Defining the Rural-Urban Fringe

Author(s): Robin J. Pryor

Source: Social Forces, Vol. 47, No. 2 (Dec., 1968), pp. 202-215
Published by: University of North Carolina Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2575150
Accessed: 12/09/2008 03:01
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uncpress.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of North Carolina Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Social Forces.

http://www.jstor.org

THE RURAL-URBAN
FRINGE
SOCIAL FORCES

202

the development of status homogamy in this

context.
Fifty knowledgeable fraternity members and
44 knowledgeable sorority members ranked the
25 fraternities and the 11 sororities on a state
university campus in the West South Central
region.
The agreement on these rankings
among men is expressed by coefficients of con
cordance of .68 and .57. Among women the
coefficients were .77 and .76. The rankings of
the men also were correlated with the rankings
of the women, yielding rho's of .97 for fra
ternities and .98 for sororities.
Information
about serious dating relation
ships was secured from reports of drops, pin
nings, and engagements in the campus news
paper. These reports are relatively complete for
fraternity and sorority members.
Forty-seven percent of the sorority members
and 20 percent of the fraternity members were
dropped, pinned, or engaged. Of these persons,
82 percent of the women and 63 percent of the
men were paired off with fraternity or sorority
partners. Men from the higher-ranked fraterni
ties. were more likely to be involved with so
rority members and their partners were more

202

likely to be from the higher-ranked sororities.

The proportions of men dating independent
women increased steadily from the highest- to
the lowest-ranked fraternities.
Unlike the situation among men where there
were very few relationships with off-campus
women, between one-sixth and one-fifth of the
women at all status levels were involved in
relationships with off-campus men. Most of
these men probably were former students rather
than nonstudents. When sorority women dated
campus men, they overwhelmingly were in
volved with fraternity men and with members
of the high- and middle-ranked fraternities.
When the status ranks of seriously-dating
Greek pairs were correlated, the correlations
increased from dropped to pinned to engaged
levels. Only the difference from dropped to
engaged was statistically significant.
Since
the same pairs were not followed through time,
no certain inference of change can be made. If
change does indeed occur, it would seem to be
a function of the selection-rejection process
rather than a function of the interaction of
pairs of individuals.

DEFINING THE RURALURBAN FRINGE*

ROBIN
University

.T.

PRYOR

of Malaya

ABSTRACT
This study is concerned with the rural-urban fringe as a complex transition zone on the
periphery of growing urban areas in Western countries. Case studies of the fringe and related
areas are reviewed, and a definition of the rural-urban fringe is suggested. Further, the urban
fringe is differentiated from the rural fringe, the former constituting the subzone of most rapid
exurban invasion. Hypotheses are postulated regarding the residents, accessibility, and land
and dwellings in the fringe, and suggestions for future studies are outlined in the conclusion.

L. Smith's discussion of the "urban

fringe" around Louisiana in 1937
marked the first use of this term sig
nifying "the built-up area just outside the cor
porate limits of the city."!

The financial assistance and research super

vision provided in the Department
of Geography,
University of Melbourne, are gratefully acknowl
edged by the author.
1 T. L. Smith, "The Population
of Louisiana:

although there is some scattering of land use,

and some villages are located within this

As a landscape phenomenon, the fringe varies

from city to city, and from one time to an
other. Around several cities in the N ether
lands a fringe is barely recognizable; Paris is
somewhat similar to the U.S.A. in the inter
mingling and scatter of land use, but there is a
closer dependence on public transport; London
is different again, because of its Green Belt,
Its Composition and Changes," Louisiana Bulletin}
293 (November 1937).

belt. In general, Dickinson concludes that the

mod ern European city "exhibits the same
tendency to extend and explode" as the North

THE RURAL-URBAN
FRINGE
SOCIAL FORCES

203

Ameri can metropolis, "but not nearly to the

same degree."?
Conversely, some American
writers now question whether the urban fringe
prob lem is disappearing, because "laws permit
more cities to supervise zoning within a certain
dis tance of their borders."3
Two features characterize the literature on
urban fringe over the past 30 years:
1. The general absence of explicit references
to the subject outside North America, al
though there have been studies, for example,
in Sydney," Adelaide.s Melbourne," and in Lon
don? and johannesburg.f
The relatively
in tegral
urban
nature
(rather
than
nonoccur rence)
of
the
fringe
around
European
cities emerges
from Wissink's
comparison of that continent with the American
urban scene."

R. E. Dickinson, The City Regon in Western

(London:
Routledge
Paperback,
1967).
3 E.g., R. E. Murphy, The American
City: An
Urban
Geography
(New York:
McGrawHill
Book
Co.,
1966).
4 N. R. Wills, "The Rural-Urban Fringe: Some
Agricultural Characteristics with Specific
Refer ence to Sydney," Australian Geoqrapher, 5
(1945), pp, 29-35; and R. Golledge, "Sydney's
Metropolitan Fringe: A Study in Urban-Rural
Relations," Aus tralian Geographer, 7 (1959), p.
243 ff.
5 D. L. Smith, "Market Gardening at Adelaide's
Urban Fringe," Economic
Geography,
42
(1966),
p. 19
2

Europe

ff.
6 R. J. Johnston, "The Population Characteris
tics of the Urban Fringe: A Review and Example,"
Australian and N et Zealand J ournal of Sociology,
2 (1966), pp. 7993.
7 R. E. Pahl, Urbs in Rure:
Thc iVI

etropolitan
Fringe in Hertfordshire (London: London School

of Economics and Political Science, Geographical

Papers No.2, 1965).
S G. H. T. Hart and T. C. Partridge, "Factors in
the Development of the Urban Fringe NorthWest of
Johannesburg,"
South
African
Geographical
.T ournal, 48 (1966), pp. 32-

44.
9

G. A. Wissink, American Cities in Perspective:

With

Special

Reference to the Development

of
Their Fringe Areas, Sociaal Geografische Studies,

Hoogleraat aan de Rijksuniversiteit te Utrecht, Nr.

5 (Assen, Netherlands:
1962).

Royal Van

203

Gorcum,

204

THE RURAL-URBAN
FRINGE
SOCIAL FORCES

2. The confusion of terminology and lack

of clear delineation in case studies. The
problem of evaluating and comparing cases is
increased by (1) their range in time, as
prevailing eco nomic conditions influence the
rate of growth and internal characteristics of
the fringe; (2) the range in size of the urban
center, from a small village to a
metropolis or Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Area, each with in herent
differences in its fringe, according to the
rate of growth, functions, and hierarchical
relationship of the central place; (3)
the variation in type and degree of zoning
control of urban invasion beyond a city's
corporate limits, so that London's modified
Green Belt results in a very different form of
guided "over spill" to Eugene-Springfield's
"uncontrolled population expansion" ;10 (4) the
differing so cial, economic and political
contexts of the studies from different
countries; and (5) the differing aims and
interests of various research workers.
A REVIEW OF RELATED
TERMS

Because of this diversity, a number of

at tempts have been made to clarify
concepts, and to differentiate between

204

commonly used terms. After reviewing some

ten definitions, Kurtz and Eicher"!
differentiate
between "fringe"
and
"suburb";
Wissink'< defines "fringe,"
"suburbs," "pseudo-suburbs," "satel lites" and
"pseudo-satellites";
Schnore-" dis tinguishes
between "satellites" and "suburbs"; and a
number of writers have described dif ferent
types of suburbs, some of which could be
synonomous with the "fringe" of another
research worker. Martin discusses satellite
rural areas.l+
Areal differentiations have also been
made, qualitatively, within the fringe: the
"urban
10

W. T. Martin, The Rural-Urban

Study

of Adjustment

to Residence

Fringe: A
Location (Eu

gene: University of Oregon Studies in

Sociology, No.1, 1953).
11 R. A. Kurtz and ]. B. Eicher, "Fringe and
Suburbs: A Confusion of Concepts," Social Forces,
37 (October 1958), pp. 32-37.
12 Wissink, op, cit.
13 Leo F. Schnore, "Satellites and Suburbs,"
Social Forces, 36 (December 1957), pp. 121-127.
14 W. T. Martin, "Ecological Change in Satellite
Rural Areas," American Sociological Reuiet, 22
(April 1957), pp. 173-183.

