. . V ...: 0' . . . . o .... .. . . . I... .r. . . o. . . . .. . . . n a o _ I o _ . .. . . . . o u. A I . . n . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . - O h ‘ o _ .9 O a —.. .. . _ . 1 . . _ . _ . . C. I . — l o. . . . n . _ . . . . . . . _ . . . . c a o _ c 1 .~ 3 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . V .. . . . . ... . .... .. . . .......... ...:ca. ... ;.... ... ”($7.33.“ _. er 3“ r . . . .o . _ >3 . . . .1 .444 4- .o n V 1 . o . . r . . .V . a . .. .; 01.. .. .. u . k .... q . 3.3”“. Co. r..’ I . ' .0 o 1 . o o . . .........o ...u.. .... .. 5..... . ..JA.. fl . 40-...”vfl. . . . . . . . . 1. . . . .. .- . _ _ .. . _ .. ..r... . ......r ..r...... 1 2.. . o . . - a . 0 . o .. _ . . . . .4 . apoV . 4 . ...: a... . 4.4.7.." ..4u. do. ,..:..}.oo~crOKK}c. 4.9... . . . .. .. . a v _ 4.... r . o .4 .10.”..uv. .44~0P .j. J . . . o . . . ... 4\ .. 1 .. J. I. 4.... t 4‘... ...!41'”. . I . . . 1 . . o . . o I . _ . . .. . . ... . .... TV .4 . .... .1; z... . .4 .r...«— .. f. can»... . I. :29' V. .. . _ . . .. . . . v . ... I ._ .. .2! .4 . . . . . . . . r... . ”....” . O a, u 0 Q I I > ..U.» O z 4 - u c o . a o . . I . . . .r .. _ . . . ..4 .. . I . v . — . . . . .4 — Q a n . V . . ... 3 .. t- . o . a . . _ . . . 1 u 1 I o . . .. _ . . . . o 1. ... . n . O . . V . . . . ...V. .. . . ohoV$f14 It? ’9. n 40.5,. ' . - . . . ... o. ' ... . ...... .vo V- I»? Ody.» _ . . . _ .911 t...“ . . islgarno‘. 1 .. . 1 . . ’. .... o ...3 ..., ..(V....n.l1.. .34.- . . . . . . . . . .... ..r. [nor . v.” nio- ”...“. . 1 ‘ 1 I 1 . .- _ .u. . . 1 . . ..... . on» .0199‘. 1 o . . 1 . . . 4 . l (1-.4473!w . . 1 . .. . . ,4 .. 1 . . . a . . . _ . . ... 37%...” a . 1 . . . u 4 , 1 .... . . . _ . ...“xw‘ O u”.. . . . . . _ 5:... t u 4 . v p . Cp‘ 4“ 0 o a . Q. . . o. ..9r1f§4..- . . 4 . 1 . 1 . . .o . . . 1 . . ...... . I . . . . . . 1 72.2.: .. . . . I 'I . 0A . 4 1 . .. 1 _ . . o 4 loofz ‘4“...4 »‘ .. .. . . .. . . . ...:n...,n_.. 1. _ . . . . . . ...». . . . 1 .. ...-... 4 . .1 I 1 9. . ‘ 4. A . o . o . .09. 4c‘a.nwo.o. . . c . . o 1. o . . 1 4 .oft“ 4“ ”v.4- . . 0 o O _ of... . I. .41 .. . . . . . r I: . v.1 . . .. . ..1. If . . . . .. V . . 1 . o \I..41. a; .‘II . . . . .. ..p... . 'Q I 0 ”9,450. .1. «Lo 1 O . 1 .3. a . o .0 o _- o .0. . to; _ 1 . 2” a. ..."..l... - | O 4 ‘ ¢ . u . . . _ . o 11.. . . .. . . . .. 1r, .3. 1.... . .AV ’: .. v. _. t f . 4 ‘1‘. 4.. 3': or o. . ... .0. .'Vo1...o1).»,r tree E 011111: ; s L0 'VV‘V""—~1"V' O o _ I . — A. n» l o O t . a . , . . . . o. . .IV. A .. '.. .l {I . A . . . . ... . .1. r... 4.. . 1. 1.. V. . t .. .. v8 . a» '44 ...“.Ulp. . . 1 "n. . L I 4. . 3 . .4 a . . . . c _ I. 4’ Ci CA...“ . ”....1x- 1 o . I . V . o c; I ... 0 5 u ' . . . ..o . . f. .p .prv. .q154 . . . .J. RD .1974 . J 1 -3 . l . 1 O r - 1 I I. D. O 1. 1‘. ’. ’ v Q Q I . . v A . V . V . . e. v . . n . . v . n . w 1 .1 .. V r . . . . . u c n . 4. .- w . , . . .. v 0 V“ . . . Q .- . - ..- . . 1 _ . r . . . . . ... .1- 1:11... _ ...1. . . . V . . .I .. .1 1 1 w 1 .0 . o . . ...... ...4 r... .-u'rstoco ‘4. V I n I n u U u . . - f . . .. .... .1 .: 16 1. V. . 1.71 ...-u. .1 .. l V. .V . . O .\ 1“ .A . . .0 1 _ .. . q l y . . 1 1 \1 . . . . ‘1. >.:l .. p... ’1 . .i H . . . . .4 . a 1 ..r 17.1 ‘ 1 V . .IA ..v .4.» . 1 .. V a .o .. . . .... ‘9‘... \ I . I .o . . s .. V o 9. .1 .: 4.. ... 1 I...- . fil..".”"~ . . n . . 1 A o 1 . 1 a .' . . . 4 o O \ . . . . . . . a up... 4 n . n I 1 ‘1 .0 ! ca 0 ~n A . _ . 1 1 . 9 . .10 1 . . . . 11 1.. . v o . 1‘ o a .9 I O '0 I . u 0 I . c. .0! a . 1 l1 . 1 It 0. l O c n - ..o C . 1 v I I? . . I O. . . v .o . fl...» ~0~rruu~nn¢efl MW." ”0"“? ”31"““““"~ 0 k I . | I Y I. 1' i. 0 . .. _ o1; — . 9 . .. Q. . ..Pc. .1 .... ‘7‘ 3». L ..V x a... 2 v. 1. . 44.5... ..l..... ...-.5... . . h. .. I. or . .I. x4241. .- V.. ...‘..v. .‘1' .‘..:I» {'P. .fiL .w..»li .H..4.5JI.P..I<41."‘ Miro-.15.”. .a‘ a. ._o. 4L1._...v . Q... ... u. 472.... ”W.an :3. 11:11 0L 0‘. tVO..c|-r.. —.‘ .1.co...u .o 5 5152-. _ .. .....UWJ.“ ...‘J..-.¢U‘. . -0' . . 41V.5|¢ f..'.‘l’11.:‘a,.-‘1 . \: ’laay1'avl "o..‘:.. 91.0..11 .o.'.lV‘ \l Oovi’ .IO 4. o . 4.0.. o» 0' I_'- ,t.» O u. v V. I l I..- a . ‘Hvul 4 . I ...-vn...) . n ’53.»... .... ’.1 . rota .— V o A pl. .. ... ....J.MHoIWc1.Hc-.V . 44 g.“.1..t.l_ . -1 .. <3... 4 .h¢.o.....b. 03.01. 01.4» .wV .2“... >4". ..Koafla. 4%....sl11v... . .. . a.._....~ 01.11.37". 3.1.39... ....1. 5Jst.V.d$.. 7. ..J... ....f ... ..a . .. 4....1K ‘ .1......._.»4.:r. T.a4..mnV manure.» fiat.“ .p - 1 .1.- (Etta... .V _.§£%fixx 02m»...1..*c}7 .1; . m»; . .. Imumguxzmgugmlmugmjmumflw Michigan 5:35:63 5 University (3 ABSTRACT A GEOGRAPHICAL STUDY OF RURAL SERVICE CENTERS IN MERIDA STATE, VENEZUELA By Jose J. Rojas Lopez The investigation concentrates on thirty-six rural settlements in the State of Mérida, in western Venezuela. Central place theory was used as a theoretical base to examine two major problems: 1) the nature and degree of the relationship between population and functional importance of the centers, and 2) the extent to which the settlements conform to hierarchical arrangement according to their functional importance. Three hypotheses were proposed in the study: 1. There is a close and positive linear relation- ship between the number of central functions performed in the settlements and the size of their populations. 2. There is a close and positive linear relation- ship between the number of functional units found in the centers and the size of their populations. 3. A defined hierarchy of settlements can be identified from an objective classification of José J. Rojas Lopez w\ GD the centers according to their number of U Lo functional units . Rural service centers were defined on the basis of the following criteria: 1) they must be capitals of rural municipios, and 2) they must have populations of less than 2,500. The centers selected ranged,thus,from 108 to 2,294 inhabitants. Data on functional composition of the settlements were gathered through fieldwork. From thirty—eight central functions found, those of a political and administrative nature were disregarded for the following reasons: 1) they generally depend on external subsidies so that their presence in a given center depends not only upon the overall level of demand but also upon government decisions. There- fore, one cannot assume a high correlation between the number of these functions and the effective demand of a settlement, and 2) with the exception of churches, none of these functions occurred more than once in each center. Consequently, in terms of number of functional units they do not prove useful in defining the relative importance of a settlement. The final list included twenty-four central functions generated by effective demand (economic activities). The two first hypotheses were investigated by means of simple correlation and regression analysis. The coef- ficients of correlation found were .959 and .937, respectively, which would be Significant at .001 level if the data could be considered as a random sample. The latter hypothesis was José J. Rojas Lopez examined through multivariate analysis. By applying factor analysis, a grouping routine and discriminant analysis, five groups of settlements were derived. The hierarchical dimension of the groups was analyzed based upon the forms of hierarchical arrangement of settlements pointed out by Garner.1 It was found that the rural service centers of Mérida State conform to a vertical hierarchy with no explicit spatial expression. Finally, a general framework, based on the concepts of rural growth center and functional hierarchy, was pro- posed to select key centers for the implementation of rural development services. 1B. J. Garner, "Models of Urban Geography and Settle- ment Location,” in Socioeconomic Models in Geography. Edited by Richard J. Chorley and Peter Haggett. London: Methuen, 1970, pp. 303—360. A GEOGRAPHICAL STUDY OF RURAL SERVICE CENTERS IN MERIDA STATE, VENEZUELA By Jose anRojas Lopez A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Geography 1974 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Clarence W. Minkel for his critical reading of the thesis and for the helpful sugges- tions that he made toward its improvement. I am also grateful to Dr. Robert N. Thomas for encouragement and advice during the course of my graduate program. Throughout the diverse aspects of the research I have appreciated the help of Mike Graff, Dave Hicks and Larry Lindberg, graduate students in the Department of Geography of Michigan State university. The fieldwork would not have been possible without the assistance of the University of Los Andes in Mérida, Venezuela. In particular, I am indebted to Professor J. E. Valbuena Gomez, Director of the School of Geography, and Professor L. F. Chaves Vargas, Director of the Institute of Geography. ii Chapter I. II. III. IV. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . Problem . Theoretical Considerations Hypotheses . Central Places Studies in Developing Countries . Scope of the Present Study . GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY AREA. Relief . Climate The Settlement Process . . Spatial Distribution of Population . Population Size of Settlements Agriculture METHODOLOGY Selection of the Centers Data Collection Data Analysis Techniques RURAL SERVICE CENTERS OF MERIDA STATE Functional Importance and Hierarchy of the Settlements . . Relationship Between Population Size and Functional Importance . Testing for Hierarchical Structuring of Settlements Discussion of the Settlement Hierarchy CONCLUSIONS: PERSPECTIVES FOR A RURAL SETTLEMENT DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK . General Considerations The Proposed Framework . . Functional Hierarchy of the Settlements iii 47 47 56 66 76 76 79 80 Chapter Page Selection of Rural Growth Centers . . 81 Implementation of Services . . . . . 84 APPENDICES A. Data Collection Form . . . . . . . . . . . 89 B. Correlation Matrix of Central Functions . . 