THESIS ”JIng4mMimiIllulmujmulflufliuu * L m;.m.,=,fl This is to certify that the dissertation entitled SPATIAL ASPECTS OF REGIONAL INEQUALITIES AND DEVELOPMENT IN GHANA presentedby Kwasi Kwafo Adarkwa has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degreein Social Science, Urban Planning Option WCflW Major professor v Date Wig—3.2 MSU it an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 042771 MSU LIBRARIES Q— ~— RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. «tr-"‘0'. n 1 5 : t) 2.1! J Ja 5 fi%fi>0 $l¥¥$ $31026 1997 W751— SPATIAL ASPECTS OF REGIONAL INEQUALITIES AND DEVELOPMENT IN GHANA BY Kwasi Kwafo Adarkwa A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment for the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture College of Social Science 1982 6 {1733/ ABSTRACT SPATIAL ASPECTS OF REGIONAL INEQUALITIES AND DEVELOPMENT IN GHANA BY Kwasi Kwafo Adarkwa One of the spatial development strategies in develop- ing countries used in redressing regional inequalities has been to concentrate development investment in large and medium-sized towns assuming that benefits would gradually trickle down to surrounding settlements. Presently, there is littheevidencefOr this strategy; only a few studies have been undertaken and results are ambigious. The research objective is to study Ghana's spatial pattern of development and assess the nature and pattern of regional inequalities and development in Ghana. Data collected from documentary sources and mailed questionnaires are analyzed using socio-economic indicators, location quotient, gini coefficient and the maximal Guttman scaling technique which was used to produce development con- tour maps for 1960, 1970 and 1980. These maps illustrate the spatial diffusion over time and changes in development patterns and regional inequalities. Quantitative scores are also used to draw graphs from which rates of change of de— velopment attributes are calculated. Chi—square is used to Kwasi Kwafo Adarkwa test the independence between regional location and develop— ment scores. Further, correlation analysis is used to ten- tatively egplain the recorded variations in development scores or inequality between settlements. The study shows that spatial inequalities exist in Ghana as measured by various gini coefficients ranging from 14.28 percent to 64.11 percent. The causes of these inequal— ities were traced to the way in which natural resources were initially exploited, with development benefits concentrated where resources were richest. Analyses of the spatial dis- tribution of development in 1960, 1970 and 1980 indicates that the pattern of development diffusion is hierarchical in nature with a settlement's degree of development being mostly influenced by its population size. Other factors are found to be insignificant in explaining developmental inequalities. This is the case, for instance, of proximity to a growth cen— ter. In addition, it is observed that there has been little change in patterns of development in Ghana during the study period. 'These findings are used to conclude that growth poles have had little effect in reducing inequalities. The conclusions of the research are used to suggest an alternative development strategy for redressing spatial disparities. Finally, areas of further research are identi- fied to support the suggested planning strategy. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my sincere gratitude to Drs. Assefa Mehretu and David Campbell of the Geography Department and also to Dr. Rene Hinojosa and Professor Keith Honey of the School of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture for their comments. I am also grateful to my friends in Ghana who quickly responded to my request for data. Finally I wish to thank Boatema Appeah, the "extending family" in Ghana for their patience and understanding; and the University of Science and Technology in Kumasi for making my studies in the United States possible. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . List of Appendices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER ONE: TWO: THREE: INTRODUCTION AND APPROACH TO THE STUDY . . Introduction and Problem statement . . . . Objective of the Study . . . . . . . . . . Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assumptions to be Tested . . . . . . . . . Sources of Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Definition of Key Concepts . . . . . . . . Organization of the Study. . . . . . . . . REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND EMPIRICAL RESEARCH. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . Definitions and Dimensions of Inequality Review of Literature . . . . . . . . . . . Determinants of Spatial Inequality . . . . Effects of Development on Regional Inequalities in Income . . . . . . . . Spatial Dimensions of Regional Inequality. Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GHANA'S CONTEXTUAL SITUATION . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Geography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Historical Background. . . . . . . . . . . Government Structure . . . . . . . . . . . Economy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv vi viii 1x 24 24 24 26 27 35 44 51 53 53 53 56 56 57 65 74 CHAPTER FOUR: FIVE: SIX: LIST OF DEVELOPMENT PLANNING IN GHANA. . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . History of Planning in Ghana . . . . . . . Comparability of Development Plans . . . . Review of Development Plans - Content Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ANALYSIS OF INEQUALITY IN GHANA. . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . Measurement and Description of Inequality. . 75 . 75 . 77 . 79 . 80 . 98 .101 .101 .102 Assessing the Changing Patterns of Inequality.116 Assessing the Effectiveness of Growth Poles Variations in Inequality or Development Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendations. . . . . . . . . Recommendations for Further Research . . . REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138 .146 .151 .153 .153 .158 .161 .188 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. LIST OF TABLES Indexes of Income Inequality, Early 19505. