A version of the Empiric model for an urban area is evaluated by examining its forecasting ability and the customary assumption that its parameters will remain constant over time. The model's forecasting ability is found to be quite poor and the assumption of parameter constancy is found to be invalid. The analysis casts grave doubts on the model's usefulness as an urban forecasting technique.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
HillD. M., 1965, “A growth allocation model for the Boston region”, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 31, 111–120.
2.
HillD. M.HansenW. B., 1966, “Prototype development of statistical land use prediction model for Greater Boston region”, Highway Research Record, 114, 51–70.
3.
Kates, Peat, Marwick and Co., 1969, Developing a Growth Allocation Procedure for Forecasting Land Use in a Metropolitan Region, report prepared for the Canadian Council on Urban and Regional Research and the Metropolitan Corporation of Greater Winnipeg, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
4.
LeeD. B., 1973, “Requiem for large scale models”, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 39 (3), 163–178.
5.
LowryI. S., 1965, “A short course in model design”, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 31, 158–165.
6.
MasserI.ColemanA.WynnR. F., 1971, “Estimation of a growth allocation model for Northwest England”, Environment and Planning, 3, 451–463.
7.
StokesE. B., 1973, “The development and evaluation of an urban growth model for Calgary”, unpublished M. A. thesis, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