TABLE

1.

THE

RURAL-URBAN

FRINGE:

DEFINITION

Functional Content

Structural Content
Definition

Delineation

Census categories (direct or

Location
RNF,
urbanized area minus
derived) e.g., non-village
central city
Contiguous census units e.g.,
"first-tier counties"
Administration
Population density
Zoning regulations

Dwelling age

Selected parameter
e.g.,beyond
500
Non-census
areal units
sq. mileof central city e.g.,
control
school, voting districts.
Zoned mixed land use (rural
and urban)
lack of subdivision control
Selected parameters e.g.,
proportion in recent inter
censal period

fringe" and the "rural-urban

fringe" ;15 the
"limited fringe" and the "extended fringe" ;16
the "suburban fringe zone" and the "outlying
adjacent zone" ;17 and inner and outer fringe
areas.l" American census categories permit
the differentiation of urban fringe, rural non
farm (RNF), and rural farm (RF) within
the Chicago Iringe.l'' and "true fringe," "par
tial fringe," and "adjacent rural townships"
outside incorporated Detroit ;20 the area be
tween the Melbourne Metropolitan Area and
Melbourne Statistical Division boundaries in
15 R. B. Andrews, "Elements in the Urban Fringe
Pattern," Journal of Land and Public Utility Eco
nomics, 18 (May 1942), pp. 169-183.
16 W. C. McKain and R. G. Burnight, "The So
ciological Significance of the Rural-Urban Fringe:
From the Rural Point of View," Rural Socioloq,
18 (June 1953), PP. 109-116.
17 M. W. Reinemann, "The Pattern and Distri
bution of Manufacturing in the Chicago Area,"
ECOIlO1nic Geo qraph, 36 (1960), pp. 139-144.
18 Wissink, op. cit.
19 O. D. Duncan and A. ]. Reiss, "Suburbs and
Urban Fringe," in Social Characteristics of Urban
and Rural Communities (New York: John Wiley
& Sons, 1956).
20 R. B. Myers and J. A. Beegle, "Delineation
and Analysis of the Rural-Urban Fringe," Ap plicd
Anthropoloq, 6 (Spring 1947), pp. 14-22.

AND DELINEATION

Definition
Land usc

Delineation
Specific
e.g., market
gardens
exclusively
urban or
rural
:'Ilixed e.g., between limits of
land
Valuation changes

Employment
Population density
Utility services
Social orientation
"Transition, "
dynamism"
ii

Census categories e.g., RNF

Rate of growth
year or
Commuting
zoneper
beyond
central
inter-censal
city
boundary
Area not served by specific
services

Rural Iooation, urban orientation

of social activity
Undergoing change e.g., increase
in population density or
vacant or urban land.
----

the 1966 Census of the Commonwealth of Aus

tralia provides a comparable census zone. The
interest of human ecologists in the fringe has
added the undefined terms "rurban fringe" and
"rurbanization" to the literature; and "slurb,"
the "slopped-over suburb," is a more recent
deviant from objective terminology.P!
DEFINITION

AND

DELINEATION

From a review of some 60 case studies of

fringe areas, four major and six minor com
ponents emerge from previous definitions, to
gether with a variety of delineation techniques,
and these are summarized in Table I. To date,
110 definition has successfully integrated these
various components of the fringe with ( 1)
theories of urban invasion, and (2) practical
delineation techniques. It appears to the pres
ent writer that these aspects should be inte
grated, and a proposal for this is made below
which will need to be validated quantitatively
by future research.
The heterogeneity which writers acknowledge
as characteristic of the fringe may be, from one
point of view, inconclusive in its very com
plexity, yet it is better viewed as distinctive
21 H. Parsons, "Slurb is (sic) ," paper presentecl
at the 39th Congress of ANZAAS, Melbourne,
1967.

URBAN

RURAL- URBAN FRI NGE

RURAL FRI NGE
FRINGE

PERCENTAGE

DISTANCE

URBAN TO RURAL
50
75

25
/
/

\/
/\

<
/ \

/
\

LAND
100

\
\

\
\

Y=BOUNDARY
OF SOLELY
RURAL LAND
rj p

X=-BOUN DA RY
OF BUILT-UP
URBAN AREA

SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF LAND USE IN THE

RURAL-URBAN FRINGE
FIGURE

in comparison with related urban and rural

characteristics. A rural-urban fringe can only
exist between a growing urban center and its
rural hinterland, so it is no diminution of the
concept to view it as the residual zone be
tween two more readily defined poles. Charac
teristics of the fringe need not be intermediate
nor on a continuum between rural and urban,
yet distinctive location and internal hetero
geneity and transition do make possible a uni
tary if not uniform definition. Figure 1 com
bines the concept of urban ,invasion with the

heterogeneous land use typical of the fringe;

it also introduces the possibility of the "rural
urban fringe" being used as a collective term
for the "urban fringe" plus the "rural fringe."
The diagram can also be viewed as a process
response model, with the process of urbaniza
tion (growth in city size and the percentage
of the population urban) resulting in the re
sponse of land use conversion, transition, and
invasion (decline in agricultural
acreage and
percentage of the rural population).
Differen
tiation of "urban fringe" and "rural fringe"

will assist longitudinal studies of the urban in

vasion of rural areas, particularly in relation
to Burgess' zone theory,22 and Sinclair's re
cent discussion of the influence of "anticipation
of urban encroachment" on rural land in prox
imity to a growing urban area.23
Bearing in mind previous definitions of the
rural-urban
fringe and the essential com
ponents identified by them, the need to take
account of the process of urban invasion, and
the desirability for the delineation technique
to be integral with the definition, the following
definition is presented for further testing:
The rural-urbcn fringe is the zone of transition
in land use, social and demographic character
istics) lying between (a) the continu01tsly built
up urban and suburban areas of the central city)
and (b) the rural hinterland) characterized by
the almost complete absence of nonjarni dwell
ings) occupations and land use) and of urban
and rural social orientation; an incomplete
range and penetration of urban utility services;
uncoordinated zoning or planning regulations;
areal extension beyond although contiguous
with the political boundary of the central city;
and an actual and potential increase in popula
tion density) with the current density above
that of s1wrounding rural districts but lower
than the central city. These characteristics l1WY
differ both zonally and sectorolly, and will be
modified through time.
Within the rural-urban
fringe it may be
possible to identify:
1. The urban fringe) that subzone of the rural
urban fringe in contact and contiguous with
the central city, exhibiting a density of occu
pied dwellings higher than the median density
of the total rural-urban fringe-a
high pro
portion of residential, commercial, industrial
and vacant as distinct from farmland-and
a
higher rate of increase in population density,
land use conversion, and commuting; and
2. The rural fringe) that subzone of the rural
urban fringe contiguous with the urban fringe,
22E. W. Burgess, "The Growth of the City," in
R. E. Park, E. W. Burgess, and R. D. McKenzie
(eds.), The City (Chicago, University of Chicago

Press, 1925).
23R. Sinclair, "Von Thunen and Urban Sprawl,"
Annals of the Association of American
phers) 57 (1967), pp. 72-87.

