell University for critically appraisingvarious drafts of this paper. The author alone isresponsible for any shortcomings of the presentanalysis.

1 Jean Gottmann, Megalopolis: The UrbanizedNortheastern Seaboard of the United States (NewYork: Twentieth Century Fund, 1961).

nomic hinge of the nation, linking theNorth American continent and the foreignmarkets accessible by the Atlantic Ocean.Thus, Megalopolis is viewed as a func­tional entity, a super-metropolis, whoseparts are interdependent and whose ac­tivities dominate the American economy."

2 For instance, Gottmann (ibid., p. 100) writes,"Despite the lively competition between the citiesand the efforts at decentralization of various over­crowded activities, a specialization worked itselfout, establishing a new division of labor not onlybetween groupsof people but also between sectionsofthe region, between places ui "Megalopolis." Else­where ("Megalopolis or the Urbanization of theNortheastern Seaboard," Economic Geography,XXXIII [1957], 189-200), after stating that"megalopolis" is of Greek origin and means a verylarge city, Gottmann refers to this region as anurban system. See also, Howard J. Nelson,"Megalopolis and the New York MetropolitanRegion: New Studies of the Urbanized Eastern

734

An Empirical Examination of Megapolitan Structure 735

And this concept is not without adherents.In a discussion of American urbanization,Friedmann and Miller have written: "Theolder established centers, together withthe intermetropolitan peripheries that en­velop them, will constitute the new eco­logical unit of America's post-industrialsociety that will replace the traditionalconcepts of the city and metropolis. Thisbasic element of the emerging spatial or­der we shall call the urban field...."3

If we are to understand the nature ofurbanization in an industrialized societycharacterized by constantly shrinkingspatio-temporal barriers, it seems neces­sary to determine empirically whether anew community form actually is emerg­ing. At the outset, it is acknowledged thatthe areas designated by Gottmann asMegalopolis undoubtedly are the commer­cial and economic dominants of America.This report focuses, rather, on whether ornot there is an increasing intermetropoli­tan division within Megalopolis. If so, thisconcept does identify a supercommunity;if not, Megalopolis is a mere configurationof metropolises which share a commongeographic area.

BACKGROrND

The concept of the metropolitan com­munity is itself a relatively recent devel­opment. The classic presentation of thisconcept occurred when Gras published hisIntroduction to Economic Hietoru.: His bas­ic theme was that with each stage oftechnological development, man has si-

Seaboard," Annals of the Association of AmericanGeographers," LII (1962),307-10.

3 John Friedmann and John Miller, "TheUrban Field," Journal of the American Instituteof Planners, XXXI (1965). See also, ChristopherTunnard, "America's Super-Cities," Harper'sMagazine (August, 1958), pp. 59-65.

4 Norman S. B. Gras, An Introduction to Eco­nomic History (New York: Harper and Brothers,1922). For an excellent summary, see Donald J.Bogue, The Structure of the Metropolitan Commu­nity: A Study of Dominance and Subdominance(Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1950),pp.7-8.

multaneously developed a community or­ganization "suitable to the techniques ofwresting a livelihood from the resources ofnature."! Gras collated information aboutthe technological progress of man throughrecorded history with comparable infor­mation about his economic and social or­ganization and presented a five-stage clas­sification of community organization on acontinuum. The metropolis represents thelast of these ideal types. Each stage is dis­tinguished by the function that the com­munity performs for the population of anarea or for a given group of people. Thus,what distinguishes a metropolis from acity is not size or shape, but the economicfunction of commercial dominance over awide area."

