Differential and non-differential urbanization in Ukraine during the soviet and post-soviet era
Formulation of the problem. To date, there are several concepts for the phased development of urban systems of various scales. But most of these urban development models are created in Western scientific schools of human geography. These models help to identify the stages of urban development in the socio-economic and political conditions of these countries. However, these models often cannot cleanly identify the stages of urban development in post-socialist and post-Soviet countries, and especially in their previous socialist or Soviet periods. Since the 1990s, Ukraine has been in a demographic crisis, which significantly distorts the perception of researchers about the processes of urbanization in its territory. Therefore, it is important to study the trends of urbanization in Ukraine through the prism of the concepts of stage-cyclical urban development. The comparison of the results with international trends and cases is also of high relevance. Based on these motives, this article tests the differential urbanization model as one of the key models of stage-evolutionary development of urban systems of higher hierarchical levels.
The purpose of the article: (1) to investigate the peculiarities of the development of urbanization processes in Ukraine during 1959-2019; (2) to rethink the conceptual basis of the differential urbanization model and methodological approaches to its testing in Ukraine; (3) to identify Soviet and post-Soviet patterns of urban development in Ukraine based on the results of identification of stages of the differential urbanization model; (4) to compare the results of testing the differential urbanization model in Ukraine with the cases from other countries.
Methodology. Based on the theory of the differential urbanization model and the experience of testing this model in other countries, certain methodological approaches were elaborated to test this concept at the national scale in Ukraine, namely (a) fixed sizes of urban centres, (b) two types of demographic indicators (rate of population growth and net migration rate) are used to identify the stages of differential urbanization, (c) calculations are based on official census data in Ukraine and inter-census estimates of migration and population.
Results. Empirical results indicate that urban development in Ukraine during 1959-2019, within the differential urbanization model, had several restarts, due to crisis processes of deconcentration of the population and crisis patterns of non-differential urbanization. The great or the first cycle of differential urbanization has been recorded since 1959, after the Second World War, as in 1959-1970 the initial stage of urbanization was identified. In 1970-1979, urban development entered the advanced stage of urbanization, which lasted until 1989. In 1989-1992, the initial stage of polarization reversal was observed in Ukraine. The crisis stage of non-differential urbanization started after 1992, when all categories of urban centres began to rapidly lose their population (for example, the same situation was observed in Estonia in the 1990s). Unfortunately, it was not possible to record migration trends in 1992-2002 due to the lack of a quality statistical base, and for this reason the end of the crisis stage cannot be clearly identified. Starting from 2002-2004, there was a restart of the advanced stage of urbanization, which prevailed until 2005-2007. During the World Economic Crisis (2008-2010), a crisis stage of counter-urbanization was recorded, which indicates a certain crisis deconcentration of the population of urban centres (for example, the same situation was recorded in the former West Germany and Russia during the socio-political and military crises of the first half XX century). A new restart of Ukrainian urbanization within the framework of the differential urbanization model took place in 2011-2013, when the advanced stage of large urban centres was identified. However, since 2014 in Ukraine the crisis pattern of non-differential urbanization has been fixed due to the aggravation of crisis processes in the socio-economical life of the country and the annexation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the beginning of the Russian-Ukrainian war in Donbas.
Scientific novelty and practical significance. Based on the results of previous research, a hybrid methodological approach to testing the differential urbanization model at the national scale was created, which was tested in Ukraine. The results of testing the differential urbanization model using the hybrid methodological approach indicate the temporary extramodelity and diversity of urban development in Ukraine. In general, with stable economic and political systems, administrative-territorial integrity, and open access to demographic data, the differential urbanization model can be used for certain forecasting and further programming of urban development both at the national level and at the level of polycentric urban regions.
Bondar, V.V. (2017). Features of ecistic-demographic development of the settlement network of Kyiv suburbs. Ukrainian Geographical Journal, 4(100), 48-53. https://doi.org/10.15407/ugz2017.04.048
Open database of the urban settlements population in Ukraine: "Cities & towns of Ukraine". Available at: http://pop-stat.mashke.org/ukraine-cities.htm
Data of the All-Union Population Census in Ukraine; open databases Demoscope. Available at: http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/
Mezentsev, K., & Havryliuk, O. (2015). Testing of the differential urbanization model in Ukraine. Ekonomichna ta Sotsialna Geografiya, 73, 15-26. https://doi.org/10.17721/2413-7154/2015.73.15-26
Mezentsev, K., Pidgrushnyi, G., & Mezentseva, N. (2014). Regional development in Ukraine: Socio-spatial inequali-ty and polarization. Kyiv: Print Service, 132.