Geogra

exhibiting a density of occupied dwellings

lower than the median density of the total
rural-urban fringe, a high proportion of farm
as distinct from nonfarm and vacant land,
and a lower rate of increase in population
density, land use conversion, and commuting.
Turning from the general concept and defini
tion of the rural-urban fringe to the detailed
findings of the large number of case studies,
there is a similar need for clarification, and
ample scope for the construction of hypotheses
which will subsequently contribute to more
objective research. Such hypotheses are sub
ject to the criticism that they attempt to relate
findings from a diversity of locales and scales=
analyzed and presented by diverse techniques,
and frequently unaccompanied by terminolog
ical definitions or statements of underlying as
sumptions.
Nevertheless, some generality ap
pears, and hypotheses are presented here for
testing in as rigorous a manner and in as wide
a field of case studies as possible.
The hypotheses which result from a content
analysis of past case studies are summarized in
three sections: (a) the residents of the fringe;
(b) the factor of accessibility in the fringe;
and (c) land and dwellings in the fringe. Un
less otherwise stated, the total rural-urban
fringe is being considered. In the space avail
able it is not practicable to indicate by foot
note the sources of each generalization, al
though the more important references (ex
tracted from a larger study) 24 are included.
Similarly, many variables are operative, but
cannot be discussed in a paper of this length.
A. The Residents

of the Fringe

Demographic and related parameters com

monly reflect the attraction of the fringe of
an urban area to a particular group--young
couples in the early years of married life
establishing their first home. The age distribu
tion is positively skewed with a greater pro
portion in younger age groups. The sex ratio
of the fringe is higher than that of the urban
area itself, but lower than the surrounding
rural areas; the degree of male predominance
may however vary from place to place within
24 R. J. Pryor, "City Growth and the Rural
Urban Fringe," unpublished M. A. thesis, Univer
sity of Melbourne, 1967.

the fringe. This reflects both the high propor

tion of households with two or more persons
(married couples), and more employment op
portunities for men.
The fertility ratio of the fringe is higher
than that of the urban place itself, but lower
than surrounding rural areas; one variable is
the age of development of a specific location
within the fringe. Myers and Beegle'" con
cluded that "the substantially higher ratio of
the fringe ...
points to the fringe as a sig
nificant area where relatively larger numbers
of children are produced and a place in which
the problems of youth are of major impor
tance." Johnston found the urban-rural gradi
ent unsubstantiated in the case of Melbourne the
differences "probably result from the age of
development variations."26
The fringe is characterized by a high pro
portion of married residents as compared with
the adjacent urban and rural areas. A ma
jority of residents have (a) moved to fringe
areas soon after marriage and have no chil
dren, or (b) commenced families and can fi
nance newer and/or larger homes. Only Rode
haver-" appears to have documented the years
married before mouinq to the fringe: at least
50 percent of residents move to their fringe
residences within ten years of marriage, with
the mean number of elapsed years lower for
those of urban rather than rural background.
Size of households: households in the fringe
are on average larger than those of the urban
area itself, but smaller than those in sur
rounding rural areas.
T. L. Smith in The Sociology of Rural
Life28 hypothesizes an urban-rural continuum,
with a declining proportion of foreign-born
residents with increasing distance from the
central city, and case studies of the fringe have
generally borne this out: the proportion of
foreign-born residents in the fringe is lower
than that of the urban area itsel f, but higher
than surrounding rural areas. Although in a
sense "decentralized," fringe residents are us25Myers and Beegle, op. cit.
26Johnston, op. cit.
27M. W. Rodehaver, "Fringe Settlement as a
Two-Directional Movement," Rural Sociology, 12
(March 1947).
28T. L. Smith, The Sociology of Rural Life
(New York: Harper & Bros., 1947).
two variables of sex and socioeconomic status
are significant, a higher proportion of males

ually economically tied to the central city, but

there are few consistent findings on social and
economic characteristics.
The residents in the
fringe exhibit a heterogeneous
occupational
structure) with both zonal and sectoral com
ponents, and a slightly greater proportion in
the commercial and skilled-worker classes than
urban or rural areas. Socioeconomic status,
a complexly derived index, is usually related
to occupation and income, but there is a lack
of reliable standardized measures. From the
varied evidence available, residents in the
fringe exhibit wide heterogeneity of socioeco
nomic status, with sectoral rather than zonal
concentrations.
Income distribution, closely related to the
two preceding characteristics, does not differ
markedly from the central city, mainly be
cause of the heterogeneity already discussed.
The residents in the fringe exhibit a positively
skewed income distribution, and a mean an
nual income per person or per household higher
than that of the associated urban and rural
areas. Another socioeconomic index analyzed
by a number of writers is that of educational
achieuement. For example, Martin-? concludes
from his study of U. S. A. satellite rural areas
that there is an upward gradient from rural
to urban areas, and this can be related both to
exurban invasion, and to the occupational and
income characteristics of the fringe; the resi
dents in the fringe exhibit a lower educational
level, by various measures, than residents of
the urban place itself, but higher than the sur
rounding rural areas.
Analyses of length of residence in the fringe,
and of the residential background of fringe
dwellers, provide consistent evidence for both
the instability and transitional nature of this
exurban zone, and for the primarily urban
source of the population; these characteristics
support the concept of invasion from a grow
ing urban center, and help to explain the
spatial appearance of the fringe, and the mo
tivation of migration.
From studies of childhood residence loca
tion it is concluded that a higher proportion of
residents of the fringe have an urban rather
than a rural or rural/urban background. The
29Martin, "Ecological Change in Satellite Rural
Areas."
having a rural background, and a higher pro
portion of middle-class (white-collar)
resi
dents having an urban background. While