The concept of the metropolitan unit­comprised of both the metropolitan cityand the surrounding countryside-as theecological dominant of a technologicallyadvanced society was further advanced byMcKenzie through methods quite differ­ent than those of Gras. McKenzie con­cluded that the development of the me­tropolis had been made possible by greatlyimproved transportation, which multi­plied the avenues of contact within anarea and brought formerly independentcommunities into a single functioning unit.And he asserted that the economic unityof the metropolitan area is based on terri­torial differentiation and specialization ofparts functionally integrated into a bal­ance of spatial and temporal relations. 7

Bogue, influenced by the conceptual struc­ture of both Gras and McKenzie, pub­lished The Structure of the MetropolitanCommunity,8 in which the principal con­cern is the interrelationships between themetropolitan center and its hinterland.

Thus, considerable attention has beendevoted to the assertion that the metropo-

6 Bogue, ibid.

6 Gras, op. cit., p. 184.

7 R. D. McKenzie, The Metropolitan Commu­nity (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company,1933).

8 Op. cit.

736 DEMOGRAPHY

lis is a form of social organization thatrepresents an adaptive response of man tohis physical, socio-cultural, and techno­logical environment and that this com­munity form is the commercial and eco­nomic dominant of American society. Ithas also been suggested that there is anintermetropolitan division of labor and aninterrelationship based on the functionalspecialization of metropolises in varioustypes of economic activity. This analysis,then, is directed towards answering thequestion of whether the so-called "mega­lopolitan structure" is an example of inter­metropolitan interdependence or whetherit is simply what it most obviously ap­pears to be-a number of contiguousmetropolitan areas whose extremities havebegun to overlap. 9

Three major types of economic ac­tivity are necessary for the survival of anycommunity: (1) that which is required forthe maintenance of the physical commu­nity; (2) the services, including trade,necessary to maintain the population at agiven level of living; and (3) manufactur­ing activity for local consumption.t" Sub­sumed under these are the various typesof occupational and industrial activity."In any community the configuration ofthe established economic system must besuch that any goods and services that can­not be produced locally will be importedfrom other areas. This can be effected only

V Thus, Jerome Picard writes in "Urban Re­gions of the United States" (Urban Land, XXI, 4[April, 1962], 3): "A popular misconception hasled to calling this a 'city 500 miles long.' It mostdefinitely is not a single city, but a region of con­centrated urbanism-a continuous zone of me­tropolises, cities, towns and exurban settlementwithin which one is never far from a city."

10 Otis D. Duncan and Albert J. Reiss, Jr., So­cial Characteristics of Urban and Rural Communi­ties, 1950 (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.,1956), p. 216.

11 For a study linking the occupational and in­dustrial composition of a community, see OrnerR. Galle, "Occupational Composition and theMetropolitan Hierarchy: The Inter- and Intra­Metropolitan Division of Labor," AmericanJournal of Sociology, LXIX (1963), 26G-69.

through local production of surpluses insome commodities to be exchanged forthose items not produced locally. Thecommunity can export these commoditiesin two ways-it can ship out the productor service, or it can temporarily attractconsumers from other areas. This is calledexport activity.P

Of course, cities are not self-sufficiententities but carryon exchanges both withtheir hinterland and with other citiesthrough the indirect medium of the mar­ket, which serves to relate intercommu­nity needs among them. A functionallyspecialized city, then, is one whose exportactivity is quite different from that of theaverage city.u

The development of functional speciali­zation between cities has been made pos­sible largely by the general contraction ofspace and time produced by improve­ments in transportation and communica­tion with the resulting fluidity of productsand people, combined with the develop­ment of extremely large cities, itself madepossible by these and other technologicaladvances. Since specialization in an activ­ity by a particular population aggregate isindicative of interdependence with otherpopulations, the patterning of functionalspecialization may be used to examine thepattern of interdependence which existsamong the various components of an ur­ban system."

12 For a sophisticated handling of the dichot­omy between maintenance and export activities,see Albert J. Reiss, Jr., "Functional Specializa­tion of Cities," in Cities and Society: The RevisedReader in Urban Sociology, ed. Paul K. Hatt andAlbert J. Reiss, Jr. (Glencoe: The Free Press,1957), IIp. 555-76; and Gunnar Alexandersson,The Industrial Structure of American Cities (Lin­coln: University of Nebraska Press, 1955).