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gross National Product at 1975 Prices. . . . Regional Differences in Gross Value Added, 1960. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Regional Gross Value Added by Sectors of Origin. . . . . . . . . . . . . Population of Ghana 1891—1980. . . . . . . . Regional Growth Rates 1960-1970. . . . . . . Comparison of Age Profiles of Ghana and the U.S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Population Density and Level of Urbaniza- tion in 1970 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ghana's Development Plans. . . . . . . . . . Expenditure by Sector Under Ghana's Development Plans 1920-1970. . . . . . . . . Summary of Plans and Their Priorities. . . . Expenditures by Sectors Under Ghana's Development Plan 1970—1980 . . . . . . . . . Post—Independence Administrations of Ghana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Development Indicators Used in Measuring Regional Inequality. . . . . . . . . . . . . Levels of Regional Development in Ghana. . . Levels of Regional Development as Determined by the Composite Index . . . . . . . . . . . vi PAGE 59 68 73 .101 .103 .106 .109 TABLE PAGE 17. Gini Coefficients for Selected Development Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 18. List of Services on Which 1960 Data Were Collected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 19. List of Services on Which 1970 Data Were Collected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 20. List of Services on Which 1980 Data Were Collected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 21. Summary of Standard Coefficients for Ghana's Structural Attributes. . . . . . . . . 124 22. Frequency Distribution of Settlements and Their Level of Development for 1960. . . . 126 23._ Frequency Distribution of Settlements and Their Level of Development for 1970. . . . 127 24. Frequency Distribution of Settlements and Their Level of Development for 1980. . . . 128 25. Changing Percentage of Settlements at the Various Stages of Development in the Regions . 134 26. Rate of Change of Regional Structural Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 27. Summary of Measures Obtained in the Correlation Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 FIGURE LIST OF FIGURES Administrative Regions of Ghana. . . . . . . Government Policies Influencing Regional/ Spatial Inequalities . . . . . . . . . . . . Location and Former Provinces of Ghana . . . Spatial Distribution of Regional Development Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . Range of Distribution of Regional Develop— ment Indicators in Ghana . . . . . . . . . . Locations of Some of the Sampled Settlements Relationship Between Number of Settlements and Number of Attributes . . . . . . . . . . Development Surface for 1960 . . . . . . . . Development Surface for 1970 . . . . . . . . Development Surface for 1980 . . . . . . . . viii PAGE 22 34 54 111 114 118 .135 140 .141 .142 LIST OF APPENDICES of Government, Quasi- Government and Private Hospitals. . . . . . . . Notes and Sources of Data for Development Indicators in Table 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . Calculation of Gini Coefficient for the of Hospitals. . . . . . . Cover Letter From Foreign Students' Office. . . to Planning Offices in O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Sample of Forms Used for Data Collection. . . . Raw Data and Scale Line for 1960. . . . . . . . Raw Data and Scale Line for 1970. . . . . . . . Raw Data and Scale Line for 1980. . . . . . . . APPENDIX 1. Regional Distribution 2. 3. Regional Distribution 4. 5. Sample of Letter Sent Ghana . . . . . . . . 6. 7. 8O 9. 10. Regional Distribution Number of Settlements ment in 1960. . . . . 11. Regional Distribution Number of Settlements ment in 1970. . . . . 12. Regional Distribution Number of Settlements ment in 1980. . . . . 13. of Observed and Expected at Each Level of Develop- . O O O O O O O O O O O O of Observed and Expected at Each Level of Develop- of Observed and Expected at Each Level of Develop— . O O O O O O O O O O O O Chi-Square Test of Independence Between A Town's Level of Development and its Regional Location . . ix PAGE 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 176 180 184 185 186 187 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION AND APPROACH TO THE STUDY Introduction and Problem Statement The internal spatial structures of most developing countries show regional inequalities in development. These inequalities are characterized by small pockets of very de- veloped regions and vast areas of poverty and underdevelop- ment. Inter-regional inequalities are generally most pro- nounced in developing countries where development tends to be concentrated in one dominant metropolitan area or enclave with the hinterland lagging behind. This pattern of develop— ment has several implications for the economies of developing countries. One such implication is the attraction of mi— grants from the lagging regions to the developed regions; usually in search of better economic opportunities. The concentration of populations in small areas or regions of developing countries has led to many urban prob— lems such as housing shortages and lack of public services. Because of the concentration of people in these areas there is usually a surplus of labor and therefore severe problems of underemployment and unemployment, which in turn affect the level of productivity (Gugler, 1978; McGee, 1976). In an 1 2 attempt to solve these problems, governments of many develop— ing countries have concentrated their financial resources and planning efforts on these areas of population concentra— tion at the expense of the lagging regions. This has led to a costly cycle of unbalanced development or regional inequality between different regions of many Third World countries. Attempts to redress the problems of regional inequality in development in many developing countries