Nefedova, T. G., & Treivish, A. I. (2005, October 10-23) The theory of "differential urbanization" and the hierarchy of cities in Russia at the turn of the XXI century. Demoscope Weekly, No. 217-218. Available at: http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2005/0217/analit01.php#_FNR_1%22
Oliynyk, Ya.B., & Stepanenko, A.V. (2000). Introduction to Social Geography: A Study Guide. Кyiv: Society "Knowledge", KOO, 204 p. (Higher education of the XXI century).
Pityurenko, Yu.I. (1972). Urban development and urban settlement system in Ukrainian SSR. Kyiv: Naukova dumka, 188.
Prybytkova, I.M. (2011). Evolution of urban systems in time and space dimension: Ukrainian way of development. Urban planning and spatial planning, 41, 351-368.
Rudenko, L.G., & Savchuk, I.G. (2013). Ukraine: cities space changes. Ukrainian Geographical Journal, 2(82), 48-56. https://doi.org/10.15407/ugz2013.02.048
Saliy, I.M. (2005). Urbanization in Ukraine: social and managerial aspects. Kyiv: Naukova dumka, 303 p.
World Bank Report (2015): Urbanization processes in Ukraine 1989-2013. Available at: https://mistosite.org.ua/ru/articles/urban%D1%96zacz%D1%96jn%D1%96-procesy-v-ukrayin%D1%96-zv%D1%96t-sv%D1%96tovogo-banku
Mezentsev, K., Oliynyk, Ya., & Mezentseva, N. (eds) (2017). Urban Ukraine: in the epicenter of spatial changes. Kyiv: Phoenix Publishing, 438.
Berry, B.J.L. (1976). The counterurbanization process: urban America since 1970. In B.J.L. Berry (ed), Urbaniza-tion and Counterurbanization. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 17-30.
Bonifazi, C., & Heins, F. (2003). Testing the differential urbanisation model for Italy. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 94(1), 23-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00234
Campuzano, E.P. (2006). Reestructuración urbano-regional y emigración de la Zona Metropolitana de la Ciudad de México [Urban and regional restructuration of the metropolitan area of the City of Mexico]. Investigaciones Geográficas, 127-144. Available at: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/569/56906011.pdf
Champion, T. (1989). Counterurbanisation: The Conceptual and Methodological Challenge. In T. Champion (ed), Counterurbanisation: The Changing Pace and Nature of Population Deconcentration. London, UK: Edward Ar-nold, 19-33.
Champion, T. (2003). Testing the differential urbanisation model in Great Britain, 1901–91. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 94(1), 11-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00233
Champion, T. (2001). Urbanization, suburbanization, counterurbanization and reurbanization. In R. Paddison (ed), Handbook of urban studies. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 143-161. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608375.n9
Elliott, J.R. (1997). Cycles within the System: Metropolitanisation and Internal Migration in the US, 1965-90. Ur-ban Studies, 34(1), 21-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098976258
Fielding, A. (1989). Migration and Urbanization in Western Europe Since 1950. The Geographical Journal, 155(1), 60-69. https://doi.org/10.2307/635381
Fielding, A.J. (1982). Counterurbanisation in Western Europe. Progress in Planning, 17(1), 1-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-9006(82)90006-X
Gedik, A. (2003). Differential urbanisation in Turkey, 1955–1997. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geo-grafie, 94(1), 100-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00240
Geyer, H., & Kontuly, T. (1996). A Theoretical Foundation for the Concept of Differential Urbanization. In H. Geyer, T. Kontuly (eds), Differential Urbanization: Integrating Spatial Models. London, UK: Edward Arnold, 290-308.
Geyer, H. (2002). An Exploration in Migration Theory. In H. Geyer (ed), International Handbook of Urban Systems. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 39-66.
Geyer, H. (1996). Expanding the Theoretical Foundation of the Concept of Differential Urbanization. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 87(1), 44-59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9663.1998.tb01536.x
Geyer, H.S., & Kontuly, T.M. (1993). A theoretical foundation for the concept of differential urbanization. In N. Hansen, K.J. Button, & P. Nijkamp (eds), Regional policy and regional integration: Vol. 6 of modern classics in re-gional science. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 219-228.