13 Duncan and Reiss, op, cii., p. 217. For abrief discussion of the European origins of theconcept of functional specialization, see Alex­andersson, op, cu., p. 20.

14 This notion is stated explicitly by Noel P.Gist and Sylvia Fleis Fava (Urban Society [5thed.; New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company,1964], 248), who write, "To the extent that spe­cialization within a region occurs, to that extentthere must be interdependence of the parts one

An Empirical Examination of Megapolitan Structure 737

It should be noted that all cities per­form virtually all economic functions (forexample, wholesale trade), but that theydo so to varying degrees, with some citiesbecoming specialized in one or more typesof activity and exporting the product ofthis activity to other areas and communi­ties. But, since functional specialization ofone area implies interdependence with an­other, any functional interrelationshipsexisting within a system of metropolitanareas should be evident through an ex­amination of employment statistics byindustry. Consequently, if there is an in­termetropolitan division of labor withinMegalopolis, this should be revealed by apattern of complementary functional spe­cialization among the various metropoli­tan units. Further, this pattern shouldhave increased temporally as the resultantof the process of differentiation of econom­ic activity and the continued developmentof the intermetropolitan division of labor.

Unless such a pattern exists among themetropolitan areas of Megalopolis andunless the intensity of this pattern hasincreased through time, it is difficult toconceive of Megalopolis as anything otherthan a grouping of contiguous metropo­lises sharing a common geographic area.

METHODS

The units selected for this analysis arethe thirty-one metropolises within thearea designated by Gottmann as Mega­lopolis. These were classified as Standard

on another." This is also a recurring theme inAmos H. Hawley, Human Ecology: A Theory ofCommunity Structure (New York: The RonaldPress Company, 1950), especially in Chapter 12.Conceptually distinct approaches to measuringsystematic interdependence, or in testing for in­terdependence to ascertain whether a system ex­ists, may be found in Walter Isard and RobertKavesh, "Economic Structural Interrelations ofMetropolitan Regions," American Journal of So­ciology, LX (1954), 152-62; and in Ralph W.Pfouts, "Patterns of Economic Interaction in theCrescent," in Urban Growth Dynamics in a Re­gional Cluster of Cities, ed. F. Stuart Chapin, Jr.,and Shirley F. Weiss (New York: John Wiley andSons, Inc., 1962), pp. 31-58.

Metropolitan Areas in 1950 and StandardMetropolitan Statistical Areas in 1960.16

Whether or not a given metropolis is func­tionally specialized in a particular type ofactivity has been determined through theuse of location quotients, given in theratio Pi/Pi, where Pi is the proportion ofthe local labor force engaged in a particu­lar activity, and Pi is the proportion ofsome base or standard population engagedin that activity. The usual inference drawnis that a ratio equal to unity indicates thatlocal production is sufficient to satisfy lo­cal consumption, so that the communityneither imports nor exports the productsof that activity. Accordingly, a ratiogreater than unity indicates export of theparticular commodity, and a ratio lessthan unity implies the community cannotsatisfy local consumption demands and