are numerous and. varied. They range from the creation of new towns in lagging regions to the concentration of economic opportunities, social facilities and investments in large- and medium-sized towns. Many countries including Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya and Uganda have all applied some variation of the latter strategy. The basis of such a strategy is the assertion that the concentration of development in selected centers will gradually transmit the benefits of development to other settlements within the do- main of these selected centers and thereby reduce inequalities. If the foregoing assertion is true, it may be applied as a useful policy rationale in planning to redress regional inequalities in developing countries. At present, however, there is no clear, empirical evidence for the assertion. Only a rew studies have so far been undertaken and the results are ambigious (Xiarchos, 1978). This dissertation studies the spatial development and regional inequalities in Ghana and intends to provide insights and evidence that could prove useful in the location and distribution of development ef— forts in other countries at a similar stage of development. 3 Apart from the academic and policy implications of this study, there are social and political reasons why a study of this nature needs to be undertaken. Regional dis- parities in development have been shown to be the root cause of social and political unrest in some countries, such as the Sudan (Roden, 1974). Hence there is a need to study re- gional inequalities in development so as to find ways and means of redressing these imbalances because even temporary inequalities can lead to political instability which will in turn slow down the level of private investment. In terms of the study's theoretical importance, it may be regarded as a test of the trickle-down concept implied in the growth pole strategy that has influenced much of de— velopment thinking. With contributions from economics, re- gional science geography and other allied disciplines, plan- ners are now better equipped with knowledge to allocate government development funds. The impact of their actions, however, is not clear. Where to spend government money and the spatial implications these decisions have on other com- munities still elude researchers and policy-makers. For ex— ample, if development is initially located in a particular region or town, how does it affect other regions or towns within the country? Will the other regions subsequently benefit from similar developments, or will such actions sim- ply introduce and later exacebate the problem of regional inequality? Answers to these questions will help planners 4 introduce policies to achieve their associated development objectives. The present study is a modest contribution in this direction. Several African countries, including Ghana, have felt the need at some stage in their development to formu- late governmental policy to reduce regional disparities in development. The need has been felt since the inception of planning in these countries. What is lacking is the ability of some governments to explicitly address this goal in their development plans. For the few plans in which this goal has been addressed, there has been no subsequent assessment of the extent to which regional disparities have been reduced and therefore no knowledge exists on their effectiveness. In other cases this is even worse because inequality has been treated indirectly or simply ignored. In Ghana, for example, the pattern of regional in- equality is deeply rooted in history. During the colonial period development plans were designed to create and main- tain a spatial arrangement which was efficient for the ex— ploitation of natural resources. Development proceeded from coastal and resource exploitation areas. After this period the pattern of development established by the British did not change. Instead urban and regional growth and develop- ment were experienced by a few urban settlements within the coastal regions. Subsequent development plans attempted to de—emphasize these areas but simply resulted in reinforcing the bias in favor of the south. The history of regional inequalities in spatial development in Ghana, then, has its roots deep in the colonial period. The current pattern of development in Ghana reflects a concentration of investments in the primate city and a few settlements serving as satellites. These centers are seen as points from which the benefits of development will spread to the surrounding areas and hence help to reduce regional inequalities. This line of reasoning has been fundamental to the formulation of most of the nation‘s development plans as it is explicitly stated in the Five—Year Development Plan 1975—1980. Despite several attempts to reduce the dispari— ties in development, there has been no systematic means of assessing the extent to which the various centers of develop— ment have succeeded in transmitting development to surrounding settlements, and hence reducing inequalities. For too long, such systematic assessment has been as aspect of Ghanaian de- velopment plans that has been overlooked. The present study is an attempt to investigate this problem by studying spatial patterns and regional inequalities in development. Objective of the Study This dissertation's primary objective is to study the spatial pattern of development and to assess the extent and nature of regional inequalities in Ghana. An achievement of this objective will help development planners gain empirical knowledge about patterns of spatial development and the extent of regional inequalities in Ghana, and perhaps then understand the processes behind a more de— sirable pattern of development. This study will, therefore, examine the patterns of spatial development during pre-independence and the ways in which such patterns have or have not changed in subsequent periods. To achieve the primary objective of this research the present study undertakes the following: a. demonstrates that there have been regional