90 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 iv Table 10 ll 12 l3 14 LIST OF TABLES Administrative Division of the State of Mérida, by Distritos Average Precipitation at Selected Locations in Mérida State Vertical Zones in the Venezuelan Andes Evolution of Urban Population in Mérida State Population Size of Selected Settlement Categories in Mérida State . Structure of the Employed Population of Mérida State . . . . . . . . Farm Land Uses in Mérida State . Frequency of Occurrence of Central Functions in the Rural Centers Studied . Weighting of Functional Units of Rural Centers Studied Population Changes of the Rural Centers Studied Unrotated Factors Pertaining to Functional Units of the Rural Centers Studied . Rotated Factors Pertaining to Functional Units of the Rural Centers Studied . Highest Factor Loadings Pertaining to Functional Units of the Rural Centers Studied. Coefficients of Linear Discriminant Functions Pertaining to Five Groups of Rural Centers and Three Factors Page 17 20 20 26 27 28 29 37 39 45 58 58 60 66 Table Page 15 Functional Hierarchy of the Rural Centers Studied . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 16 Mean Values of Population Size and Functional Importance of the Hierarchy of Rural Centers Studied . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 17 Data Matrix for Selection of Rural Growth Centers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 vi Figure LIST OF FIGURES Christaller's Regular Lattice Models Mérida State: Physical Features and Settlements Rural Centers of Mérida State: Relationship Between Population Size and Number of Central Functions Rural Centers of Mérida State: Relationship Between Population Size and Number of Functional Units Rural Centers of Mérida State: Relationship Between Population Size and Weighted Functional Units . . . . . Rural Centers of Mérida State: Factor Scores on Factors 1 and 3 Rural Centers of Mérida State: Stepwise of Grouping . Mérida State: Hierarchy of Settlements Elements of a Dendritic Market System vii Page 18 50 53 54 61 64 70 74 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The distributional pattern of human settlements varies from isolated farmsteads to large urban centers, each type having its own importance within the entire settlement net- work. Centralizing principles of organization and coherence are basic to settlements everywhere. Consequently, aspects of agglomeration or concentration are of vital interest in settlement geography. The systematic study of the spatial structure of settlements on a theoretical basis was first undertaken by Walter Christaller in 1933.1 He postulated a general deduc- tive theory to explain the size, number and distribution of settlements. Since then central place theory has been an important part of geography. Although its more frequent applications are found in urban geography, it began with the study of rural centers or villages. Thus,the generalizations or laws associated with central place studies should hold not only for cities but for all sizes of centers. However, 1Walter Christaller, Central Places in Southern Germany, trans. Carlisle W. Baskin (New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs, 1966). most planners and scholars have neglected rural settlement studies to some extent, perhaps due to the lack of adequate data. In present day Latin America, however, the complex problems associated with heavy internal migration have necessitated comprehensive research on the structure and evolution of rural settlements. Problem Central place theory is used in this study as a general framework to analyze a set of rural centers in the State of Mérida, Venezuela. Specifically, the study is concerned with two postulates implied in the theory: 1) the size of a settlement is closely associated with its functional impor- tance, and 2) settlements can be graded in a hierarchical class system based upon functional units. Central place theory, as presently perceived, comprises diverse facets, including the size and spacing of centers, locational patterns and grouping of retail activities, consumer travel behavior and trade areas.2 Two aspects relevant to central place theory have been investigated in this study: 1. The nature and degree of inter-relationship between the population of thirty—six rural settlements and their functional importance, 2Brian J. L. Berry, H. Gardiner Barnum and Robert J. Tennant, ”Retail Location and Consumer Behavior," Pa ers and Proceedings of the Regional Science Association 9 ZIE62): 65. 2. The extent to which the rural centers conform to a hierarchical arrangement according to their func- tional importance. Theoretical Considerations The nature of classic central place theory has been discussed by several authors.3 The cornerstone of Christaller's theory is the notion of a functional interdependence between a town and its surrounding rural area. For every central place there exists a complementary area the size of which varies according to the distance over which the surrounding rural population is willing to travel to obtain any particular good or service. This distance was termed "the range of a good." On the basis of this concept, and using economic arguments, Christaller defined an optimal spatial structure for a hierarchy of centers distributed on an isotropic surface. He stated that settlements would be regularly spaced and centrally located within hexagonal market areas (Figure l). The hierarchical dimension in this model arises from the assumption that higher-order centers supply all the goods and services offered by lower order centers, together with a number of higher-order goods and services distinctive to themselves. The centers offering lower-order goods and services would be more numerous and less widely spaced than 3See for example: Brian J. L. Berry, Geography of Market Centers and Retail Distribution (New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, 1967) and, John [L Marshall, The Location of Service Towns (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969). 3n 25 on .52: ...2222 .3 .22. 3:5 330: mo_._.._.<._ m<.5omm mkmjngzo ._ mmaot 5.55.. 0 $4.35 I 230» 0 CE I xmo3hmz u>_.r as» h: . la b‘ .\ . .v 4 . t 0 0.3.35 (\\r/. O . _ ( _.) \} \omfiuqfiz .83 A I'\ I! h V 1 / 19 concentration. The upper basins of the Motatan, Santo Domingo, Uribante and Caparo Rivers also function as gateways to surrounding lowlands. The piedmont belt on the northwest, a transition area between the Cordillera de Mérida and the Lake Maracaibo low- lands, is characterized by a series of parallel alluvial fans which have been recently brought under cultivation. Climate Abrupt ecological contrasts are common in the region. Marked changes of climate and vegetation, especially, can be noted within short distances. Precipitation varies according to elevation and may also vary from one valley to another at any given elevation. On the windward flanks of the mountains averages of 2,800 mm. are reached, while some intermont basins average less than 600 mm. annually. These "dry islands" have often been explained as being the result of local relief on wind circulation. Table 2 shows the spatial variability of precipitation within the study area. Temperatures vary from 27° C at Palmarito, in the Lake Maracaibo lowlands, to l-4°C below zero on Pico Bolivar. Elevation modifies the climate so that distinct vertical zones can be recognized. Vila has identified the zones shown in Table 3.1 1Marco A. Vila, Aspectos geogréficos del estado Mérida (Caracas: Corporacion Venezolana de Fomento, 1967), pp. 64-66. 20 TABLE 2 AVERAGE PRECIPITATION AT SELECTED LOCATIONS IN MERIDA STATE (IN MILLIMETERS) Place Precipitation Lagunillas 493 Mucuchfes 708 La Azulita 1,400 Mérida 1,674 TABLE 3 VERTICAL ZONES IN THE VENEZUELAN ANDES Zone Altitude Mean Temperature (Meters) (°Centigrade) Tropical 0-800 27-24 Subtropical 800-l,500 24-20 Temperate l,500-2,000 20-16 Cold 2,000-3,600 16- 7.5 Péramo (Alpine Meadow) 3,600-4,600 7.5- 4.5 Gélido (Barren Zone) 4,600-5,007 4.5- ? Local features such as topography, insolation and winds distort the vertical zonation pattern, particularly in the intermont basins. Chaves and Vivas consider the altitudinal ordering of landscapes within an ideal Andean basin as follows:2 2Luis F. Chaves and Leonel Vivas, Geografia de Vehgzuela CMérida: Universidad de los Andes, Instituto de—Geografia, 1972), pp. 93-95. 21 1. Xerophytic vegetation composed hy thorpy shrub, hawthorn and cactus. The upper limit is variable although frequently reaches 1,000 meter level. Main crops (sugar cane and tobacco) are grown on alluvial terraces with the use of irrigation. Other crops are pineapple and fique (henequen). Goat grazing is common throughout these areas. 2. Subtropical semideciduous forest. It extends up to I:500-1,700 meters andiconstitutes the coffee zone. Sugar cane is also grown on river flood plains. 3. Cloud forest. This is a transitional zone between 1T500-1,700 meters and 2,000 meters. Land use consists of pasture and diverse crops (corn, potatoes and horticulture). 4. Andean matorral (bush). It goes up to about 2,800 meters and forms the cereal zone. Potatoes and horticultural crops are also important. 5. Paramo. This zone is located above 2,800 meters. Crops are less common because of frost and hail. Extensive cattle grazing and isolated potato cultivation are the dominant land uses. The Settlement Process Since Pre-Colombian times the settlement pattern has been one of heavy population concentration in the intermont basins. The unhealthy hot and wet lowlands were a source of malaria and yellow fever and also presented difficulties for agricultural activities. These are generally considered principal causes for the population to have located in the temperate lands of the Cordillera. However, James states that: Probably the most important reason for the high degree of habitability of the Cordillera de Mérida was that the Indians depended on maize as their basic food, and this was very productive maize country. . . . Better diets, probably, rather than lower temperatures, made possible the relatively dense populations of vigorous Indians; but the lower temperatures worked ‘ q 5‘] L1! ._L_, / 22 indirectly to improve the health conditions after the arrival of European diseases, for the fever carrying insects are less numerous above the tierra caliente.3 The Andean territory was inhabited by diverse Indian groups, Timoto-Cuicas being the most important. They practiced the most advanced agriculture in the Venezuelan territory. Salas estimates an Indian population of 20,000 at the arrival oftfluaSpaniards to the Andes in 1557.4 During the last decades of the 15th century, according to Brito- Figueroa, the following characteristics of Andean settlements prevailed:5 1. High population density in the areas of irrigated agriculture. The dwellings were grouped in stabilized aldeas (hamlets). 