centripetal forces, or rural exodus, and intra

and interstate migration will make a small con
tribution, it could be expected that the previous
address of fringe residents would provide even
stronger support for the city being the main
source of migration, and this generally proves
to be true: in a majority of cases the previous
homes of fringe residents were in the adjacent
urban area, with centripetal and other migra
tion patterns making a varied but smaller con
tribution. Length of residence is a useful in
dex of the dynamism and transitional nature of
the fringe, and of its general age of develop
ment. While divergent time-periods have been
used in various studies, it is concluded that at
least 50 percent of the residents have been
located in the fringe for less than five years.
The rural-urban fringe is populated by in
dividuals who have made personal decisions to
migrate, and who subsequently make their own
evaluations of their new residential location.
In a sense, these individual decisions and mo
tivations are the raison d'etre of the fringe as a
landscape phenomenon, and in many ways re
flect the characteristics which have already
been outlined. The most important reasons
for movement to the fri'nge are the search for
less congestion and more privacy, to be near
employment, and for the benefit of children:
differences are to be expected between previ
ously urban and rural families, and between in
elividual localities because of differing attrac
tions. As well as the general motivation to
move to a new area, specific site characteris
tics may also be sought, or even take pre
eminence. The most important reasons for the
choice of a particula site in the fringe are
suitability of the house and desirable lot size.
Attraction to the general neighborhood, and
access to employment, schools, and the central
city will be important to a smaller proportion
of households, and differences may be corre
lated with socioeconomic status.
Because of the varied residential and socio
economic backgrounds of fringe residents, and
the diversity of reasons for moving to the

fringe, residential stability and satisfaction

will also vary. Studies of the degree of social
adjustment, the participation of residents in
community organizations and social activities,
and of their attitudes toward living in fringe
areas, provide some insight into the future
stability, or conversely, new intracity migra
tions, of this low density residence zone. Per
ceived advantages and disadvantages of the
fringe, correlated with other characteristics of
present residents, may throw light on future
spatial features of the expanding city.
The residents in the fringe exhibit a low de
gree of social and community participation.
and associational ties. A number of studies of
the fringe have documented the residents'
attitudes to li'l'il1g ill a fringe area. Outstand
ing among these is Martin's study of adjust
ment to residential location in the Eugene
Springfield fringe.3o The residents in the
fringe are generally well satisfied with their
residence location with the exception of Ul1satis factory utility services.
B. The Factor of Accessibility

in the Fringe
Distance operates as a major constraint in
shaping and facilitating urban growth, and
the friction of space experienced by the rural
urban fringe is but a particular example of a
principle generally accepted in human ecology
and geography: " ...
the layout of a metrop
olis-the
assignment of activities to areas
tends to be determined by a principle which
may be termed the minimizing of the cost of
friction."il1 This situation is of course com
plicated where there is not one point of maxi
mum accessibility, but multiple urban nuclei,
and where other advantages of residential lo
cation, such as the semi-rural environment in
the fringe, outweigh sheer physical distance:
as Clark and Peters state in a slightly dif
ferent context "opportunities
override dis
tances."32 The accessibility of services is also
Martin, The Rural-Urban Fringe.
3! R. M. Haig, "Toward an Understanding of the
Metropolis: Some Speculations Regarding the Eco
nomic Basis of Urban Concentration," Quarterly
J ournal of Economics, 40 (1926), pp. 179-208
and
30

402-434.

32C. Clark and G. H. Peters, "The 'Intervening

Opportunities' Method of Traffic Analysis," Traffic
Quarterly, 19 (January 1965).

a reflection of the stage of development of an

area, so that the friction of space may operate
via distance from an extending network of
services rather than from one or more points
at one time. Public utilities and mass transport
modes, and the degree of access of an individ
ual to work places, schools and retail centers,
tend to be sources of dissatisfaction to fringe
residents due to the frequent incomplete range
and capacity of such services, at least in the
early stages of urban invasion.
It is concluded from case studies that the
fringe is characterized by an incomplete range
and incomplete network of utilit services such
as reticulated water, electricity, gas and sewer
age mains, fire hydrants and sealed roads; this
inadequate service sometimes results from dif
ficult physical terrain, and sometimes from
inadequate finances to keep capital works in
phase with low density urban encroachment.
For similar reasons, the fringe commonly has
an inadequate network of public transport
modes, and consequently there may be dissatis
faction with this service among some residents;
where public transport routes do exist, there is
often morphological evidence of their contri
bution to the formation of the fringe via resi
dential and industrial invasion and ribbon de
velopment.
Presumably because of the inadequacy of
public transport, and the needs of a commuting
population. the fringe area is characterized by
relatively high car o'Wnershl:pas compared with
the associated urban and rural areas. A ma
jority of the '(vorl? places of residents in the
fringe are in the city itself. rather than in
the fringe or surrounding rural areas, other
advantages of residence location outweighing
the friction of space involved in commuting.
The accessibility of schools in terms of dis
tance traveled, and available transport modes.
is a problem for households in the fringe.
A majority of the retail centers patronized
by fringe residents are in the urban area itself,
rather than in the fringe or surrounding rural
areas.
C. Land and Dwellings in the Fringe
Land use in the rural-urban
fringe is dis
tinctively intermingled and transitional, with
an irregular transition
from farm to non
farm land. Here too may be found manu-

facturing or commercial enterprises requiring

large acreages; noxious, extractive or other
industries zoned-out from the central city;
vacant, "dead," or "tax delinquent" land; and
scattered urban settlement aligned along high
ways, in nodes around railway stations, or in
other "leap-frog" pockets. Zoning and master
plans may assist more orderly invasion of the
rural hinterland, cause uneconomic leap-frog
ging, or if nonexistent, allow totally unco
ordinated and piecemeal speculation and the
juxta positioning of incompatible land uses.
In rural areas, land values and rates increase
with the anticipation of urbanization,
and
various studies have identified distinctive char
acteristics in nonfarm dwellings as well as in
land use.
On adnnnistratiow and planning in fringe
areas, case studies have identified (1) exces
sive and premature subdivision in close prox
imity to expanding urban centers; (2) the tax
delinquency of fringe areas undergoing transi
tion or stagnation in land use ;33 (3) the gen
eral need for planning and control, for order and
economy in the conversion from rural to land
use; and (4) the significance of the urban or
rural background of fringe residents in the ac
ceptance of governmental intervention in land
use zoning, and in determining the services
desired and the attitude toward taxes provid
ing these. It is concluded that the fringe is
characterized by inadequate control of sub
division; tax delinquency; zoning inadequately
geared to the present and future needs of the
expanding urban place; and a conflict of in
terest in the type and extent of control, be
tween long-established
residents and new
comers, and between the central (metropolitan)
and local planning or administrative authori
ties.
Agricultural
land use,' the fringe area is
characterized by a smaller proportion of farm
workers than rural areas; by a relatively high
proportion of part-time farmers; by intensive
agricultural
production in the form of market
gardens, poultry farming, and to a lesser de33 E.g., H. G. Berkman,
"Decentralization
and
Blighted Vacant Land," in H. M. Mayer and C. F.
Kohn (eds.), Readings in Urban Geography (Chi
cago: University of Chicago Press, 1964), pp. 287298.