15 There were 39 SMSA's in this area in 1960.Under 1950 definitions, however, many of theeight additional SMSA's would not have qualifiedas SMA's. For a discussion of the differences indefinition between SMA's and SMSA's as well aschanges in boundary and title occurring to vari­ous SMSA's between 1950 and 1960, see Office ofStatistical Standards, Standard Metropolitan Sta­tistical Areas (Washington, D.C.: GovernmentPrinting Office, 1961). It was felt that analysisshould be limited to units for which comparabledata are available, at the same time recognizingthat the process of economic differentiation im­plied by Megalopolis and similar concepts shouldfoster the rise of new metropolitan areas special­ized in particular types of economic activity. Theplaces included in this study, by their 1950 SMAdesignations, are: Albany-Schenectady-Troy; Al­lentown-Bethlehem-Easton; Atlantic City; Balti­more; Boston; Bridgeport; Brockton; Fall River;Harrisburg; Hartford; Lancaster; Lawrence;Lowell; Manchester; New Bedford; New Britain­Bristol; New Haven; Philadelphia; Providence;Reading; Scranton; Springfield-Holyoke; Stam­ford-Norwalk; Trenton; Washington; Waterbury;Wilkes-Barre--Hazleton; Wilmington; Worces­ter; and York. The New York-New JerseyStandard Consolidated Area was used in 1960because of its correspondence to the 1950 NewYork-Northeastern New Jersey SMA. For an ap­praisal of the extent to which SMA's correspondto communities, see Allan G. Feldt, "The Metro­politan Area Concept: An Evaluation of the 1950SMA's," Journal of the American Statistical As­sociation, LXJI965), 617-36.

738 DEMOGRAPHY

must import the product to meet thisdeficiency."

There are two types of export activityin which a metropolis can engage andwhich produce two conceptually distincttypes of functional specialization-thatbetween metropolitan city and hinterlandand that between metropolises. Since ourconcern is intermetropolitan interdepend­ence, that which exists between city andhinterland should be controlled. While inthe present analysis this has been at­tempted through the selection of the basepopulation, in other analyses, the conven­tional procedure has been to use theUnited States labor force as the base.This, however, certainly would includethe effects of metropolitan-hinterland spe­cialization, large numbers of nonmetropol­itan workers and consumers, and inter­regional diversity of consumption anddemand patterns. The base populationused in this report is the collective laborforce of the thirty-one metropolitan unitsof analysis. If the pattern of metropolis­hinterland interdependence were the samefor all metropolises, this procedure wouldin fact control for that relationship andany differences would represent inter­metropolitan exchanges. While this is notstrictly the case, it is felt that a generalsimiliarity in this respect exists amongmetropolitan areas, that any errors in­curred will not be cumulative from me­tropolis to metropolis, and that the effect

16 Obviously, these arguments rest on a num­ber of assumptions which mayor may not betenable in a given case. For a discussion of thisproblem, see John M. Matilla and WilburThompson, "The Measurement of the EconomicBase of the Metropolitan Area," Land Economics,XXXI (1955), 215-28; and George H. Hilde­brand and Arthur Mace, Jr., "The EmploymentMultiplier in an Expanding Industrial Market:Los Angeles County, 1940--1947," Review of Eco­nomics and Statistics, XXXII (1950),241-49. Anearlier statistic from which the location quotienthas been developed may be found in the "coef­ficient of localization," in A. J. Wensley andP. Sargent Florence, "Recent Industrial Concen­tration," Review of Economic Studies, VII (1940),139-58.

of these errors will be similar in 1950 and1960.

Two procedures have been followed toassess the existence of increasing differen­tiation between the various metropolitanareas. Location quotients for each activityhave been determined and the variance ofthese ratios computed at each point oftime. If differentiation occurred duringthe intercensal period, the variancesshould be larger in 1960 than in 1950. Thesecond procedure has been to form ratiosof the standard deviation of the locationquotients in each activity to that in retailfood, on the assumption that retail foodactivity basically represents nonexportedactivity. Therefore, variation in retailfood activity between metropolitan areascan be regarded as approximately theamount of variation that can be expectedby chance. If these ratios are not greaterthan unity, little support for interdepend­ence is present. Further, the change in the1950-60 period can be measured by sum­ming these ratios at each point of time andcomparing the two statistics. If, on theone hand, the aggregate 1960 statistic islarger than the 1950 measure, it seems safeto assert that the process of differentiationtoward an intermetropolitan division oflabor occurred. On the other hand, if the1960 statistic is not larger than in 1950,little support is present for the notion thata new community form is emerging.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The labor force profiles in the broad in­dustrial groups are presented in Table 1.Little change occurred in the overall dis­tribution during this period. The largestincreases occurred in the categories, "pro­fessional services" and "other industries."(The increase in the last was primarilyattributable to an increase in the cate­gory of "industry not reporting.") Thelargest decreases occurred in the cate­gories "personal services" and "retailfood." These industrial categories de­clined by about 20 per cent over the re­spective 1950 portions of the labor force.

