Abstract
Critiques of the urban functions in rural development approach have explored the strengths and limitations of this regional planning process as well as those of the location-allocation algorithms proposed as an alternative. Whatever the limitations of the two approaches may be, however, location-allocation algorithms cannot replace the broader planning framework of the urban functions method. Continuing the debate over the merits of these regional planning methods has become less important than examining the lessons from nearly two decades of experience of applying the urban functions method in developing countries. Those lessons can help regional scientists formulate new methods of regional analysis that will be useful to planners and policymakers in the future.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