gree, dairying
and fruitgrowing;
by farms
considerably smaller in acreage than surround
ing rural areas; by land values and rates
lower than those of the adj acent urban center,
but rising above those of the surrounding
rural areas as the urban invasion continues;
and by the gradual and irregular conversion
of farm to nonfarm to urban land use.
Most studies of the decentralization of manu
facturing land use have been oriented to "sub
urbs" rather than the rural-urban fringe; how
ever, the fringe area is characterized by a sig
nificant though smaller proportion
of manu
facturing land use than the urban place itself;
by newly established or recently relocated
industries, frequently close to major highways;
and by the presence of noxious, extractive, and
related industries.
Dwellings and allotments reflect a number of
features already discussed, for example, in
come, socioeconomic status, size of house
hold, availability of utility services, and zon
ing regulations such as those controlling lot
size. Lot sizes of residential properties in the
fringe are characteristically greater, in area
and frontage, than in the urban place itself;
families who have moved from the urban center
tend to have larger lots than other fringe resi
dents. Lower population densities in fringe
than in urban areas are a result of both larger
lot size and the incorporation of nonurban
land. Dwelling size, in terms of number of
rooms, is lower in the fringe area than in the
city. The value of dwellings in the fringe area
exhibits both a lower mean and a narrower
range than the urban area itself. Land rates
in the fringe are lower than for the urban area,
but as urban expansion continues there is a
tendency for the gap between the rates, and
hence the attraction of lower rates in the
fringe, to diminish. Conversely, the cost of
the primary installation of utility services,
roads, etc., means that some fringe areas have
higher rates than longer established urban
areas.
A higher proportion of dwellings are fully
owned in the fringe, particularly in the outer
parts of the fringe, as compared with the urban
area; there is a lower rate of renting or
leasing than in the urban area, and a higher
rate of renting, leasing, or being-purchased in

the inner part of the fringe than in the outer

more rural zone. Average house rents in the
fringe are lower than for the urban place,
but higher than for the surrounding rural
areas.
H onie facilities and the state of repair of the
house, more than most other characteristics,
reflect the particular time when the study was
made. Case studies of the fringe in the 1940's
and early 1950's indicated a significant propor
tion of incomplete and temporary dwellings,
and buildings requiring maj or repairs; fewer
inside baths and toilets than in the main urban
area; considerable variation in the main fuel
used for cooking; and a lower proportion of
dwellings with a telephone than in the urban
area itself. It could be anticipated that cur
rent studies would show less evidence of the
postwar housing shortage, and more evidence
of technological advances in amenities, and
in improved personal spending capacity.
CONCLUSIONS

The two maj or aims here have been (1) to

arrive at a definition of the rural-urban fringe
which can be integrated with theories of urban
invasion, as well as giving some guidance for
the delineation of case study areas, and (2) to
summarize from previous studies the major
characteristics of the fringe. Both the general
definition and the subsequent hypotheses have
been stated in a form suitable for further test
ing, with the hope of consolidating the present
fragmented body of knowledge of the fringe.
In the light of the suggested internal differen
tion into "urban fringe" and "rural fringe,"
future studies may be able to contribute knowl
edge not only of these two subzones, but of
their respective relationships with the urban
area and the rural hinterland. There is a need,
too, to relate specific fringe characteristics to
the size, morphology, economic base, and rate
of growth of the associated central place, with
the prospect of identifying the key catalysts
and functional thresholds which are essential
to the invasion process in a specific locality.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
AMERICANSOCIETYOF PLANNING OFFICIALS.
"An
nexation of Urban Fringe Areas," Information
Report, 30 (September 1951).
ANDERSON, T. R. "Interrnetropolitan Migration:

A Comparison of the Hypotheses of Zipf and

Stouffer," American
Sociological
Review, 20
(1955), pp. 287-291.
---.
"Interrnetropolitan
Migration:
A Corre
lation Analysis," American Journal of Sociology,
61 (1956), pp. 459,-462.
ANDERSON,T. R. and COLLIER,J. "Metropolitan
Dominance and the Rural Hinterland,"
Rural
Sociology, 21 (1956), pp. 152-157.
ANDERSON, W. A. Social Change in an Urban
Fringe Area (Ithaca, New York: Department
of Rural Sociology, Cornell University, 1953).
---.
Fringe Families and Their Social Partici
pation (Ithaca, New York: Agricultural Exten
sion Station, Cornell University, 1955).
ANDERSON,W. A. and SIBLEY, D. N. The Social
Participation
of Fringe Families-A
Second
Study (Ithaca, New York: Department of Rural
Sociology, Cornell University, 1957).
ANDERSON,W. F. "A Method of Delineating the
Rural-Urban Fringe Surrounding
Small Cities,"
unpublished M.A. thesis, Pennsylvania State Col
lege, 1951.
--.
The Flight to the F1'inge (Ithaca, New
York: Department of Rural Sociology, Cornell
University, 1956).
ANDREWS,R. B. "Elements
in the Urban Fringe
Pattern," Journal of Land and Public Utility
Economics, 18 (1942), pp. 169-183.
---.
"Urban Fringe Studies of Two Wisconsin
Cities: A Summary," Journal of Land and Pub
lic Utility Economics, 21 (1945), pp. 375-382.
ANDREWS,W. H. and ESHLEMAN, J. R. "The New
Community:
Characteristics
of Migrant
and
Non-Migrant Residents in the Rural Fringe of a
Metropolitan Area in Ohio," Research Bulletin,
929 (Ohio Agricultural Experimental
Station,

1963).
---.
"The New Community II: Adjustment to
Living in the Changing Rural Fringe of a
Metropolitan Area," Research Bulletin, 955 (Ohio
Agricultural Experimental
Station, 1963).
ARPKE, F. "Land Use Control in the Urban
Fringe of Portland, Oregon," ] ournal of Land
and Public Utility Economics, 18 (1942), pp.

468-480.

ASCHMAN, F. T. "Dead Land-Chronically

Tax
Delinquent Lands in Cook County, Illinois,"
Land Economics, 25 (1949).
ASHBY, A. W. "The Effects of Urban Growth on
the Countryside," The Socioloqicol Reuicso, 31
(1939), pp. 345-369.
BAIN, C. W. "The Annexation of Fringe Terri
tory," in A Place to Liue : The Yearbook of
Agriculture,
1963 (Washington,
D.C.: Govern
ment Printing Office, 1963).

BALK, H. H. "Rurbanization of Worcester's En

virons," Economic Geography, 21 (1945), p,
104 ff.
BEEGLE,J. A. "Characteristics of Michigan's Fringe
Population," Rural Sociology, 12 (1947), p. 254
ff.
BEEGLE,J. A. and SCHROEDERW, . "Social
Organi
zation and Land Use in the North Lansing
Fringe," Technical Bulletin, 251 (Michigan Agri
cultural Experimental Station, 1955).
BEIJER, B. Rural Migrants in Urban Setting (The
Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1963).
BENNETT, C. F. "Mobility from Full- Time to
Part- Time Farming," Rural Sociology, 32 (1967),
p. 154 ff.
BERKMAN, H. G. "Decentralization
and Blighted
Vacant Land," in Mayer, M. H. and Kohn,
C. F. (eds.), Readings in Urban GeograPhy
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964),
pp. 287-298.
BEST, R. H. "The Loss of Farm Land to Other
Uses in England and Wales," Town and COll11try Planning, 26 (1958).
BLIZZARD,S. W. "Research on the Rural-Urban
Fringe," Sociology and Social Research, 38
(1954), pp. 143-149.
---.
"Research on the Rural-Urban
Fringe:
A Case Study," J ournal, 1802 (Pennsylvania
Agricultural Experimental Station, 1954).
BLIZZARD,S. W. and ANDERSON,W. F. "Prob
lems in Rural-Urban Fringe Research: Concep
tualization and Delineation," Progress Report, 89
(Pennsylvania
Agricultural
Experimental
Sta
tion, 1952).
BOGUE, D. J. Metropolitan Growth and the Con
version of Land to N on-Aoricuitural
Uses
(Scripps Foundation for Research in Population
Problems, Miami University, and the Univer
sity of Chicago, 1956).
BOGUE, D. J. and SEIM, EMERSON. "Components
of Population Change in Suburban and Central
City Populations of Standard Metropolitan Areas
1940 to 1950," Rural Sociology, 21 (1956), pp.