As a result of this stability, there was

An Empirical Examination of Megapolitan Structure 739

little change in the means of the locationquotients (Table 2). When the standarddeviations of the location quotients areexamined, the only large increase in varia­bility occurs in the category "business andrepair services." Since decreases in varia­bility occur in most of the other generalcategories of economic activity, it appearsthat metropolitan areas have becomemore alike rather than more differentiatedin this respect." When ratios are formed

17 An increase in homogeneity of economic ac­tivity should not be entirely surprising. Rela­tively advantageous locations for a given type ofeconomic activity are dependent upon more fa­vorable accessibility to basic industry inputsfrom regional and national sources and to re­gional and national markets. Basic industry in­puts would include intermediate factors such asa skilled labor force, economies of scale, industrylinkages, and so on, as well as the basic resources.As transportation and communication networkscontinue to improve within a region, any givenpoint within that region will have better accessboth to the input factors and to the existing mar-

of the standard deviation of the locationquotients in each activity to that of retailfood, there is a cross-sectional evidence ofinterdependence at each point of time, butthere is no evidence of increasing inter­dependence except in "business and repairservices." When a summary statistic isformed by summing these ratios, this fig-

kets. Eventually this would reduce variance inaccessibility for different points within the region.Further, the various metropolitan areas withinthe megalopolitan region have been experiencingpopulation growth, which enlarges existing mar­kets and creates new ones. These two factors,combined with the market orientation of the re­gional economy, are conducive to ubiquity ofproduction and economic activity, and wouldlead to homogeneity of labor force profiles for thevarious metropolitan communities containedwithin the megalopolitan region. For a treatmentof the consequences of variations in access char­acteristics, see Harvey S. Perloff et al., Regions,Resources and Economic Growth (Lincoln: Univer­sity of Nebraska Press, 1960).

Table I.-INDUSTRIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE METROPOLITAN

LABOR FORCE, 1950 AND 1960

Percent of totallabor force

Industry 1950I960

1950 1960

Construct ion .............•....... 5.625 4.9S5 .886Manufacturing ...••.•••.••••••.••• 32.319 30.899 .956Utilities, transportation and

communication ................... 8.349 7.198 .862Wholesale trade •••••••••••••••••• 4.197 3.867 .921Retail food ....................... 6.552 5.379 .821All retail trade .•••••••••••••••• 15.696 13.737 .875Finance, insurance and

real estate .................... 5.358 5.780 1.079Business and repair services ..... 2.746 2.969 1.081Personal services ................ 6.248 5.109 .818Professional services ..•.•.•..••. 10.062 12.832 1.275Public administration .•••••.••.•• 6.032 6.221 1.031

Other industries(a)

3.345 6.403 1.914..............

(a)Includes nonurban activities, such as agriculture, forestryand fisheries, and mining, and industry not reported.

SOURCE: All data in this report are computed from the United StatesCensus of Population, Table 35, "Economic Cha r-ac t e r-Ls t Lc s ofthe Population by Sex, for Standard Metropolitan Areas,Urbanized Areas, and Urban Places of 10,000 or More: 1950,"and Table 75, "Industry Group of Employed Persons and MajorOccupational Group of Unemployed Persons, by Sex, for Stan_dard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Urbanized Areas, andUrban Places of 10,000 or More; 1960."