2. Relatively high population density, but still with stabilized aldeas, in those areas of economy based upon agriculture of azada (spade agriculture). 3. Low population density associated with nomadism in the peripheral areas. Agriculture was a fundamental factor of concentration and stabilization of the first Andean aldeas. Later, many of these aldeas grew to become villages. 3Preston E. James, Latin America (New York: The Odyssey Press, 1969), p. 368. 4Julio C. Salas, Etnografia de Venezuela (Mérida: Universidad de los Andes, 1956), pp. 3-4. 5Federico Brito-Figueroa, Poblacion y economia en el pgsado indigena venezolano (Caracas: Tipografia Remar, 1962), p. 7. 23 Cardozo has classified the Andean settlements into three groups based on their origins:6 1. Villages founded directly by the Spaniards (villages of royal origin). They were established by official authorization and served as bases of operations to conquer the surrounding territory. 2. Settlements arose irregularly by a slow association of dwellings without permission of the Spanish Crown. This was the origin of most of the Andean towns. 3. Indian communities organized by the Spaniards. Most of the towns with Indian names had their origin as communities inhabited exclusively by Indians. From the beginning the economy of Andean settlements was agriculturally oriented. Spaniards developed the native crops, especially cocoa, cotton and tobacco, and introduced wheat and sugar cane. Later, in 1777, coffee was brought to the region and became the leading crop. Each settlement and its surrounding countryside set up a closed circuit irregularly opened to errant outside mer- chants, usually from Maracaibo.7 Upon this structure developed a town system with weak internal relations. It was not until the beginning of petroleum exploitation in Venezuela that a small-scale commercial interchange among the larger Andean towns began.8 Arturo Cardozo, Proceso de la historia de los Andes (Carggagé Biblioteca de Autores y Temas’Tachirenses, 1965), PP: ‘ - 7Ibid., pp. 37-38. Angel F. Diaz, Hacia una estrategia de desarrollo urbano para la region andina (Mérida: Instituto de Investigaciones EconomiEas, 1972), pp. 8-9. 24 At the earliest stage, competition and interaction between centers operated only on a small scale. Each center served a surrounding area despite inadequate communications. In purely theoretical terms, all settlements would therefore have identical functions. Following Webb, if one multiplies von Thfinen's isolated central cities in a region no differen- tiation of urban functions would take place because there is no interaction and, thus, each center is like the others.9 Spatial Distribution of Population Recently two new factors acting together have exerted a powerful influence on the spatial distribution of the population: 1) the construction of highways and improve- ments of roads, and 2) the improvement of health conditions in the lowlands. In 1955 the northwestern piedmont section of the Pan American Highway was completed. Subsequently, these lands were invaded by squatters moving downslope from the Andean highlands. This migration constituted a defined settlement thrust. Today, a process of unplanned "space filling" is occurring in the piedmont.10 9J. W. Webb, "Basic Concepts in the Analysis of Small Urban Centers of Minnesota," Annals of the Association of American Geographers 49 (1959): 55. 10Orlando L. Venturini, "Aspectos geograficos de la colonizacién del piedemonte noroccidental de los Andes venezolanos," Revista Geogréfica 9 (1968): 94. 25 The construction of the Llanos Highway along the south- eastern piedmont, in 1968, encouraged out-migration of people from the southern section of the state. The construction of highways, thus, has brought about a process of rural-to-rural migration from highland to lowland. Hence, the main axes of settlement in the region are the Chama basin, in which more than 50 percent of the population is concentrated, and the northwestern piedmont. It is in the former where most of the urban centers have develOped. In 1971 the population of the state of Mérida reached a total of 347,095 (3.2 percent of the national population), of which 57.6 percent may be classified as rural.11 However, a progressive increase of the urban population has occurred, as shown in Table 4. The population growth trend is associated primarily with urban centers located along the two principal axes of settlement in the region. Population Size of the Settlements Chaves and Amaya have proposed a classification of the Andean settlements based upon a hierarchy of markets, 12 production factors and services. They differentiated 11The Census Office establishes three categories of settlements: 1) urban, more than 2,500 inhabitants; 2) inter- mediate, between l,000 and 2,500 inhabitants; and 3) rural, of less than 1,000 inhabitants plus the dispersed population. In this work the second category is also considered as rural. 12Luis F. Chaves and Carlos A. Amaya, Sistema de ciudades, pp. 8—10. 26 TABLE 4 EVOLUTION OF URBAN POPULATION IN MERIDA STATE Year Urban Population (Percent of Total Population) 1963 8.74 1941 12.47 1950 17.57 1961 28.24 1971 42.44 Source: X censo national de poblacién: 1971. seven categories of settlements: l. 7. Metropolitan areas, integrated by the largest Andean cities, their suburbs and satellites. The largest is the San Cristébal area which supports a population of 152,239 inhabitants. Intermediate cities (ciudades medias) with populations ranging from 10,000 tog25,000 inhabi- tants. Small cities, with populations between 5,000 and 10,000. Village-cities (ciudades-pueblos), as forms of transition between urban and rural settlements. Villages (ppeblos), between 500 and 2,000 inhabitants. Village-hamlets (aldeas-pueblos), between 300 and 500 inhabitants. Hamlets, with populations under 300. Unfortunately, these categories are based largely on population size. In fact, the authors do not include any 27 measure of market areas, production factors or services in the classification. Despite the ”urbanizing" trends of the Mérida popula- tion, a substantial number of small settlements remain. In 1961 the national census registered 70.8 percent of the population as scattered and living in centers of fewer than 2,500 inhabitants.13 The number of centers having between 100 and 999 people was of 515, whereas there were only eighteen centers with populations above 1,000. Table 5 shows the distribution of Mérida population by size of centers. TABLE 5 POPULATION SIZE OF SELECTED SETTLEMENT CATEGORIES IN MERIDA STATE Size Number of Percent of Total Centers Population 100-199 298 15.4 200-499 173 18.3 500-999 44 10.9 1,000-1,999 9 4.2 2,000-2,499 2 1.6 2,500-4,999 3 3.1 5,000-10,000 3 8.9 10,000-50,000 1 17.2 Source: IX censo nacional de poblacién: 1961. 13A minimum of three grouped dwellings was the criterion used to classify a place as a p0pu1ated center. Census infor- mation for 1971 regarding small centers was not available at the time of this study. 28 Agriculture The State of Merida is basically an agricultural region. In 1961, for example, 61.5 percent of the employed population was engaged in the agricultural sector. Table 6 reveals the economic structure of the state in terms of employed population. TABLE 6 STRUCTURE OF THE EMPLOYED POPULATION OF MERIDA STATE (PERCENTAGES) Sector Year 1950 1961 Agriculture 66.0 61.5 Manufacture 4.6 5.3 Construction 3.2 2.7 Transportation 1.3 2.7 Commerce 4.7 7.6 Services 19.0 18.2 Source: Universidad de los Andes, Instituto de Investiga- ciones Econémicas, 1966. With respect to agricultural land use, the 1950 and 1961 agricultural censuses classified the use of farm land as shown in Table 7.14 14To date, the 1971 agricultural census has not been released. 29 TABLE 7 FARM LAND USES IN MERIDA STATE (PERCENTAGES) Land Use 1961 1950 Perennial crops 10.0 8.3 Annual and semi- perennial crops 8.6 10.9 Cultivated pastures 29.9 13.6 Uncultivated pastures 14.4 20.0 Fallow land 14.1 13.4 Forest 18.1 27.0 Other uses 4.6 6.8 Source: III censo agropecuario: 1961. Considering as agricultural lands those included in the first three categories, i.e., the space on which the man-land relationship is more apparent, it appears that agricultural output depends more upon the amount of land used than the intensity of use. The area of agricultural land increased from 32.8 percent in 1950 to 48.5 percent in 1961. Because of ecological factors, comparative advantages have developed for specialized agriculture (coffee, potatoes, horticulture) in the intermont basins. In the tierra caliente (tropical zone) plantains are the most important crop, especially in the piedmont. The largest part of this pro- duction is exported from the region to national markets. A subsistence and semi-subsistence agriculture is 30 practiced in the less accessible parts of the region. The tiny holdings of campesinos (peasant cultivators) occupy the areas of lowest fertility as a result of an inadequate land tenure system. From an economic and ecological VieWpoint, these are critical areas characterized by a continuous process of out-migration. In 1968, for example, a survey of ninety-one migrant families living in the piedmont disclosed that fifty-eight came from the poorest areas of Merida State.15 15Orlando L. Venturini, Aspectos geogréficos, p. 81. