Cubic spline population density functions and subcentre delimitation. The case of Barcelona

The presence of subcentres cannot be captured by an exponential function. Cubic spline functions seem more appropriate to depict the polycentricity pattern of modern urban systems. Using data from Barcelona Metropolitan Region, two possible population subcentre delimitation procedures are discussed. One, taking an estimated derivative equal to zero, the other, a density gradient equal to zero. It is argued that, in using a cubic spline function, a delimitation strategy based on derivatives is more appropriate than one based on gradients because the estimated density can be negative in sections with very low densities and few observations, leading to sudden changes in estimated gradients. It is also argued that using as a criteria for subcentre delimitation a second derivative with value zero allow us to capture a more restricted subcentre area than using as a criteria a first derivative zero. This methodology can also be used for intermediate ring delimitation.

The Accessibility City. When Transport Infrastructure Matters in Urban Spatial Structure

Suburbanization is changing the urban spatial structure and less monocentric metropolitan regions are becoming the new urban reality. Focused only on centers, most works have studied these spatial changes neglecting the role of transport infrastructure and its related location model, the “accessibility city”, in which employment and population concentrate in low-density settlements and close to transport infrastructure. For the case of Barcelona, we consider this location model and study the population spatial structure between 1991 and 2006. The results reveal a mix between polycentricity and the accessibility city, with movements away from the main centers, but close to the transport infrastructure.

Metropolitan Areas in Spain and Italy

Metropolitan areas concentrate the main share of population, production and consumption in OECD countries. They are likely to be the most important units for economic, social and environmental analysis as well as for the development of policy strategies. However, one of the main problems that occur when adopting metropolitan areas as units of analysis and policy in European countries is the absence of widely accepted standards for identifying them. This severe problem appeared when we tried to perform comparative research between Spain and Italy using metropolitan areas as units of analysis. The aim of this paper is to identify metropolitan areas in Spain and Italy using similar methodologies. The results allow comparing the metropolitan realities of both countries as well as providing the metropolitan units that can be used in subsequent comparative researches. Two methodologies are proposed: the Cheshire-GEMACA methodology (FUR) and an iterative version of the USA-MSA algorithm, particularly adapted to deal with polycentric metropolitan areas (DMA). Both methods show a good approximation to the metropolitan reality and produce very similar results: 75 FUR and 67 DMA in Spain (75% of total population and employment), and 81 FUR and 86 DMA in Italy (70% of total population and employment).