Tab

le2

.-L

oC

AT

ION

QU

OT

IEN

TS

OF

GE

NE

RA

LT

YP

ES

OF

IND

US

TR

IAL

AC

TIV

ITY

,19

50A

ND

1960

Mea

no

flo

cati

on

qu

oti

en

tsS

tan

dar

dd

ev

iati

on

of

Sta

nd

ard

dev

iati

on

of

LQj

locati

on

qu

oti

en

tsto

LQin

reta

ilfo

od

Ind

ust

ry

19

50

19

60

19

60

19

50

19

60

19

60

19

50

19

60

19

60

19

50

19

50

'i:"9"5

'O

Co

nst

ruct

ion..

....

....

..••..

e.'

.99

51

.04

21

.04

7.2

28

.19

0.8

33

1.3

18

1.0

80

.81

9M

anu

fact

uri

ng

••••

••••

••••

••••

•1

.21

51

.21

3.9

98

.37

7.3

37

.89

42

.17

91

.91

5.8

79

Uti

liti

tes,

tran

spo

rtati

on

and

com

mu

nic

ati

on

s..

••..

••..

....

.81

1.8

13

1.0

02

.25

9.2

13

.82

21

.49

71

.21

0.8

08

Wh

ole

sale

trad

e••

••••

••••

•.••

•.7

07

.74

51

.05

4.2

00

.18

2.9

10

1.1

56

1.0

34

.89

4R

eta

ilfo

od

••••

••••

••••

••••

••.

.89

7.9

46

1.0

55

.17

3.1

76

1.0

17

1.0

00

1.0

00

1.0

00

All

reta

iltr

ad

e..

....

....

....

.94

2.9

96

1.0

57

.11

5.1

09

.94

8.6

65

.61

9.9

31

Fin

an

ce,

insu

ran

ce,

and

real

esta

te•.

••••

••••

••••

•••

.63

9.7

08

1.1

08

.37

4.3

19

.85

32

.16

21

.81

3.8

39

Bu

sin

ess

and

rep

air

services~.

.81

4.7

62

.93

6.1

80

.22

61

.25

61

.04

01

.28

41

.23

5P

erso

na

lserv

ices.•

•••.•

•..

•..

.86

2.8

97

1.0

41

.45

6.3

98

.87

22

.63

62

.26

1.8

58

Pro

fess

ion

al

serv

ices.•

•..

.•.•

.90

2.9

24

1.0

24

.17

8.1

71

.96

11

.02

9.9

72

.94

5P

ub

lic

ad

min

istr

ati

on

••••

••••

•.8

73

.89

11

.02

1.8

94

.77

6.8

68

5.1

67

4.4

09

.85

3

To

tal.

....

••••••••••••••••..

.•••••••••.•

••••.•

••••.•

..••..

••.•

••..

•••..

....

.••

19

.84

91

7.5

97

.88

7

An Empirical Examination of Megapolitan Structure 741

ure drops from 19.85 in 1950 to 17.60 in196Q-a decline of 11 percent.

On the basis of these broad categoriesof economic activity, there is little em­pirical evidence for the notion of an in­creasing economic differentiation amongthe thirty-one metropolitan areas included

in this study. Since it is possible that thesemore general types of activity might con­ceal more detailed interdependence, theadditional step has been taken of perform­ing a similar analysis using more detailedindustry groups. (See Table 3.)

When this is done, the labor force pro-

Table 3. -DETAILED INDUSTRIAL CHARACTERISTICSCa) OF THE

METROPOLITAN LABOR FORCE, 1950 AND 1960

Industry

Construct ion .Durable processing .••••••••••••••Durable fabricating ..••••••••••.•Nondurable processing .•••••••••.•Nondurable fabricating .•••••••.••

Railroads .Trucking , .Other transportation .••••••••••.•Telecommunica t ions. 4 •••••••••••••

Utilities and sanitary services ..

Wholesale trade ••••...•••••.•.•••Retail food .•••...•.••••••.••.•••Other retail sales .•..•••••••••••Finance, insurance, and real

estate .••.••........•••.•••••••Business services ..