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY The basic problem faced by an investigator of rural settlements in an area such as the Andes is the lack of data and the difficulty in collecting what information is available. Data on functional composition for small centers do not appear in any directory or census, thus necessitating field- work. However, in a substantial number of cases, the poor accessibility, dispersion of settlements and scarce carto- graphical resources, to mention a few obstacles, affect the completeness of the data or sample designs in these areas. Quantitative approaches therefore must be more flexible and less inclusive than in developed regions. Selection of the Centers The rural service center is the basic unit with which this Study is concerned. These settlements were defined in the following terms: 1) they must be capitals of rural municipios, and 2) they must have populations of less than 2,500 inhabitants. The first criterion is supported by previous studies emphasizing the role of the municipio cabeceras as centers 31 32 providing goods and services for the surrounding 1 area. In a broad sense the Venezuelan rural municipio constitutes a community, especially in the Andes where the typical municipio is: a territorial unit comprising a principal nucleus (cabecera) and a rural hinterland inte- grated by vecindarios (neighborhoods), aldeas and dis- persed population. This pattern seems to be a general characteristic in rural Latin America. In Smith's words: in Latin America as a general rule the separation of state and church was slow in coming about, and even today the local govern- ment unit, designated as a municipio in most of the countries, corresponds exactly to the church parish. Furthermore, the boundaries of the municipios are almost always drawn with social and economic factors taken into consideration, so that they correspond much more closely to natural social areas than do those in the United States.2 Hill, et al. found that the cabeceras acted as true central places finrthe inhabitants of the municipio. The Andean community presented the strongest centralizing character. They pointed out that in the Andean community all the neighborhoods depend exclusively upon the cabecera to fulfill their economic and social needs. For instance, lGeorge Hill, et al., La Vida rural, pp. 126-131; Cosejo de Bienestar Rural, Problemas econémicos y sociales de los Andes venezolanos, 2 vols. (Caracas: Ministerio de Agricultura y Cria, 1955), 1:75-78. 2T. Lynn Smith, ”The Rural Community with Special Refer- ence to Latin America," Rural Sociology 23 (1958): 61. 33 more than 85 percent of the campesinos interviewed bought clothes, food and tools and sold their products in the cabecera.3 For Colombia, Smith drew similar conclusions: the typical rural community in Colombia consists of two parts: (1) a small market, trade, religious, ceremonial and administrative center; and (2) a tributary zone of open country whose inhabitants can reach the village or town on market days and Sundays, generally on foot, 4 and return to their dwellings before nightfall. It is likely that the central place character of a settlement depends appreciably upon areal extent and road system. Small municipios with rudimentary roads may produce greater frequency of contact from the outlying area to the center than larger muncipios with better roads. The second criterion to select the centers is a com- promise solution, which follows in part censal considera- tions, given the difficulties in establishing satisfactory population thresholds to distinguish rural from urban settlements. Whatever threshold one selects there will be "cities" with a smaller population and ”villages" with a larger one. Of course, this differentiation can be approached 3 4T. Lynn Smith, Colombia (Gainsville: University of Florida Press, 1967), p. 310. George Hill et al., La Vida rural, p. 129. 34 in several other ways, including physical and socioeconomic characteristics. However, the population limit established for this study is believed to reflect the rurality condition of settlements in Mérida State. In total thirty-six centers were selected, of which four are also distrito capitals, with populations ranging from 108 to 2,294 inhabitants. Data Collection Since data on the number of functions and functional units were not available, a field study of each center was conducted in the spring of 1974. First, a list of all central functions expected to occur was tabulated.. Next, a data collection form was designed. This form is included as Appendix A. Complementary information was acquired through informal interviews with merchants of the centers. For the larger centers presidents of junta comunales (town councils) or municipio prefectos checked the data. At the outset basic concepts were operationally defined as follows: Central function: Any good or service provided directly by the rural center to the population of the surrounding area on a regular basis. ' Functional unit: The frequency of occurrence of a given central function. For example, if small groceries appear several times in a center, the frequency of occurrence is noted under the category of functional units. Establishment: The physical unit (building) in which or from which one or more functions are performed. Hierarchy: An arrangement of settlements in groups of differing levels of functional importance. 35 Functional importance A measure of importance of a center in terms of the number of central functions and functional unitsit possesses compared with the number found in other centers. Non-central function: Those functions which basically serve the populatian living in the center, such as piped water, or a population living outside the local trade area, such as tourism. Table 8 lists the thirty-eight central functions performed in the centers. Fourteen functions related to administrative and political decision were not included in the analysis due to the following reasons: 1. Functions of political and administrative character generally depend upon external subsidies. Their presence in a center is determined not only by the overall level of demand but also by government decisions. For instance, agricultural extension centers, telegraph, telephone, post offices, police stations and health centers are services established by the government largely on the basis of territorial and political considerations. Hence, one cannot assume a high cor- relation between the number of these functions and the effective demand of a center. Likewise, the govern- ment-controlled schools are organized on an areal basis and consequently their appearance in a center does not necessarily indicate that a certain population threshold has been reached. The importance of local political leaders and political favors in obtaining such services is well known and thus the concept 36 of threshold may be completely meaningless when applied to them.”5 2. With the exception of churches, none of these functions occurred more than once in each center. Therefore, in terms of functional units they are of little use in defining the relative importance of a center. Furthermore, these services are used very sporadically by the population living in the outlying area. During fieldwork it was evident, for example, that people preferred to send their letters and packages to the larger centers of the state directly through a private transport service (by ”jeep") because it is a faster way. To maintain consistency, the central function concept was redefined as: Any good or service provided directly by the center to the population of the surrounding area on a regular basis and whose occurrence is related to overall economic demand. Permanent business establishments were also used as criteria in the selection of central functions. For example, itinerant barbers and dentistis and short-term food stores were disregarded. Since no objective criterion was applied, the distinction of these minor activities may be considered partially subjective. The same may be said regarding th 5H. Carter, et al., Functions of Welsh Towns, p. 26. 37 TABLE 8 FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF CENTRAL FUNCTIONS IN THE RURAL CENTERS STUDIED Economic Political-Administrative Functions Frequency Functions Frequency Small groceries and Churches 36 sundries 36 Health centers 36 Bars 36 Primary schools 36 Restaurants 26 Police stations 36 Large groceries 21 School cafeterias 36 Hotels and hostels* 18 Post offices 30 Pharmacies l6 Telegraphs 24 Dry good stores 15 Telephones l8 Soda shops 15 Agricultural extension Gas stations 15 centers 14 Butcher shops 14 Homemaking centers 12 Auto repair shops 14 Secondary schools 9 Trinket shops 14 Weekly parish movies 9 Tailor shops 10 Adult education centers 5 Tire repairs 10 Community centers 3 Barber shops 10 Furniture and wood- working shops 9 Hardware and building supplies 7 Shoe stores 7 Bakeries 6 Farm stores 6 Supermarkets 5 Lawyers 3 Electrical appliance repairs 2 Physicians 2 *Hotels and motels which cater primarily to tourists and traveling salesmen were omitted. 38 differentiation of several commercial functions performed in a single establishment. In this case the volume of goods in each was the criterion used. The final list included twenty-four central functions, generated by effective demand, ranging from two in the smallest centers to twenty-four in the largest ones. Population data from the latest national census, conducted in 1971, were used in testing hypotheses. Data Analysis Techniqpes The relationship between population size, number of central functions and number of functional units is examined by means of simple correlation and regression analysis. Population is taken as the dependent variable on the grounds that: Christaller suggested that through the working of the income mechanism the population of a center was a function of the number of types of central goods and services the central place provided. To consider the qualitative differences in the level of functions that exist in the centers, functional units were weighted according to the values shown in Table 9.7 6Brian J. L. Berry and William L. Garrison, The Functional Bases, p. 149. 7I am indebted to Professor J. Valbuena-Gomez for his comments in discussing this point. maosm wcwxuoauoos cam muzuficusm muwmmmu muHH maocm posouam mowaamsm wassafisn flaw GHNBVHNI mmHOUw Euwm meowumum mmo muwmamu ” moonm moamwaaam uwxGHuH maonm uoawme monoum poow mum mmflpmxmm Hmowuuomam moonm mumm maonm mwom uwmamn 0u5< mmflomEpmzm muscum mosm muokqu mmfiuvanm cam mawumon mmwumoouw Hamam mucmunmummm maocm possum cam mamuom mofluoooum mwumg muoxumameSm mcmfiowmmfim H u 3 m u 3 m n 3 n u 3 0H u 3 ma u 3 ON u 3 HH> mmmau H> mmmao > mmmao >H mmmau HHH mmmao HH mmmau H mmmao QmHQDHm mmmHsz AIom562 a u: guano 2n 3 £53.53 .35.. . 33¢ 53 ....... :35 I" s 3.22.358 3:5,. . 83.. dies Ill :35 ... ... 35232.5» .35.. . 33¢ 33.. ll shamanism» 23¢: . .0 \Il\-/‘!Illllunls("' l0. \ \ \ \ \ .a ......... . \\ llllll.’ ....... . ... f ...... \ \ P IIIIII Ila \\ .. ’f fl. 0 .. I 1/255/ .. .(..... . . . / ... ..... \. ...... ... ... .... \.....~ $144? ’ ”rm... ~ \s . ‘\ — ... . ... \\ ‘g‘ 6 . .. ... .... u I 1 Ar ~\. 3“ ... .. ..... IV \ 6... .. ‘ ... ... . \ s . I. n n . \|‘ \ ... I’I ” n u \ ~ .. a. .u \ . . I I I, ..II \I‘ .... _ 28.53-23. . / r . A \1 )1. \ / .