The Urban Population Spatial Structure and Labor Productivity of Administrative Region of Cities in The Northeast China

  • 1. College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, Jilin 130024, China;
    2. Urban Planning and Design Institute of Jilin Province, Changchun, Jilin 130061, China

Received date: 2010-12-04

  Revised date: 2011-06-13

  Online published: 1997-11-20


The spatial structure and efficiency is one part of the core content of Economic Geography. In recent years, based on the context of rapid development of metropolitan areas, some western scholars have been attempting to explore the relationship between spatial structure and labor productivity from the perspective of population aggregation effectiveness in metropolitan district. It is believed that the concentration can improve labor productivity. The paper measures the urban population spatial structure of administrative region of cities in the Northeast China by selecting 36 prefecture-level cities of Northeast China as samples, using data of the fifth national population census in 2000 and adopting the indicators of urban population polycentricity and decentrality which are offered by Meijers et al. In addition, the paper also has a derivation of demonstration regression model on the basis of OLS and Cobb-Douglas production function, and then takes a demonstration study on labor productivity and indicators such as polycentricity, decentrality and population scale of primate city. The objectives of this paper are generalized as: 1) to analyze the relationship between regional spatial structure and labor productivity; 2) to explore whether there is a similar relationship between structure and efficiency by comparing western researches conducted at the level of metropolitan areas with prefecture-level cities of Northeast China. The present study will undoubtedly provide a valuable theoretical basis for the prevalent regional urban systems planning in China. The main conclusions are drawn as follows: 1) The population scale of primate city has a positive correlation with labor productivity. In other words, larger population scale of primate city shows a higher labor productivity; 2) Polycentricity does not show higher labor productivity. There is no significant effect, no matter the spatial organization is single-center or multi-center, on labor productivity and also has not displayed the characteristics of scale dependence and space dependence; 3) Decentrality has an adverse impact on labor productivity, which is affected by population scale and area scale of administrative region of cities. More decentrality shows a lower labor productivity, and the population scale and area scale of administrative region of cities have a direct impact on the lower level of labor productivity when the decentrality is constant. Correspondingly, the spatial structure tending to concentration can lead to a higher labor productivity.

Cite this article

YANG Qing-shan, DU Xue, ZHANG Peng, ZHAO Yi-chun . The Urban Population Spatial Structure and Labor Productivity of Administrative Region of Cities in The Northeast China[J]. SCIENTIA GEOGRAPHICA SINICA, 2011 , 31(11) : 1301 -1306 . DOI: 10.13249/j.cnki.sgs.2011.011.1301


[1] 金凤君.空间组织与效率研究的经济地理学意义[J].世界地理研究,2007,16(4):55~59.
[2] Sveikauskas L. The Productivity of Cities[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1975,89(3):393-413.
[3] Segal D. Are there returns to scale in city size?[J].Review of Economics and Statistics,1976,58(3):339-350.
[4] Moomaw R L. Productivity and city size: a critique of the evidence[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1981, 96(4):675-688.
[5] Nakamura R. Agglomeration economies in urban manufacturing industries: a case of Japanese cities [J]. Journal of Urban Economics, 1985, 17(1):108-124.
[6] Henderson J V. Efficiency of resource usage and city size[J]. Journal of Urban Economics, 1986, 19(1):47-70.
[7] Carlino G A. Increasing returns to scale in metropolitan manufacturing[J].Journal of Regional Science, 1979,(19):363-373.
[8] Futagami K, Y Ohkusa. The quality ladder and product variety: larger economies may not grow faster[J]. Japanese Economic Review, 2003,(54):336-351.
[9] Meijers E J, Burger M J.Urban Spatial Structure and Labor Productivity in U.S.Metropolitan Areas[M]//The 2009 Regional Studies Association Annual Conference.Leuven, Belgium: Regional Studies Association ,2009.
[10] Glaeser E L, M E Kahn. Sprawl and Urban Growth[M]// Henderson V, J Thisse.Handbook of Regional Science and Urban Economics 4,Netherlands: Elsevier,2004: 2481-2527.
[11] Phelps N A, T Ozawa. Contrasts in agglomeration: proto-industrial, industrial and post-industrial forms compared[J]. Progress in Human Geography, 2003,27(5): 583-604.
[12] Meijers E J. Summing small cities does not make a large city: polycentric urban regions and the provision of cultural, leisure and sports amenities[J].Urban Study,2008,45(11):2323-2342.
[13] Ciccone A, Hall R E.Productivity and the density of economic activity[J].American Economic Review,1996,86(1): 54-70.
[14] LeeB, P Gordon. Urban Spatial Structure and Economic Growth in US Metropolitan Areas[M]//The 46th Annual Conference of The Western Regional Science Association. California, America: Western Regional Science Association,2007.