Geyer, H.S. (1990). Implications of differential urbanisation on deconcentration in the Pretoria-Witwatersrand-Vaal Triangle metropolitan area, South Africa. Geoforum, 21(4), 385–396. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-7185(90)90019-3
Gnatiuk, O., Mezentsev, K., & Provotar, N. (2021). From the agricultural station to a luxury village? Changing and ambiguous everyday practices in the suburb of Vinnytsia (Ukraine). Moravian Geographical Reports, 29(3), 202-216. https://doi.org/10.2478/mgr-2021-0015
Gnatiuk, O. (2017). Demographic dimension of suburbanization in Ukraine in the light of urban development the-ories. AUC Geographica, 52(2), 151-163. https://doi.org/10.14712/23361980.2017.12
Hall, P. (1971). Spatial Structure of Metropolitan England. In M. Chisholm, & G. Manners (eds), Spatial Policy Problems of the British Economy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 96-126.
Havryliuk, O., Gnatiuk, O., & Mezentsev, K. (2021). Suburbanization, but centralization? Migration patterns in the post-Soviet functional urban region – evidence from Kyiv. Folia Geographica, 63(1), 64-84. Available at: http://www.foliageographica.sk/unipo/journals/2021-63-1/587
Karácsonyi, D., Mezentsev, K., Pidgrusnyi, G., & Dövényi, Z. (2014). From Global Economic Crisis to Armed Crisis: Changing Regional Inequalities in Ukraine. Regional Statistics, 4(2), 18-39. https://doi.org/10.15196/RS04202
Kontuly, T., & Geyer, H.S. (2003). Introduction to Special Issue: Testing the Differential Urbanisation Model in Developed and Less Developed Countries. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 94(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00232
Kontuly, T., & Geyer, H.S. (2003). Lessons Learned from Testing the Differential Urbanisation Model. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 94(1), 124-128. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00242
Kontuly, T., & Dearden, B. (2003). Testing the temporal characterisation of the differential urbanisation model in western Germany, 1939–2010. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 94 (1), 64-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00237
Magocsi, P.R. (2010). A History of Ukraine: The Land and Its Peoples, 2nd Edition. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, Scholarly Publishing Division, 896.
Mezentsev, K., Gentile, M., Mezentseva, N., & Stebletska, I. (2019). An island of civilization in a sea of delay? Indif-ference and fragmentation along the rugged shorelines of Kiev's newbuild archipelago. Journal of Urban Affairs, 41(5), 654-678. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2018.1503544
Mezentsev, K., Brade, I., & Mezentseva, N. (2012). New Social and Economic Processes in Kyiv’s Hinterland. Hu-man Geography Journal, 12(1), 156-160.
Nefedova, T., & Treivish, A. (2003). Differential urbanisation in Russia. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 94(1), 75-88. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00238
Population growth rate: methodology. Demographics: Population Change: Core indicator. Unated Nations. Available at: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/natlinfo/indicators/methodology_sheets/demographics/population_growth_rate.pdf
Richardson, H.W. (1980). Polarization Reversal in Developing Countries. Papers in Regional Science, 45(1), 67-85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5597.1980.tb01101.x
Tammaru, T. (2003). Urban and rural population change in Estonia: patterns of differentiated and undifferentiat-ed urbanisation. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 94(1), 112-123. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00241
Tammaru, T., Kulu, H., & Kask, I. (2004). Urbanization, Suburbanization, and Counterurbanization in Estonia. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 45(3), 212-229. http://dx.doi.org/10.2747/1538-7126.96.36.199
Tisdale, H. (1942). The Process of Urbanization. Social Forces, 20(3), 311-316. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/20.3.311
Van den Berg, L., Drewett, R., Klaasen, L.H., Rossi, A., and Vijverberg, N.H.T. (1982). Urban Europe: A Study of Growth and Decline. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 184 p. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2013-0-03056-3
Van den Berg, L. (1999). The Urban Life Cycle and the Role of a Market-Oriented Revitalization Policy in Western Europe. In A. Summers, P. Cheshire, & L. Senn (eds), Urban Change in the United States and Western Europe. Comparative analysis. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press, 539-558.