Repair services .......•.......••.Private household ..•.•••.••••.•..Other personal services .Entertainment ..........•.........Hospitals, welfare, and other

professional services ..••......

Educational services .Public administrstion .•.•........Other industries ..•..••••.•.•.•••

- ~ -

Percent of totallabor force

19501960

1950 1960

5.6251

.8864.9852.429 2.201 .906

11.411 12.935 1.1349.412 7.466 .7939.066 8.297 .915

1. 741 1.009 .5801.219 1.247 1. 0232.445 2.124 .8691.445 1.505 1.0421.500 1.312 .875

4.197 3.867 .921.6.552 5.379 .821.9.145 8.359 .91<1

5.358 5.780 1.0791.342 1.866 1.390

1.404 1.104 .7862.787 2.249 .8073.460 2.860 .8271.101 .810 .736

5.749 7.445 1.295

3.212 4.576 1.4256.032 6.221 1.031.3.345 6.403 1.914

(a)With the exception of manur a c t ur-Lng activity, these categoriesfollow those of the condensed classification of the United statesCensus, with the following alterations. The 1950 categories, "hotelsand lodging places" and "other personal serVices," have been combinedto equal the 1960 category, "other personal services." The 1950 cate_gories, "medical and other health services" and "other professionaland related serVices," have been combined to correspond with the 1960ca t.cgory , "hospitals, welfare and other professional services, It whichconsists of "hospitals, II "welfare, religious and nonprofit membershiporganizations," and "other professional and related services.""Educational services, gove rnment " and "educational services, private"have been collapsed into "educational serv i ccs ," Retail food is thecombination of "food and dairy products stores, and milk retsiling"and Heating and drinking places. II Manuf ao t u r i.ng activity has beendivided into four types, following the scheme presented in Otis D.Duncan et al., Metropolis and Region (Baltimore: The Johns HopkinsPress, 1960), pp. 57_8.

SOURCE: See Table 1.

Tab

le4

.-L

oC

AT

ION

QU

OT

IEN

TS

OF

DE

TA

ILE

DIN

DU

ST

RIA

LA

CT

IVIT

IES

,19

50A

ND

1960

Mea

no

flo

cati

on

qu

oti

en

tsS

tan

dard

dev

iati

on

of

Sta

nd

ard

dev

iati

on

of

LQj

locati

on

qu

oti

en

tsto

LQin

reta

ilfo

od

Ind

ust

ry

19

50

19

60

19

60

19

50

19

60

19

60

19

50

19

60

19

60

T9'5O

T9'5O

I95

0

Ca

nst

ruct

ion..

....

...•

•.•

•••.•

..9

95

1.0

42

1.0

47

.22

8.1

90

.83

31

.31

81

.08

0.8

19

Du

rab

lep

ro

cess

ing

...•

•••••••••

1.5

22

1.3

53

.88

91

.64

21

.14

9.7

00

9.4

91

6.5

28

.68

8D

ura

ble

fab

ricati

ng

.•••

••••

••••

1.1

88

1.2

37

1.0

41

.90

8.6

98

.76

95

.24

91

.96

6.7

56

No

nd

ura

ble

pro

cess

ing

••••

••••

••1

.57

51

.45

1.9

21

1.2

07

.92

4.7

66

6.9

77

5.2

50

.75

2N

on

du

rab

lefa

bri

cati

ng

••••

••••

•.7

93

.92

31

.16

4.4

50

.57

51

.27

82

.60

13

.26

71

.25

6

Ra

ilro

ad

s..

....

....

....

....

....

.1

.07

01

.01

9.9

52

.88

6.8

54

.96

45

.12

14

.85

2.9

47

Tru

ckin

g........................

.93

71

.01

61

.08

4.2

22

.33

91

.52

71

.28

31

.92

61

.50

1O

ther

tran

spo

rtati

on

••••

••••

•••

.51

5.4

54

.88

2.2

90

.29

21

.00

71

.67

61

.65

9.9

90

Tel

eco

mm

un

ica

tio

ns..