in- equalities in development in Ghana; b. describes the patterns of inequality in Ghana; c. explains how they came about; d. assesses how the patterns of inequalities are changing; e. accounts for observed variations in inequality between settlements and regions. Methodology To achieve the study's objective, two general approaches may be proposed following the usual guidelines of deductive and inductive reasoning. The deductive way of conducting re— search is perhaps the most rigorous and conclusive course of formal inquiry. The steps involved in this approach have been treated elsewhere. For the present study these steps may be summarized as was done by Fisher (1971): 7 statement of a hypothesis of a general and theoret- ical nature that is closely related to the re— search objective; deduction and statement of testable (scientific) proposition implied by the analysis, which con— cerns the explanation and prediction of decisions or planning actions; conducting test which have the capacity to dis— prove these propositions on the basis of particular evidence, thereby documenting their scientific validity or outright falsity. The first two steps may be applied easily to the pres— ent research because the hypothesis and proposition to be tested can be obtained from development literature which is filled with theoretical propositions and effects on inequal— ities in regional development. However, the third step is difficult because to demonstrate that certain policies re— sulted in certain outcomes one would require historical in- formation, or enough time to monitor all nine regions to pro- vide such information, and also account for other factors. It may not techniques The logic with be practical, therefore, to apply pure deductive to the research design in this study. other research approach is based on inductive the following steps (Fisher, 1971): a. observation and recording of particular planning decisions as they have or are being made; b. review of specific recorded observations for the purpose of identifying propositions which appear to describe or predict other planning decisions, and c. hypothesis of a general planning decision which serves to describe or predict the decisions re— viewed. It is evident from the foregoing that the inductive approach is less demanding in terms of testing propositions or hypothesis. It simply infers propositions from the ob— servations of a large number of cases. This approach may be easier to follow as it does not require rigorous testing to reject hypothesis. However, if this course of inquiry is to be followed, this researcher to generalize his findings would need a large number of countries or cases for which good qual— ity data exist. The present study has only one case, and it is less than ideal to enable the researcher to follow a pure inductive course of inquiry. It is apparent, therefore, that neither simple de— duction nor simple induction provide a suitable approach for the design of this research. What appears most suitable is either a modification of each of these two approaches or a fusion of the two. A modification of the deductive ap- proach appears to be a suitable approach to the research 9 design because of the severe data and time limitations. The steps involved in the adaptation of the deductive approach to this research can be summarized as follows: a. statement of a hypothesis of a general and theo— retical nature concerning the nature and pattern of regional inequalities in developing countries; b. collection and recording of observations (data) concerning the regional distribution of develop— ment benefits at different time periods in Ghana; c. testing of the hypothesis as it relates to Ghana; and d. drawing specific conclusions within the limits of the available data. More specifically, this research is undertaken through the following steps: 1. a literature review to identify what constitutes inequality and how development affects it. This will offer some insights into how development could have influenced inequalities in Ghana and how it is likely to affect them in the future; 2. presentation of basic information about Ghana such as geography, history, economy and population and how they contribute to regional inequalities in development; 3. a review of past development plans for Ghana to see how they have addressed the problem of regional 10 inequalities in development and the factors which might have contributed to the present pattern of regional inequalities; 4. description of the pattern of inequality and the distribution of development effects; 5. test hypothesis of the pattern and extent of re- gional inequalities in development in Ghana; 6. determining factors that could explain any varia— tions in inequality between settlements and regions; and 7. draw specific conclusions from the analysis about the pattern and extent of regional inequalities in development in Ghana. The unorthodox adaptation of the deductive approach implies that the applica- bility of the study's findings cannot be guaranteed to be valid for countries with development patterns that are different from Ghana's. The main features of the above steps are the measure— ment of inequality and the assessment of spatial patterns. These are discussed next. 1 Measuring Inequality. Two techniques will be used to describe the pattern of inequality in Ghana. First, the measurement of levels of regional development using socio- economic indicators that reflect inputs to the development process. These indicators will be selected from lists of standard indicators which reflect basic-needs concerns in de- velopment and for which data are readily available. The ll magnitude of an indicator will simply be associated to levels of development. Depending on the indicator being considered, the highest and lowest values for a region will be assumed to designate the most and least developed areas, respectively. ‘ For example, when using percent of urban population or literacy per 1000 population, the highest and lowest values /// will be assumed to designate the most developed and