\ \ \ .. QSSGVSS wk: 71 widely spaced than lower-order centers, nor are the latter clearly ”nesting" within the hinterlands of the former.17 Thus, it can be stated that the service centers of Mérida State conform to a vertical hierarchy, but without an explicit spatial expression. The distribution of settlements is governed largely by the road system, which therefore consti— tutes a primary factor in the location and growth of the centers. There is a conspicuous relationship between type of roads and orders of the hierarchy: Higher-order centers form linear patterns along the main highways, whereas lower-order centers scatter in the less accessible parts of the region. It should be stressed that the spatial dimension of a settlement net must be viewed according to the set of inter- actions and interchanges within a marketing system. Ultimately it is the decision about where the consumer spends his money (as well as the amount of money that is available) that forms the ultimate determinant of any central place system. Consequently it is appropriate that the spatial analysis of consumer spending patterns, not in one center, but with reference to a set or system of places forms the current frontier of central place studies. 17Averages of linear distance (Km) from each of the centers to all other centers in each order, are as follows: First order = 61 Second order = 51 Third order - 58 Fourth order = 73 Fifth order = 50 18Wayne K. D. Davies, Towards an Integrated, p. 195. 72 In this context, only a technique involving interviews in the countryside can directly identify the linkages which define the areal extent of a central place system. It should be expected that trade area size for a particular function increases with the order of centers, and the maximum distance consumers are willing to travel (range of that function) would consequently depend on the level of the hierarchy. Could a hierarchical spatial expression be found for the settlements of Mérida State by examining the threshold populations and the range of goods and services? Or, to the contrary, do larger centers absorb functions which should be performed by lower-order centers? These questions remain to be answered. Chaves and Amaya examined the wholesale flows within ' the settlement system of the "region of Mérida,’ which was defined generally as the Chama basin between Estanques and San Rafael de Mucuchies. They found that with the exception of Mucuchies and Ejido, whose supply of goods was provided in part by extraregional cities, Mérida dominated wholesale distribution on the bottom of the valley, along the Trans- Andean Highway. On the other hand, the small cities of Ejido and Lagunillas did not exert their wholesaling influence on the centers closest to them along the highway but on the 19 less accessible slope-located aldeas. Based upon Mintz's 19Luis F. Chaves and Carlos A. Amaya, Sistema de Ciudades, pp. 12-17. 73 concepts of "horizontal exchange" and "vertical exchange," it was concluded that the Mérida region, and presumably the whole Venezuelanlhukxg is a typical example of a regional dendritic system (Figure 9).20 Figure 9 is described by Johnson in the following terms: Goods destined for export (e g., coffee, sisal) and a wide variety of provisions for the urban population (e g., pork, beef, poultry, eggs, pulses, grain) are gathered up in or near rural markets, bulked or processed in a few "strategic" markets, and moved to port-cities by migrant traders (révédez). Conversely, consumer goods which peasant-community artisans cannot produce move from port-cities through strategic (whole- sale) markets to local markets. An important aspect of Mintz's model is that the organ- ization of the marketing system is strongly linked to social groups with marked economic and social differentiation. When the exchange of goods and services ends in their consumption by class equals, there is a horizontal exchange. Goods passing from the importer, wholesaler or factory owner to the peasantry indicates a downward vertical exchange. Fresh vegetables and 20Sidney W. Mintz, "Internal Market Systems as Mechan- isms of Social Articulation," Proceedings of the American Ethnolggical Society, Seattle 1959, pp. 20-30. See also: "A Tentative Typology of Eight Haitian Market Places," Revista de Ciencias Sociales 4 (1960): 15—57; "Pratik: Haitian Personal Economic Relationships," Proceedings of the American Ethnglggical Society, Seattle 1961, pp. 54-63;5"The Role of the Middleman in the Internal Distribution System of a Carib- bean Peasant Economy," Human Orggnization 15 (1956): 18-23. 21E. A. J. Johnson, The Organization of Space in Develop- ing_§ggntries (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970), p. 85. 74 PORT CITY MARKET MAJOR INLAND MARKET PERIODIC LOCAL MARKET DEPEN DENT HAMLETS (after E.A.J. Johnson, pg. 86) 75 craft goods, for example, passing from the peasantry to the upper classes illustrates upward vertical exchange.22 It seems that the two models attempt to explain the spatial component of the rural market system at different levels. From the description above, it can be concluded that dendritic schema is based upon inter—center linkages, taking basicallyinflaaccount wholesale distribution through different socio-economic groups. On the other hand, central place, as classically viewed, is a demand-oriented model centered on the retail transactions that a central place performs for its surrounding dependent population. From this viewpoint, it seems unlikely that peasants living in areas surrounding San Rafael de Mucuchies, for instance, travel to the city of Merida frequently to purchase their goods because 1) most of these peasants do not live in nucleated settlements but in scattered and poorly communicated farmsteads, and 2) due to a low income economy their consumer behavior is greatly restricted to subsistence goods. There- fore, the scattered rural population probably resorts to the nearest rural market to buy its frequent-use farm and household items. 22Sydney W. Mintz, Internal Markets, p. 21. Thus the ghaves and Amaya study concentrated mainly on "downward" lows. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS: PERSPECTIVES FOR A RURAL SETTLEMENT DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK A growing interest is apparent in integrated settle- ment planning, particularly in rural areas of developing countries. Such plans are of great importance for the future develOpment of these areas, since they permit a rationalization in the provision of infrastructural services. This is especially important with respect to roads, schools and public health facilities, which largely influence the extent of rural development. Not only are the quantity and quality of services critical, but also their spatial distribution since it provides the physical framework within which socioeconomic relationships take place. The planning process demands a flexible methodology andiaset of criteria upon which it is based. These criteria differ from region to region, but there are basic elements which must be taken into account in all planning policy. General Considerations The spatial structure of services can be understood by the way facilities are distributed in an area relative to the user—population. Assuming that in most of these areas 76 77 there are insufficient services to guarantee an improvement in living conditions, and considering that several of the rural centers are loosing population, a geographic problem arises: What are the best locations for the provision of these services? This is the main question with which this chapter is concerned. A relevant spatial principle behind the planned develop- ment of services is the agglomeration of activities in nuclei to take advantage of scale economies. In fact, the costs of providing public services for a dispersed population living in isolated hamlets and farmsteads are particularly high.1 Advantages derived from implementation of this principle include the following: 1. Farmers visiting such service centers can make use of several facilities at one time. For example, they might be inclined to call more frequently at the agricultural office and the health center than if they had to make separate trips to acquire these services. 2. Fewer objections will probably be received from professional staff (teachers, physicians, agricul- tural engineers) appointed to certain rural centers if clusters of services exist. 3. Agricultural institutions (cooperatives, farmer associations, rural credit agencies) function more efficiently when they are placed within a satis- factory infrastructure of services. Such policies in rural areas involve selecting a limited number of settlements where population may be 1A. Anderson, "Space as a Social Cost," Journal of Farm Economics 32 (1950): 411-430. 78 increased and the range of service provision extended, and designating the remainder for future stability or even contraction.2 The concentration policy maintains that provision of services should not be made in declining population settle- ments, unless the services can be provided at relatively low cost. Otherwise, such centers should be allowed to run down and their populations encouraged to move. The point is that these centers are not in themselves viable and, therefore, it would be a waste of resources to improve their viability if they will eventually become depopulated and derelict. Green has noted that: Building up larger rural communities, loCated farther apart, would be a continuation of a trend that has been apparent in the history of rural settlements as one form of transportation has replaced another.3 Similar points of view have been put forward by Kovalev and C1awson.’+ Some problems associated with this approach should also be considered, such as the following: 2Hugh D. Clout, Rural Geography (Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1972), pp. 140—141. 3R. J. Green, "The Remote Countryside: A Plan for Contraction," Plannipg Outlook 1 (1966): 34. 4S. A. Kovalev, "Problems in the Soviet Geography of Rural Settlements,” Soviet Geography 9 (1965): 641-650. Also, "Transformation of Rural Settlements in the Soviet Union," Geoforum 9 (1972): 33-34; M. Clawson, "Factors and Forces Affecting the Optimum Rural Settlement Pattern of the United States," Economic Geography 42 (1966): 283-293. 79 1. It necessitates certain compulsory action, since otherwise there would be a residual population that would choose to remain and for these people some basic services would have to be provided. 2. The capital which already exists in declining centers plus the costs of re-settling the popula- tion must be set against the costs of maintaining and improving existing services. 