Concentric Zone Theory

The concentric zone theory demonstrated by Ernest Burgess is a theory that might be a little dated. It used to be that cities would form around one central nucleus in order to make sure that all important things were done in that specific area and people would come to this center area to administer and watch whatever may be going on in the town circle, as you get further out to reach the factory area in the CZT. Today, cities don’t really follow that pattern as you would not want a cluster of factories right outside the city’s main urban area. This would make the center see a little more irrelevant for factories.
After the factory area, you have the transition zone. Now this is something that I still think exists. I see the transition zone as the area of low income workers who don’t make enough money to be labeled as blue collar, as well as an example of many service-sector jobs. These are the people who are slowly working their way into the outer zones in order to live a better life. Right outside of the transition zone, you have the residential zone. This is the biggest zone in the theory, as this is where all workers choose to live. This still applies to what is called the suburbs today. Most people strive to make sure that when they have a family and children, to live in the suburbs as this area is generally much safer and where most of the educational establishments are. Finally, you have the commuter zone, which is where you must drive in order to get your place of work and then again to get to your place of residence. This could go either way, as some people have a ton of land outside the city, whereas others don’t have the money to live within the city and would rather live somewhere more remote and just come into the city when they need something or if they have to go to work. When asked if this theory still holds, I would say it depends on where you look. During my time I spent in the southern states, I would say it is more common in small, rural towns than it is in medium to large cities. When in the south, you could easily identify the business district and also the housing district. The center of the town was usually wherever the police and fire stations were at as well as the city courts. But if you were to look at a larger city, I would have to say that this theory no longer applies. Even in a city like Anchorage, where the population is nowhere near that of a major city, there are a few spots around that you could call the center of town, it all depends on who you ask and who really knows Anchorage inside and out. Naturally, over the last few hundred years, there have been many changes which have contributed to the disbanding of the CZT. People have gotten wise to the fact that it is not healthy to live near factories. People now know that the suburbs are a clean, quiet, and safe place to raise a family. In fact, many factories have even suburbanized. This theory no longer applies to larger cities. Which theory does work? The multiple-nuclei theory (MNT) is what seems to be happening in most of our larger towns. People have started to move away from all of the loud, noisy machinery to farther outlying places. The area where you would call the central business district is not necessarily only in one spot. If you had to ask an urban political economist what they thought about the CZT, they would probably most likely say that is impractical in society today. As said before and earlier in my paper, with all the things wrong with having the CZT in effect, it just isn’t practical.