267-275.

BOLLENS, J. C. "Metropolitan and Fringe Area

Developments in 1960," in The Municipal Year
Book (Chicago: International
City Managers'
Association, 1961).
BORG, N. "Overspill : A Short Study of Essen
tials," Journal of the Town Planning Institute,
47 (1961), p. 116 ff.
BRADEMAS, T. B. "Fringe
Living Attitudes,"
Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 22

(1956).
BRIEN, M. L. "The Shire of Croydon as a Rural-

Urban Fringe Zone," unpublished B.A. thesis,

University of Melbourne, 1965.
BURGESS, E. W. "The Growth of the City," in
Park, R. E., Burgess, E. W., and McKensie,
R. D. (eds.), The City (Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1925).
B'USCHE,L. M. and SMITH, H. E. "A Study of the
Rural-Urban
Fringe Residents of Fort Wayne,
Allen County, Indiana," Studies Circular, 11 and
12 (Purdue Agricultural Experimental Station,
1951).
CARROLLR, . L. and WHEELER, R. H. "Metropoli
tan Influence on the Rural Non-Farm
Popula
tion," Rural Socioloqv, 31 (1966), p. 64 ff.
CARVERH, . Cities in the Suburbs (Toronto:
Uni
versity of Toronto, 1962).
CHRISTALLER, W. Die ccniralcn ortc in slId
deutschiG'l1d (Tena : Gustav Fischer, 1933).
CLARK, C. and PETEHS, G. H. "The 'Intervening
Opportunities'
Method of Traffic Analysis,"
Traffic Quarterl.v, 19 (1965).
COLEMAN, B. P. "Agriculture
011
the Urban
Fringe," in Whitelaw, J. S. (ed.), Auckland in
Ferment (Melbourne:
New Zealand Geograph
ical Society, 1967).
DALY, :M. T. "Land Value Determinants:
New
castle, New South Wales," Australian
Ceo
graphical Studies, 5 (1967), pp. 30-39.
DAVIES, 1. "Urban Farming: A Study of Agri
culture of the City of Birmingham," Gcoqrapli,
38 (1953), pp. 296-303.
DEWEY, R. "Peripheral Expansion in Milwaukee
County," American. ] ournal of Sociolo qy, 53
(1948), pp. 417-422.
"The Rural-Urban
Continuum:
Real but
Relatively Unimportant,"
Amcricim Lournal of
Sociolottv 66 (1960).
DICKINSON, R. E. The City Re_qion ill Western

Urban. Rcsearcb Methods (Princeton, New J er

sey: D. Van Nostrand Co., 1961).
DUNCAN, O. D. and REISS, A. J. "Suburbs and
Urban Fringe," in Social Characteristics of Ur
bin and Rural Communities, 1950 (New York:
John Wiley & Sons, 1956), chap. 11.
EDITORSOF "FORTUNE." The Exploduu, 111ctropolis
(N ew York: Doubleday & Co., 1958).
ETTER, O. "Legal Approaches to Problems of the
Rural-Urban
Fringe,"
in The Rural-Urball
Fringe: Proceedings of the Commonwealth Con
ference, op . cit.
FAIRBAIRN, K. J. "Population Movements Within
the Christchurch
Urban Area," N cts: Zealand
Geographers, 19 (1963).
FAITHFULL,W. G. "Ribbon Development in Aus
tralia," Traffiic Quart crl, 13 (1959).
FAUST, L. M. "The Eugene, Oregon, Rural-Urban
Fringe," in The R1Iral-Urban Fril/.{Je: Proceed
ings of the Commonwealth Conference, op, cit.
FAVA, S. F_ "Suburbanism as a Way of Life,"
American Sociological Re'uie7c', 21 (1956), pp.
34-38.
FIREY, VV. "Ecological Considerations in Planning
for Rurban Fringes," American Sociolo.r;ical Rc
uici, 11 (1946), p. 411 ff.
---.
"Social Aspects to Land Use Planning ill
the Country-City Fringe," Special Bulletin. 339
(Michigan State College Agricultural
Experi
mental Station, 1946).
---.
Loud Usc in Central Boston (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1947).
FIREY, W., Looxns, C. P., and BEEGLE,]. A. "The
Fusion of Urban and Rural," in Labatut, J. and
Lane, W. ]. (eds.), Highways in 0111' National
Life (Princeton,
New Jersey: Princeton Uni
versity Press, 1950), chap. 13.
FREEMAN, H. D. "Public Utility Problems in

Europe (London: Routledge Paperback, 1967).

DIETRICH, T. S. "Nature and Directions of Sub
urbanization in the South," Social Forces, 39
(1960), p. 181 ff.
DORN, H. F. "Migration and the Growth of Cities,"
Social Forces, 16 (1938), pp. 328-337.
DORNBUSCH, S. M. "A Typology of Suburban
Communities:
Chicago Metropolitan
District,
1940," u-i- Analvsis Report. 10 (Chicago:
Chicago Community Inventory, 1952).
DOUGLAS,V. A. "Health and Sanitation Problems
of the Fringe," in The Rural-Urban Frinac :
Proceedings of the Commonwealth Conference
(Eugene : University of Oregon, 1942).
DUCKERT, W.
"Luftbild
Darmstadt
Stadt rand
NINE," Die Erdc, 96 (1965), p. 81 ff.
DUNCAN, O. D. "Gradients of Urban Influence
on the Rural Population," in Gibbs, J. P. (ed.),

Fringe Areas," in The Rural-Urbon

Friuac :
Proceedings of the Commonwealth Conference,
cit.
FUGUITT, G. V. "Urban Influence and the Extent
of Part-Time
Farming,"
Rural Sociology. 23
(1958), p. 392 ff.
---.
"Part-Time
Farming and the Push- Pull
Hypothesis,"
American J ournal of Sociolou.
64 (1959), pp. 375-379.
---.
"The Rural-Urban
Fringe," in Proceed
ings of the American Country Life Association,
1962.
---.
"The City and Countryside," Rural So
cioioflY,28 (1963), p, 246 ff.
GANS, H. J. "Effects of the Move from City to
Suburb," in Duhl, L. J. (ed.), The Urban COII
diiion (New York: Basic Books, 1963), chap. 14.
GILBERT,]. H. "Financial Problems of the Fringe

or.