3. To deny the growth or accelerate the decline of non-viable settlements is a difficult planning decision. If small settlements are not only declining relatively but are really dying out, their deterioration cannot be reversed rapidly by the infusion of new functions. Therefore, a realistic decision is to plan their fast abandonment to prevent the social damage inherent in an underpopulated 5 center. Indeed, residual economies, settlements and popu- lations become a real problem. The Proposed Framework Any discussion of rural center development must be conceived within the broad context of regional policy and strategy. Therefore, the scheme here proposed assumes the following decisions in regional policy as a basis of exposition: 1. Investment of resources is to be directed toward selected locations to achieve both a concentration of investments and a maximum diffusion of benefits (agglomeration advantages). 2. There is need to strengthen small and medium-sized settlements to intercept the population drift out 5David H. K. Amiran, "The Structure of Settlement: Needed Adaptations to Change," Geographica Helvetica 26 (1971): 3. 80 of the region, and this can be achieved at least partially by an improved provision of services. 3. The policy of settlement development will be well integrated into the social, economic, political and cultural strategy. No capital will be allocated to a given project without reference to all other projects in the area. 4. Effective combined action between government planning offices, private enterprise, local administration and community leaders is to be expected. Setting aside the major problems of regional development, the question to be faced is how to select objectively "key centers" which efficiently serve their hinterlands in a region with conditions of depopulation, stagnation and a general low level of services. Central place hierarchy, associated with the notion of rural growth center, is pro- posed as a methodological base from which to deal with this problem. A rural growth center is defined as one that has under- gone economic and demographic growth or that has potential capacity to grow rapidly under induced socioeconomic changes. Positive changes in a wide range of relevant variables is crucial to the concept of growth center. Unfortunately, temporal data are generally lacking in these regions. Functional Hierarchy of the Settlements A hierarchy of settlements based upon central functions permits an evaluation of their functional importance or ”centrality" as providers of goods and services in excess of those demanded by their own inhabitants. If there exist data 81 on central functions for different time periods, temporal changes of the settlements in the hierarchy can be analyzed to facilitate the evaluation of key centers. This analysis would indicate which centers are showing a strong tendency toward increasing their centrality through time. It is essential to stress the difference in kind of central functions for it is on the existence of higher-order activities that the higher status of a place depends. It follows that a system of ”weights" must be designed to account for the differential significance of functions. The hierarchical organization is therefore conspicuous as the first supporting element in the selection of growth centers. Selection of Rural Growth anters a. Depending upon the sc0pe of the planning policy and the total number of settlements investigated, a certain number of higher-order centers is chosen from the ranked hierarchy. In this respect, Johnson favors a "saturation” of one or more portions of the better areas, while randomly chosen growth points would be used as "pilot projects" in the more backward portions.6 However, the initial number of selected settlements is tentative, since complementary indicators must be evaluated and quantified. Among these are: —__ j 6E. A. J. Johnson, The Organization of Space, p. 218. 82 1. Physical accessibility. Their geographic location shouldfbe such that accessibility, real and potential, between these foci and the other points of the settlement network is maximized. Travel distance or cost distance may be estimated to measure this variable. Accessibility is one of the most important factors in the attraction- diffusion impact of a center. 2. Population trends. It is necessary to examine population changes of the centers, particularly relative growth, since a given settlement may increase its population in absolute number even though its rate of growth is decreasing. 3. Existing public services and political-administra- tive structure (urbanization complex). In economic terms, the development process is less costly if the settlements are selected with consideration of their present urbanization infrastructure. Scale of operation, number of employees or budget level may be used as surrogate measures. 4. Demographic and economic characteristics of sur- rounding areas. An evaluation of present and potential land use, density and distribution of population, agricultural productivity and tourist potential of the municipios in which centers are located is useful to determine the demographic and economic characteristics of areas surrounding a selected central place. Harrison has emphasized the importance of potential agricultural capacity in this kind of investigation. Functional hierarchy permits the evaluation of settle- ment characteristics to be reduced to those centers selected on the basis of their centrality. Otherwise, an evalutation of all centers should be required. Functional importance is 7Tarun B. Lahiri, ”Urbanization Potential of Villages," Geographical Review of India 28 (1966): 30. 8Bennett Harrison, Rural Growth Centers: A Strategy for the Rural Development of'Low-Income‘COuntries (washington: united States Agency for International Development, 1967), p. 2. 83 an outstanding criterion for pre-selection of places, since it is theoretically an accurate measure of the drawing power of a central place. Actually, central functions are the activities forming the economic base of these settlements. Once complementary indicators have been quantified, the data may be summarized in some sort of index. The following index Ij is proposed. The larger the value of Ij the greater the importance of complementary indicators in a given center. _ T i,'i . Ii — k 100 I. 1 Relative importance of a particular indicator pi. Tpi,ji = Total value of a particular pi for all ii centers in the study area. k = Total value of all indicators pi for all ii centers in the study area. m Ij = iél (P1»j1 ' I1 + p2:31 ' I2 + p3'31 ‘ I3 +,. . .,+ pm, jn . 1m) 1. = Index of complementary indicators for a particular 3 center 1. First, an index of importance for each indicator is calculated Ii' By multiplying these indices by the value of the indicator in each place, and adding these products, an index Ij for each center is obtained. The objective is to show which of the existing concentrations of complementary indicators qualify for the functioning of a rural growth center. The results of the analysis may be ordered in a matrix as shown 84 in Table 17. By comparing the indices of complementary indicators with centrality of the settlements, a conclusive number of rural growth centers can be selected. Again, this is a decision of regional policy. TABLE 17 DATA MATRIX FOR SELECTION OF RURAL GROWTH CENTERS Ranking of Preselected Complementary Indicators Centers Ij (Centrality) p1 p2 p3 pm 31 P1:jl P2:31 p3ojl- :pm:31 131 32 P1»32 P2.jz P3rjz- -Pm¢jz 132 jn plvjn p2!Jn p33jn‘ 'pm’jn Ijn Implementation of Services The implementation of the service infrastructure for rural growth centers can be made according to the concepts of population threshold and range of a good. Range of a good would be defined as the maximum distance a population might travel to obtain that good, and population threshold as the udnimum population needed to support that good. 85 Central place studies in diverse parts of the world have shown some regularities: 1) the proportion of population which partronizes a particular center tends to decrease with distance from that center, 2) the number of people who resort to a central place is directly related to the number of goods and services available in that center, 3) the service area for any given center increases with the size of the center, and 4) the service area is not fixed but is a demand surface, the slope of which varies for each function. Typically, influence areas of centers are delimited through interviews carried out in the center itself or in the countryside. Respective tributary areas are identified for a variety of particular goods and services and single mean boundaries drawn. Gravitational models have also been used to identify points of consumer indifference between two competing centers. These models employ only data on the magnitude of the centers (generally population) and the distance between them and do not consider actual movements of goods and people.9 A simple probabilistic model has been developed by Huff based upon a measure of the relative size of the center and time involved in traveling to that center.10 9For example the breaking-point formula is expressed as: Db = Dab/1 + JPa7P5. Where Db = the breaking-point between centers g and p measured in miles from p; Dab = distance from g to p; Pa = population of g and Pb = population of p. P. D. Converse, ”New Laws of Retail Gravitation," Journal of Marketipg 14 (1949): 379-384. 10David Huff, "Defining and Estimating a Trade Area," Journal of Marketing 28 (1964): 34-38. 