•.•

••••••••

.73

5.8

31

1.1

31

.32

2.2

79

.86

61

.86

11

,58

5.8

52

Uti

liti

es

and

san

itary

serv

ices..

.••..

....

..•..

....

•.9

66

1.0

26

1.0

62

.19

4.2

37

1.2

22

1.1

21

1.3

47

1.2

02

Wh

ole

sale

trad

e••

••••

••••

••••

••.7

07

.74

51

.05

4.2

00

.18

2.9

10

1.1

56

1.0

34

.89

4R

eta

ilfo

od

••••

••••

••••

••••

••••

.89

7.9

46

1.0

55

.17

3.1

76

1.0

17

1.0

00

1.0

00

1.0

00

Oth

erreta

ilsa

les..

•••••••••••

.97

51

.02

81

.05

4.0

09

.00

8.8

89

.05

2.0

45

.86

5F

ina

nce

,in

sura

nce

,an

drea

lesta

te..

....

....

....

....

..6

39

.70

81

.10

8.3

74

.31

9.8

53

2.1

62

1.8

13

.83

9B

usi

ness

serv

ices..

••••••••••••

.56

0.5

96

1.0

64

.32

7.3

80

1.1

62

1.8

90

2.1

59

1.1

42

Rep

air

serv

ices..

..••••••••••••

1.0

57

1.0

43

.98

7.1

72

.17

71

.02

9.9

94

1.0

06

1.0

12

Priv

ate

ho

use

ho

ld..

...•

•••••••.

.78

5.8

39

1.0

69

.48

0.4

89

1.0

19

2.7

75

2.7

78

1.0

01

Oth

erp

erso

na

lserv

ices•••••..

..9

25

.94

21

.01

8.6

29

.56

1.8

92

3.6

36

3.1

88

.87

7E

nte

rta

inm

ent...........•......

.81

3.7

78

.95

7.3

93

.32

5.8

27

2.2

72

1.8

47

.81

3H

osp

itals

,w

elf

are

,an

do

ther

pro

fess

ion

al

serv

ices•••.•

•••

.85

2.8

90

1.0

45

.22

3.1

67

.74

91

.28

9.9

49

,73

6

Ed

uca

tio

na

lse

rv

ices..

•••••.•

.•1

.02

41

.00

4.9

80

.24

9.2

53

1.0

16

1.4

39

1.4

38

.99

9P

ub

lic

ad

min

istr

ati

on

.•••

••••

••.8

73

.89

11

.02

1.8

94

.77

6.8

68

5.1

67

4.4

09

.85

3

To

tal.

..•••••••••••••••••.•

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

,6

0.5

30

53

.12

6.8

78

An Empirical Examination of Megapolitan Structure 743

file is not quite as stable as when the moregeneral categories are used. The standarddeviations of the location quotients showthat substantial increases occurred in fouractivities during the 1950-60 period:"nondurable fabricating," "trucking,""utilities and sanitary services," and"business services." (See Table 4.) Thereis also considerable cross-sectional evi­dence of interdependence, as indicated bythe ratio of the various standard devia­tions to that of retail food. However, thereis only evidence of substantial increaseddifferentiation or interdependence in thefour types of activity mentioned above,while in twelve of the industry groups

there is evidence of decreased interdepend­ence. In this case, the aggregate statisticdeclines from 60.53 in 1950 to 53.13 in196o-a decrease of 12 percent.

To sum up: there is but limited evi­dence of increasing economic interdepend­ence among the metropolitan areas ofMegalopolis. If anything, their labor forceshave become more homogeneous. Onemust therefore question the validity ofconcepts like Megalopolis as representinga new community form and ecologicalunit and consider them as clusters oflarge, contiguous cities until some evi­dence is made available to support theMegalopolitan concept.