Area," in The Rural-Urban

Frsnqe : Proceed
ings of the Commonwealth Conference, op, cit.
GIST, N. P. "The New Urban Fringe," Sociology
and Social Research} 36 (952), pp. 297-302.
GOLLEDGER, . "Sydney's Metropolitan Fringe:
A Study in Urban-Rural
Relations," Australian
Geographer, 7 (959), p. 243 ff.
GORDON,W. R. "Satellite Acres," Bulletin, 282
(Rhode Island Agricultural Experimental
Sta
tion, 1942).
GORDON . R. and MELDRUM,G. S. "Land, Peo
W,
ple and Farming in a Rurban Zone," Bulletin,
285 (Rhode Island Agricultural Experimental
Station, 1942).
GOTTMANN,J. Megalopolis} The Urbanised North
eastern Seaboard of the United States (New
York: Twentieth Century Fund, 1961).
GOTTMANN,J. and HARPER, R. A. Metropolis on
the Move: Geographers Look at Urban Sprawl
(New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1967).
GREENE, s. E. Ferment on the Fringe: Studies of
Rural Churches in Transition
(Philadelphia:
Christian Education Press, 1960).
GREGORH, . F. "Spatial Disharmonies in
California Population
Growth," Geographical
Review} 53 (963), p. 100 ff.
GRIFFIN, P. F. and CHATHAM, R. L. "Urban Im
pact on Agriculture in Santa Clara County, Cali
fornia," Annals} Association
of American
Geog
raphers, 48 (958), pp. 195-208.
---.
"Population:
A Challenge to California's
Changing Citrus Industry,"
Economic
Geog
raphy, 34 (958), pp. 270-276.
HAIG, R. M. "Toward an Understanding of the
Metropolis:
Some Speculations Regarding
the
Economic Basis of Urban Concentration,"
Quar
terly Journal of Economics} 40 (926), pp. 179208 and 402-434.
HARRIS, C. D. "Suburbs," American Journal of
Sociology} 49 (943), pp 1-13.
HART, G. H. T. and PARTRIDGET, . C. "Factors
in the Development of the Urban Fringe North
West of Johannesbutgh,"
South African Geo
graphical Journal} 48 (1966), pp. 32-44.
HAUSER, F. L. "The Ecological Pattern of Four
European
Cities and Two Theories of Urban
Expansion," J ournal of the American Institute
of Planners, 17 (951), pp, 111-130.
HARVEY,R. C. and CLARK,W. A. V. "The Nature
and Economics of Urban Sprawl," Land Eco
nomics} 41 (965).
HAWLEY, A. H. and ZIMMER, B. G. "Suburbani
zation and Some of Its Consequences," Land
Economics, 37 (1961), pp. 88-93.
HA YES, C. R. "Suburban Residential Land Values

Along the C. B. & Q. Railroad," Land Economics,

33 (957), pp. 177-181.
HIGBEE, E. "Agricultural
Land on the Urban
Fringe," in Gottmann and Harper, loco cit., pp.

57-66.
HILLER, E. T. "Extension of Urban Characteris
tics into Rural Areas," Rural Sociology, 6
(941), p. 242 ff.
HOUSE, P. W. "Preferential Assessment of Farm
land in the Rural-Urban
Fringe of Maryland,"
Bulletin, 8 (Washington,
DC.:
Government
Printing Office, 1961).
HUFFAKER,C. L. "School Problems of the Fringe,"
in The Rural-Urban Fringe: Proceedings of the
Commonwealth Conference, op, cit.
HUGHES, I. H. Local Government. in the Fringe
Area of Flint, Michigan (Ann Arbor: Univer
sity of Michigan Press, 1947).
JACO, E. G. and BELKNAP, I. "Is a New Family
Form Emerging in the Urban Fringe ?!' Auier
ican Sociological -Revieio, 18 (953), pp. 550-557.
JAUHARI, A. S. "Post Partition Expansion of Pre
Existing Towns in the Sutlej-Yamuna
Divide:
A Study in the Development of Urban Fringe
and Suburbs," National Geographical Journal of
India, 10 (964).
JEANS, D. N. and LOGAN,M. I. "The Problems of
Growth in Sydney's New Suburbs," Australian
Journol of Social Issues, 1 (961), p. 30 ff.
JOHNSTON, R. J. "The Population Characteristics
of the Urban Fringe:
A Review and Example,"
Australiaw and New Zealand Journal of Sociol
ogy, 2 (1966), pp, 79-93.
JONES, F. L. "Ethnic Concentration and Assimila
tion: An Australian Case Study," Social Forces,

45 (967), 412-423.

KENYON, J. "Manufacturing and Sprawl," in Gott

mann and Harper, op, cit.
KIMBALL, S. T. "The New Social Frontier:
The
Fringe," SPecial Bulletin, 360 (Michigan Agricul
tural Experimental Station, 1949).
KUNKEL, J. H. "The Role of Services in the An
nexation of a Metropolitan
Fringe Area," Land
Economics, 36 (960), pp. 208-212.
KURTZ, H. A. and EICHER, J. B. "Fringe and Sub
urbs: A Confusion of Concepts," Social Forces,
37 (958), pp. 32-37.
KURTZ, R. A. and SMITH, J. "Social Life in the
Rural-Urban
Fringe,"
Rural
Socioloq,
26
(961), p. 24 ff.
LAZERWITZ, B. "Metropolitan
Residential Belts,
1950 and 1956," American Sociological Reuiet,
25 (1960), pp. 245-252.
LINGE, G. ]. R. The Delimitation of Urban Boun
daries (Canberra:
Australian
National Univer
sity, 1965).

LOOMIS,C. P., BEEGLE, J. A., and FIREY, W.

"Michigan's
Country-City
Fringe,"
Michigan
Farl1t Economics, 42 (1946).
McKAIN, W. "The Exurbanite: Why He Moved,"
in A Place to Live: The Yearbook of Aqricul
ture, 1963 (Washington,
D.C.:
Government
Printing Office, 1963).
McKAIN, W. and BURNIGHT,R. G. "The Sociolog
ical Significance of the Rural-Urban
Fringe:
From the Rural Point of View," Rural Socioloq,
18 (1953), pp. 109-116.
MARSHALL,A. "The Growth in Subdivision in the
Adelaide Urban Area," Proceedings of the Royal
Geographical Society, Australia, S. A., 1961.
MARTIN, W. T. "A Consideration of Differences
in the Extent and Location of Formal Associa
tional Activities of Rural-Urban
Fringe Resi
dents," American. Sociological Review, 17 (1952),
pp. 687-694.
--.
The Rural-Urban Fringe: A Study of Ad
justment to Residence Location (Eugene: Uni
versity of Oregon Studies in Sociology No.1,
1953) .
---.
"Some Socio-Psychological Aspects of Ad
justment to Residence Location in the Rural-Ur
ban Fringe," American Sociological Reuieto, 18
(1953), p. 248 ff.
---.
"The Structuring of Social Relationships
Engendered by Suburban Residence," American
Sociological Review, 21 (1956), pp. 446-453.
---.
"Ecological
Change in Satellite Rural
Areas,"
American
Sociological
Review,
22
(1957), pp. 173-183.
MAXWELL,R. L. "An Analysis of Residential Sub
divisions, Melbourne Metropolitan
1954-1962,"
unpublished thesis, Melbourne University, 1963.
MELBOURNEAND METROPOLITANBOARDOF
WORKS, The Future Growth of Melbourne
(Melbourne:
A Report to the Minister for Local Government,
1967) .
MOORE,E. H. and BARLOWE,R. "Effects of Sub
urbanization Upon Rural Land Use," Technical
Bulletin,
253 (Michigan
Agricultural
Experi
mental Station, 1955).
MUMFORD,L. The City in History (London: Pel
ican Books, 1966).
MURPHY, R. E. The American City: An Urban
Geography (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
1966).
MYERS, R. B. and BEEGLE,J. A. "Delineation and
Analysis of the Rural-Urban
Fringe," Applied
Anthropology, 6 (1947), pp. 14-22.
PAHL, R. E. Urbs in Rure: The Metropolitan
Fringe in H ertjordshire
(London:
London
School of Economics and Political Science, Geo
~graphical Papers, No.2, 1965).