86 It is believed that a technique involving interviews is most promising to define the service area of a settlement. Ideally this technique would reveal how countryside people use the functions of the center. But interviewing a settled rural population or isolated hamlets is extremely time-consuming. The problem may be tackled by interviewing within the center itself and asking for the frequency of visits to acquire each of the higher-order services. The frequencies can be ranked and the flows mapped. In this way, the amount of inter- action between centers, and between centers and countryside, may be evaluated. In investigating service areas, effects of travel time or travel cost on various kinds of services emerge as fundamental variables for the construction of consumer behavior surfaces. For center-based interviewing certain constraints should be observed: 1) it is important to stratify establishments in terms of kind and size and to randomly select units from each stratum, 2) interviews should be carried out throughout a number of randomly selected sample days, and 3) a sampling decision has to be made with respect to people entering the selected units of services. Haggett and Gunawardena have suggested that the popu- lation threshold of any function is the middle point of its "entry zone," i.e., the population value which divides the ranked list of centers in such a way that the number of centers lacking the function above the division is equal to 87 the number of centers possessing the function below the division.11 Thresholds empirically established in the present situation are of relative value given that, as was expressed earlier, the main planning aim is to reinforce the service scale of key centers to serve their tributary population efficiently. Potential thresholds deserve greater attention because: When new and better services are introduced, new needs will be created. Satisfying these needs may then be one of the incentives for a rural population to make greater efforts towards achievin the developments planned for their area.1§ The establishment of potential thresholds provides one element upon which to base the decision as to what new services are to be installed and what existing services must be improved, taking into consideration the present and future population of both the centers and their service areas. In a broad sense, it implies an examination of national targets set by central planning offices with regard to certain services such as education and health. Deciding the minimum population for the effective function- ing of a center will depend largely on the population 11Peter Haggett and K. A. Gunawardena, "Determination of Population Thresholds for Settlements Functions by the Reed-Muench Method," Professional Geographer 16 (1964): 6-9. 12D.B.W.M. Van Dusseldorp, Planning of Service Centers in Rural Areas of Developing Countries (Wageningen: Interna- tional Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement, Publication 15, 1971), p. 22. 88 thresholds for the center's higher-order goods and services. A conclusion must be reached in relation to the number of inhabitants that may be expected when all the potential development in a center and its service area has been realized. In fixing threshold populations and service areas sufficient attention must be given to the accessibility and population distribution in the area. These two factors may make it desirable or necessary to adjust established estimates. Whether or not the service equipment functions satisfactorily will be determined to a large extent by the communication and transport system. Through this framework it is possible to arrive at a proposal for rationalization in the provision of services in each settlement according to the level to which it was assigned in the hierarchy of rural growth centers. This can help foster a more balanced system for services through- out the region. Rural growth centers of different sizes, along with their service areas, would form the planning units for the implementation of rural development programs. The proposed framework thus permits the selection of growth centers in terms of areas with a viable economic base and a population large enough to support a package of economic and social services to sustain and accelerate the process of development through time. APPENDICES Appendix A. Data Collection Form Michigan State University Name and Number of Settlement: Total Population: Municipio: Date: Central Functions Number of Functional units (Name) (Individual Observation) (Total) Observations Total Central Functions: Total Functional Units 89 ooooo ooom ma oooo.a Boom .895 NH Nona. ooooq oooaoooo moo Ha omao. moon. oooo.H moooo ooxoaya oH oaoo. «Ham. ooao. oooo.a moooo oaooou ooo< mo aooo. mafia. mama. aoao. oooo.a ooaooaoooo mo ammo. oooa. «moo. omaa. amao. oooo.H oooao oooooom ao ammo. ooao. oaoa. aooa. oooo. oooo. oooo.H oaoooo; ooo oaooo: oo mooa. omaa. amao. mama. Noaa. ooaa. oaoo. oooo.~ oooooo ooow aoo no moam. omaa. mooa. oaoo. nmoo. ooao. omno. aaoo. oooo.H moauoooow moons so oooo. oooo. oomo. mama. ooma. ooma. oooa. ammo. oooo. oooo.a mooooooooom mo omao. ooma. maoo. oaaa. aoaa. oaao. mama. omoa. mama. ooaa. oooo.a moon No anoa. ammo. oomo. aoaa. wooa. soon. omoa. aooa. omoa. mooo. mono. oooo.a mongoooo ooo ooaooooow Haoam Ho aaoo. oaMa. ammo. mama. Hoaa. oaoo. oooa. mama. Nana. oooo. oaao. moon. ooo.a nu ma Ha oa oo oo ao oo no so no No Ho mzoaaozoa aamazmu ao xamaaz zoaaaommmoo .m xaozmomo 90 SIl noononoaoo sa oooo.a $.38 85.28.. 838E ma SR. 884 oooazoo Na mono. mono. oooo.a oooxooauooon Ha sona. sona. oaao. oooo.H oooooo ooon om soon. soon. nsao. oaaa. oooo.H 8% 2 naos. naos. oono. nnaa. onoa. oooog monsooso monoanoo ooo ouszooo: on onan. onan. oano. oaoa. noun. noon. oooo.a oooooo_oaoa an oono. oono. aoan. aaoo. ooan. ammo. naso. oooo.a ounoooo onna on onas. onas. oann. naso. onoa. naao. Hana. oasa. oooo.a ooooo soanoa no oons. oons. ooan. osno. oaoo. oson. noaa. annn. onno. oooo.H afiosfifiiissaflfiaaosa 3%. one 38. nan $8. on? 83. oSt .83. as? 884 moons soon no noos.. noos. onos. oHHn. oaoo. nano. onao. onno. nsna ooao. ooao. ooooo ooouoo an osan. oan. aaHo. ooaa. noao. sooo. onno. Nona. osna. ssoo. aooo. ooosoooo moo Ha oson. oson. anon. naos. saos. nann. oons. ooon. ssoo. aaoa. nons. ooooo ooxoaoa on onsn. oosn. woos. anan. aoaa. oooo. nana. onno. onna. onna. soda. ooooo “nooou ooos no ooan. ooHn. oson. Hoso. oaHa. saso. sosa. onoo. nsao oaoo. noaa. monooaoooo oo aoon. aoon. onns. soos. Noon. oann. asao. oaan. aasn. nooo. aaan. ooooo Hoooooo ao onus. onus. ooon. aonn. aaoa. nsaa. oaaa. ooso. oono. Hoaa. oooa. maooooo ooo oaooo: oo noon. noon. onns. nuns. anon. anon. onso. noun. anaa. aaao. noao. oouooo oooo aoo no Nasn. aasn. aHns. oaan. Homo. noao. sooa. anon. onaa onoo. aoaa. monoooouo oonoo so nooa. nooa. ssoo. onns. oson. nnsn. ssoo. Haon. snso. onno. nano. ooooooooooo no aons. aoos. oaos. noon. naao. aaan. oaoo. naao. aaaa. anaa. «nan. oooo No noas. noas. onsn. oson. Haso. noon. saoo. anon. sooo onno. asno. mongoooo ooo oonoooooo Human Ho oaas. oaas. nann. aoon. Hsoo. onno. onno. anon. naoo. oaoo. nooo.. sa ma Na Ha oa no on an on na sa oosoaoooo .o unoouooo B IBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Abiodun, J. 0. ”Urban Hierarchy in a Developing Country," Economic Geogra h 43 (1967): 347-367. "Central Place Study in Abeokuta Province, Southwestern Nigeria,” Journal of Regional Science 9 (1968): 57-76. Ahmad, Qazi. Indian Cities: Characteristics and Correlates. Chicago: University ofChicago, Department of Geography, Research Paper No. 102, 1965. Amiran, David H. K. "The Structure of Settlement: Needed Adaptation to Change," Geographica Helvetica 26 (1971): 2-4. Anderson, A. "Space as a Social Cost," Journal of Farm Economics 32 (1950): 411-430. Berry, Brian J. L. "Ribbon Developments in the Urban Business Pattern," Annals of the Association of American Geographers 49 (1959): 145-155. Geography of Market Centers and Retail Distribu- tion. New Jersey: Prentice:HalI, 1967. , and Gardiner, Barnum.H. "Aggregate Relations and Elemental Components of Central Place Systems," Journal of Regional Science 4 (1962): 35-68. , and Garrison, William L. "The Functional Bases of the Central Place Hierarchy," Economic Geography 34 (1958): 145—154. . "A Note on Central Place Theory and the Range of a Good, " Economic Geography 34 (1958): 304- 312. "Recent Developments of Central Place Theory," ngers and Proceedings of the Regional Science Associatlon 4v(1958):107-120. ; Gardiner Barnum H.; and Tennant, Robert J. etail Location and Consumer Behavior," ngers and Proceedingp of the Regional Science Association 9*(1962): 65-106. ”R 92 93 , and Pred, Allan. Central Place Studies: A B1bliogr§phy of Theory and Applications. Philadelphia: RegionaIScience Research Institute, Bibliography Series No. l, 1965. Blalock, Hubert M. Social Statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960. Brito-Figueroa, F. Poblaciény economia en elApasado indigena venezolano. Caracas: Tipografia Remar, 1962. Brunn, Stanley D. "The Inertia Effect in Measuring Threshold Populations," Southeastern Geographer 7 (1967): 6-12. Brush, John E. "The Hierarchy of Central Places in South- western Wisconsin," Geographical Review 43 (1953): 380-402. Cardozo, Arturo. Proceso de la historia de Los Andes. Caracas: Biblioteca deTAutores y Temas Tachirenses, 1965. Carter, H.; Stafford, H. A.; and Gilbert, M.M. "Functions of Welsh Towns: Implications for Central Place Notions," Economic Geography 46 (1970): 25-38. Castillo, Juan B.; Chaves, Luis F.; Lopez, José E.; Martinez, Francisco; Tricart, Jean; and Venturini, Orlando. Estudio de log suelos de las partes altas de las cuencas de los rios Chama_y Santo Domingp, 2 VOIs. Merida: Universidad de EDS Andes, Ihstituto de Geografia, 1972. Chaves, Luis F., and Amaya, Carlos. ”Sistema de ciudades." Paper presented at the Local Seminar on Urban Planning, Mérida, November, 1973 (Mimeographed). , and Vivas, Leonel. Geografia de Venezuela. Méridaz, Universidad de Los Andes,“Instituto de Geografia, 1972. Christaller, Walter. Central Places in Southern Germany. Translated by Carlisle W. Baskih. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs, 1966. Clark, Phillip J. "Grouping in Spatial Distributions," Science 123 (1956): 373-374. Clawson, M. "Factors and Forces Affecting the Optimum Rural Settlement Pattern of the United States," Economic Geography 42 (1966): 283-293. 94 Clout, Hugh D. Rural Geogrgphy. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1972. Consejo de Bienestar Rural. Problemas economicosyy sociales de Los Andes venezolanos, 2 vols. Caracas: Ministerio de Agricultura y Cria, 1955. Converse, P. D. "New Laws of Retail Gravitation," Journal of Marketing 28 (1964): 34-38. Curry, Leslie. ”The Geography of Service Centers Within Towns: The Elements of an Operational Approach," Lund Studies in Geography, Series B, 24 (1962): 31-53. Dacey, M. F. ”A Probabilistic Model for Central Place Location," Annals of the Association of American Geographers—56_(l966): 550-568. Davies, W. K. D. ”Towards an Integrated Study of Central Places: A South Wales Case Study." In Urban Essays: Studies in the Geography of Wales, edited by M. Carter and W. K. D. Davies. London: Longmans,l970. Diaz, Angel F. Hacia una estrategia de desarrollo urbano para la regiBn andina. Mérida: Universidad de Los Andes, Instituto de lnvestigaciones Economicas, 1972. Doherty, Peter and Ball, John. "Central Functions of Small Mexican Towns," Southeastern Geographer ll (l97l):20-28. Dutt, A. K. "Intra-City Hierarchy of Central Places: Calcutta as a Case Study," Professional Geographer 21 (1969): 18-22. Folke, S. "Central Place Systems and Spatial Interaction in Milgiris and Coorg, India," Geografisk Tidsskrift 66 (1967): 161-178. Fuguitt, Glenn V., and Deeley, Nora A. "Retail Service Patterns and Small Town Population Change: A Replication of Hassinger's Study," Rural Sociology 31 (1966): 53-63. Funnel, D. C. "Rural Business Centres in a Low Income Country: Some Theoretical Problems," Tid'schrift voor Econ. en Soc. Geographie 61 (1970): 25-31. Galpin, J. G. "The Social Anatomy of an Agricultural Community," Research Bulletin 34. Agricultural Experimental Station of the University of Wisconsin, 1915. 95 Garner, B. J. ”Models of Urban Geography and Settlement Location," In Socioeconomic Models in Geography. Edited by Richard'J. Chorley and Peter Haggett. London: Methuen, 1970. Getis, Arthur and Getis, Judith. "Christaller's Central Place Theory," Journal of Geography 65 (1966): 220-226. Gogniat, Donald A., and Brenes, Eduardo E. Estructura urbana regional y jerarquizacién deiios centros poblados de Guanacaste. San José: Instituto de Fomento y Asesoria Municipal, 1974. Green, R. J. "The Remote Countryside: A Plan for Contrac- tion," Planning Outlook 1 (1966): 17-37. Haggett, Peter. Locational Analysis in Human Geography. London: Edward Arnold Publishers,‘l965} , and Gunawardena, K. A. "Determination of Population Thresholds for Settlements Functions by the Reed-Muench Method," Professional Geographer 16 (1964): 6-9. Hanneson, Bill. ”Periodic Markets and Central Places in the Chiquinquira-Ubate Area of the Eastern Cordillera of the Colombian Andes." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oregon, 1965. Harman, H. H. Modern Factor Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,_1967. Harrison, Bennett. Rural Growth Centers: A Strategy for the Rural Development of Low-Income Countries. Washington, D.C.: United States Agency fOr Interna- tional Development, 1967. Hill, David A. ”Spatial Relations and Socioeconomic Change: A Preliminary Study of Differentiation of Places in the Sabana de Bogota, Colombia," Professional Geographer 19 (1967): 136-143. Hill, George; Silva, José A.; andckaHill, Ruth. La vida rural en Venezuela. Caracas: Tipografia Vargas, S.A., 1960. Hodge, Gerald. "Do Villages Grow? Some Perspectives and Predictions," Rural Sociology 31 (1966): 183-196. Huff, David. "Defining and Estimating a Trade Area," Journal of Marketihg 28 (1964): 34-38. 96 Instituto de Geografia. Estudio integral de las cuencas de los rios Chama y Gapazdn, subproyecto No. 7. MéfIda:"Uhiversidadde Los Andes, Instituto de Geografia, 1972. Instituto de Investigaciones Economicas. Anuario estadistico de Los Andes. Merida: Universidad as Los Andes, Instituto de Investigaciones Economicas, 1966. James, Preston E. Latin America. Fourth Ed. New York: The Odyssey Press, 1969. Johnson, E. A. J. The Organization of Space in Developing Countries. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970: Johnston, R. J. "Central Places and the Settlement Pattern," Annals of the Association of American Geographers 56 (1966): 541-549. . "Choice in Classification: The Subjectivity of Objective Methods," Annals of the Association of American Geographers 58 (1968): 573-589} "Grouping and Regionalizing: Some Methodological and Technical Observations," Economic Geography 46 (1970): 293-305. Kenyon, J. B. "On the Relationship Between Central Function and Size of Place," Annals of the Association of American Geographers 57 (1967): 736-750. King, Leslie J. ”The Functional Role of Small Towns in Canterbury,” Proceedings of the Third New Zealand Geography Conference, Palmerston, 1961. . "Central Place Theory and the Spacing of Towns in the United States,” in Land and Livelihood: Essays in Honor of George Jobberns. EditedTBy Murray McCaskill} ChristEhurCh: *New’Zealand Geographical Society, 1962. . Statistical Analysis in Geography. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall,v1965. Kovalev, S. A. "Problems in the Soviet Geography of Rural Settlements," Soviet Geography 9 (1965): 641-650. . "Transformation of Rural Settlements in the Soviet Union," Geoforum 9 (1972): 33-45. Lahiri, Tarun B. ”Urbanization Potential of Villages,” Geographical Review of India 28 (1966): 29-34. 97 . ”Service Costs and Size of Towns," Geographical Review of India 29 (1962): 90-98. Lankford, Philip M., and Semple Keith R. "Classification and Geography," Geographia Polonica 25 (1973): 7-30. Lasch, August. The Economics of Location. Translated by William H. Woglom and Wolfgang F. Stolper. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1954. Lukerman, F. "The Role of Theory in Geographic Inquiry," Professional Geographer 13 (1967): 1-6. Marshall, John V. The Location of Service Towns. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969. Mattelart, Armand; Eyhéralde, René; Pefia, Alberto;and Necochea, Andrés. La vivienda_y los servicios comunitarios rurales. Santiago de Chile: ICIRA, 1968. Mintz, Sidney W. "The Role of the Middleman in the Internal Distribution System of a Caribbean Peasant Economy," Human Organization 15 (1956): 18-23. "Internal Market Systems as Mechanisms of Social Articulation, " Proceedings of the American Ethnological Soc ciety. Seattle, 1959. . "A Tentative Typology of Eight Haitian Market Places " Revista de Ciencias Sociales 4 (1960): 15- 57. "Pratik: Haitian Personal Economic Relationships, Proceedings of the American Ethnological Sociepy, Seattle, 1961. Morrison, Donald. ”On the Interpretation of Discriminant Analysis," Journal of Marketing Research 6 (1969): 156-163. Pioro, Zigmunt. "Ecological Interpretation of Settlement Systems," International Social Science Journal 18 (1966): 527-538. Ratcliffe, Jane E. "An Examination of the Population-- Economic Activities Relationship and Hierarchy of Central Places: The Costa Rican Example," Ph. D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1970. Rojas, José J. "E1 paisaje semiérido de la cuenca media del Chama, Andes venezolanos," Licentiate thesis, Universidad de Los Andes, 1970. 98 . Aspectoshgeograficos del uso de la tierra en las cuencas de Ios rios Chama y Capazon. Merida: Universidadide Los Andes, Escuela deWGEOgrafia, 1972. Rummel, R. J. "Understanding Factor Analysis," Journal of Conflict Resolution 11 (1967): 444-480. Salas, Julio C. Etnografia de Venezuela. Mérida: Universidad deFLos‘Andes,'l956. Scott, Peter. "Trade Center Population Change, Central- ization and Trade Area Farming Type," Rural Sociology 33 (1968): 424-436. Singh, K. M. "Spatial Patterns of Central Places in the Middle Ganges Valley," National Geographical Journal of India 12 (1966): 218-226. Skinner, William G. W. "Marketing and Social Structure in Rural China: Part 1," Journal of Asian Studies 24 (1964-1965): 3-43. Smith, Carol A. "The ‘Domestic Marketing System in Western Guatemala: An Economic, Locational and Cultural Analysis," Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1972. Smith, Herbert R. "Regional Growth, Central Place Develop- ment and Functional Change: River Bend Area, Minnesota," Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1970. Smith, Lynn T. "The Rural Community with Special Reference to Latin America,” Rural Sociology 23 (1958): 52-67. Colombia. Gainesville: University of Florida Press, Smith, Robert. "Method and Purpose in Functional Towns Classification,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 55 (1965): 539-5487 Smout, M. A. H. "The Hierarchy of Central Places in Natal," Tidjschrift voor Econ. en Soc. Geographie 61 (1970): 25-31. Stafford, Howard. "The Functional Bases of Small Towns," Economic Geography 39 (1963): 165-175. Symanski, Richard. "Periodic Markets of Andean Colombia," Ph.D. dissertation, Syracuse University, 1971. Szumeluk, K. Central Place Theory: A Review. London: Center for Environmental Studies, Wofking Papers No. 9, 1968. 99 Tarrant, J. R. "A Note Concerning the Definition of Groups of Settlements for a Central Place Hierarchy," Economic Geography 44 (1968): 144-151. Thomas, Edwin. "Some Comments on the Functional Bases for Small Iowa Towns,” Iowa Business Digest 31 (1960): 10-16. . "Toward an Expanded Central Place Model," Geographical Review 51 (1961): 400-411. Tiedemann, Clifford E. "Two Models for the Inferential Analysis of Central Place Patterns," Ph.D. disserta- tion, Michigan State University, 1966. Tricart, Jean. "E1 desarrollo de Los Andes venezolanos," Cuadernos de la Sociedad Venezolana de Planificacion l (1963): 15-231 Van Dusseldorp, D.B.W.M. Planning of Service Centers in Rural Areas of Developing Countries. Wageningen: International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement, Publication No. 15, 1971. Vance, Mary (ed.). Workin Notes and Biblio ra h on Central Place Studies, I965-I969 IIIinois: Council ofPlanning Librarians, Exchange Bibliography No. 209, 1970. Venezuela. III censo nacional agropecuario, 1961. Venezuela. VIII censo nacional de poblacion, 1950. Venezuela. IX censo nacional de poblacion, 1961. Venezuela. X censo nacional de poblacion, 1971. Venturini, Orlando L. "Aspectos geogréficos de la colonizacion del piedemonte noroccidental de Los Andes venezolanos," Revista Geogréfica 9 (1968): 73-95. Vila, Marco A. Aspectos geograficos del Estado Mérida. Caracas: Cbrporacion Venezolana deFFomento, 1967. Vining, R. "A Description of Certain Spatial Aspects of an Economic System,” Economic Development and Cultural Change 3 (1955): 147-195. Walters, R. F. "Economic Backwardness in the Venezuelan Andes," Pacific Vieypoint 8 (1967): 17-67. 100 Webb, J. W. ”Basic Concepts in the Analysis of Small Urban Centers of Minnesota," Annals of the Association of American Geographers 49 (1959): 55:74. Wittick, Robert I. "Some General Statistics Programs Used in Spatial Analysis," Technical Report 71-1, Computer Institute for Social Science Research, Michigan State University, 1971. Wolfe, Marshall. "Rural Settlement Patterns and Social Change in Latin America," Latin America Research Review 1 (1966): 5-50. MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRRRIE | Illl II" III” l7“! |7ll