Perspectives on the city‐region

By J. Parr. 2005

197 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The “creative class” in the uk: an initial analysis (2008, background): “As Parr (2005) notes, standard UK administrative geographies do not typically relate in a systematic way to any theoretical construct of the city-region; for the UK this ‘meaningful unit’ was primarily the NUTS3 definition (105 spatial units in England and Wales).”
Functional Polycentricity: Examining Metropolitan Spatial Structure through the Connectivity of Urban Sub-centres (2012, methodology): “…on polycentricity is strongly intertwined with a broader discussion about urban change where cities are no longer seen as mere morphological entities with clear and detectable borders but rather as functional urban regions incorporating large areas around the central city (Parr, 2005; Hall, 2009).”
From competitive regions to competitive city-regions: a new orthodoxy, but some old mistakes (2007, unknown): “In contrast to the overwhelming plethora of accounts that now support the rise of the city-region concept (for a flavour see Hall and Pain, 2006; Lloyd and Peel; 2006; Parr, 2005; Scott, 2001; Ward and Jonas, 2004), this paper reflects on the experiences of the new regionalism to offer some sobering”
The Rise of the “City-region” Concept and its Development Policy Implications (2008, background): “Despite its increasingly widespread use, there is no commonly accepted definition of what a city-region is (Parr, 2005).”