PARSONS, H. "Slurb is (sic) ," paper presented at

the 39th Congress of ANZAAS,
Melbourne,
1967.
PIRENNE, H. Medieval Cities (Princeton, New Jer
sey: Princeton University Press, 1948).
PRICE, P. H. and HILLERY, G. A. "The Rural-Ur
ban Fringe and Louisiana's Agriculture: A Case
Study of the Baton Rouge Area," Bulletin, 526
(Louisiana Agricultural
Experimental
Station,
1959) .
PRYOR, R. J. "City Growth and Rural-Urban
Fringe," unpublished M.A. thesis, University of
Melbourne, 1967.
---.
"Delineating Outer Suburbs and the Urban
Fringe," Geografiska Annaler, forthcoming.
"Accessibility
in Melbourne's
Urban
Fringe," Research Paper, Geographical Society
of New South Wales, forthcoming.
---.
"A Sampling Frame for the Rural-Urban
Fringe," The Professional Geographer, forthcom
ing.
QUEEN, S. A. and CARPENTERD, . B. "The
Socio logical Significance of the Rural-Urban
Fringe: From the Urban Point of View," Rural
Sociol ogy, 18 (1953).
RAESIDE, J. D. "Urban Sprawl," Proceedings of
the New Zealand Institute of Agricultural Sci
ence, 8 (1962).
REEDER, L. G. "Industrial Deconcentration
as a
Factor in Rural-Urban
Fringe Development,"
Land Economics, 21 (1955), pp. 275-280.
REINEMANN, M. W. "The Pattern and Distribu
tion of Manufacturing
in the Chicago Area,"
EC01t01nic Geography, 36 (1960), pp. 139-144.
RODEHAVER,M. W. "Fringe Settlement as a Two
Directional
Movement,"
Rural Sociology,
12
(1947) .
ROHRER,W. C. and HIRZEL, R. "A
Methodolog
ical Note on Demographic Analysis of the Rural
Urban Fringe," Rural Sociology, 22 (1957), pp.
71-73.
ROSSI, P. H. Why Families Move: A Study in
the Social Psychology of Urban Residential Mo
bilit (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1955).
ROTERUS, V. and HUGHES, 1. H. "Governmental
Problems of Fringe Areas," Public IJ1anaqemeni,
30 (1948), pp. 94-97.
SALTER,L. A. "Land Classification Along the Ru
ral-Urban Fringe," in Proceedings of the First
National Conference on Land Classification (Co
lumbia: University of Missouri, 1940).
SCHAFFER,A. "A Rural Community at the Urban
Fringe," Rural Sociology, 23 (1958), pp. 277-285.
SCHNORE, L. F: "Satellites and Suburbs," Social

Forces, 36 (1957), p. 121 ff.

---.
"The Growth of Metropolitan Suburbs,"
American Sociological Review, 22 (1957).
---.
"Municipal Annexations and the Growth of
Metropolitan Suburbs, 1950-60," American J our
nal of Sociology, 67 (1962), pp. 406-417.
SINCLAIR, R. "Von Thunen and Urban Sprawl,"
Annals, Association of American Geographers, 57
(1967), pp. 72-87.
SMITH, D. L. "Market Gardening at Adelaide's
Urban Fringe," Economic Geography, 42 (1%6),
p. 19 ff.
SMITH, T. L. "The Population of Louisiana: Its
Composition and Changes," Louisiana Bulletin,

293 (1937).
--.

The Sociology of Rural Life (New York:

Harper & Bros, 1947).
STOCKER,F. D. "Governmental Problems on the
Urban Fringe," Agricultural Economic Research,
13 (1961), p. 117 ff.
---.
"Taxing Farmland in the Urban Fringe,"
J ournal of Farm, Economics, 45 (1963), pp. 1131-

1139.
THROOP,V. M. The Sllburban Zone of Metropol
itan Portland, Oregon (Chicago: University of
Chicago, 1948).
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING BOARDOF VIC
TORIA. Organisation
for Strategic
Planning
(Melbourne: A Report to the Minister for Local
Government, 1967).
\iVALDOA, . D. "Farming on the Urban Fringe,"
in
A Place to Live: The Yearbook of Aarlculture,
Government Printing
1963 (Washington, D.

c.:

Office, 1963).
\iVEHRWEIM,G. S. "Land Classification for Rural
Zoning," Proceedings of the First National Con
ference on Land Classification, op, cit.
---.
"The Land Uses of the Rural-Urban
Fringe," in The Rural-Urban
Fringe:
Pro-

ceedings of the Commonwealth Conference, op.

cit.
---.
"Governmental
Problems and Zoning in
the Rural-Urban
Fringe," idem.
---.
"The Rural-Urban Fringe," Economic Geo
graphy, 18 (1942), pp. 217-228.
WHITNEY, V. H. "Urban Impact on a Rural
Township," in Sussman, M.P. (ed.), Community
Structure and Analysis (New York: Thomas Y.
Crowell Co., 1959).
WILLS, N. R. "The Rural-Urban
Fringe: Some
Agricultural
Characteristics
with Specific Refer
ence to
Sydney," Australian
Geographer,
5
(1945), pp. 29-35.
WIRTH, L. "Urbanism as a Way of Life," Amer
ican Iournal of Sociology, 44 (1938).
WISSINK, G. A. American Cities in Perspective:
With Special Reference to the Development of
Their Fringe Areas, Sociaal Geografische Studies,
Hoogleraar aan de Rijksuniversiteit
te Utrecht,
Nr. 5 (Assen, Netherlands: Royal Van Gorcum,

1962).
WOLFE, R. 1. "Nucleation on the Rural-Urban
Fringe," Ekistics, 20 (1965), pp. 228-231.
WOOLLEY, L. Ur of the Chaldees (Middlesex:
Pelican Books, 1938).
ZIMMER, B. G. and HAWLEY, A. H. "Approaches to
the Solution of Fringe Problems;
Preference of
Residents
in the Flint
Metropolitan
Area,"
Public Administration
Review, 16 (1956), pp.
258-268; reprinted in Theodorson, G. A. (ed.),
Studies in Human. Ecology (Evanston, Illinois:
Row, Peterson & Co., 1961).
---.
"Local Government as Viewed by Fringe
Residents," Rztral Sociology, 23 (1958), p. 363 ff.
---.
"Suburbanization
and Church Participa
tion," Social Forces, 37 (1959), p. 348 ff.
---.
"Suburbanization
and Some of Its Conse
quences," Land Economics, 37 (1961), p. 88 ff.