least developed regions, respectively. All other regional values will then be standardized accordingly. On the other hand, V" when using an indicator such as dependency ratio, the lowest and highest regional values will refer to the most and least developed regions, respectively. This method of analysis has two major drawbacks. First, it assumes that development can be described simply by assigning isolated numerical values to various indicators. This is certainly not the case, and therefore, a composite index will also be used to present a consistent picture of regional levels of development. Second, such an analysis gives an overall picture of development at one point in time, and, strictly speaking, cannot be used in addressing the dynamic aspects of the policy issue the pres- ent study attempts to address. These dynamic aspects will be investigated using another technique. To overcome the difficulties associated with relying solely on the foregoing indicators, the study will be supple— mented using relevant literature on development planning in Ghana and other techniques to address the problem. 12 Apart from the use of socio-economic indicators to measure regional development, a location quotient approach will also be used to determine any patterns compatible with results of the earlier analysis. The location quotient, in this contest, is an index of relative locational concentration. y// It assumes a higher development value if a certain facility in a region is greater in relation to its population. Using this measurement it will be possible to assess a region's level of development relative to all other regions by stan— dardizing the various regions' location quotients. The standardization will be done in such a way that the region with the largest disproportional concentration will be as- sumed to be the most developed region. This analysis will be carried out for the location and distribution of such social services as hospitals and schools on which data are‘” available. Assessment of Changing Patterns of Inequality. To assess how the concentration of development attributes or inequalities are changing over time, two techniques could be used: multivariate techniques, such as factor analysis, and maximal Guttman scaling or scalogram method. In using multivariate analysis to depict the spatial patterns of in— equality a large number of variables relating to health, edu— cation, public services, communications and commercial acti— vities could be measured. An isoline map of component scores synthesized from these data would indicate patterns of in- equality. A number of these maps would be drawn for different 13 time periods and the changing patterns of inequality inferred from them. Although this technique is very useful for de— picting inequalities, its data requirements are so enormous that in cases of data scarcity, such as the present study, its use is inappropriate. The maximal Guttman scaling technique, on the other hand, does not require excessive amounts of data. It util— izes dichotomous or binary data and converts these data to quantitative scores if two conditions are satisfied. First, data on which the scale is to be constructed must be unidi— mensional in that its components should measure movement to— ward or away from one baseline of a phenomenon. Second, the data should be cumulative. The degree to which the data are cumulative or unidimensional controls the extent to which re— sponses or observations on one variable can be related to responses or observations on other variables (Nie 25 al., 1975). This technique is highly recommended for situations in which quantitative data are not readily available and has been successfully applied in a study of rural growth nodes in Thailand (Voelkner, 1975). The present study will use Gutt— man scaling with data on the presence or absence of social services and facilities in 1960, 1970 and 1980, for two hun— dred and fifty-five Ghanaian settlements. It has been shown in Voelkner's study that by using binary data scalogram analy— sis results.obtained may be similar to those from other sophis— ticated techniques such as factor analysis. The use of binary 14 data is therefore not likely to bias the results in any way. The presence or absence of these various services and facil— ities in the settlements will be used as indicators of de— velopment because they reflect development objectives in much the same way as improvement in health or levels of education. Tests will be performed on the data to determine whether they satisfy the two basic conditions. Once these conditions are satisfied, the data will be converted into quantitative scores to be used as measures of the various settlements“ levels of development. If these conditions are not met, the data will be adjusted until the conditions are met. The quantitative scores will be used for two purposes. First, they will be used to draw development contours on base maps on Ghana for three periods in time-—l960, 1970 and 1980. These maps will then be used to indicate the spatial distri— bution of development attributes, and hence regional inequal— ities in development over time. These maps will also be used for comparisons and will indicate any changes in the pattern of development, making it possible to detect a changing pat— tern of regional inequalities. To further show the changes which have occurred in pat— terns of development, two techniques will be used. First, a graph will be drawn showing the relationship between the num— ber of settlements and the number of development attributes they possessed during the three time periods. A comparison will indicate likely changes in the distribution of development 15 benefits and probably changes in the pattern of development. Second, a chi—square test will be used to examine the hypo- thesis of "change in the pattern of development” for each of the three time periods. In each test the independence be— tween settlements' number of development attributes and their regional location will be explored. A regional bias in de— velopment will exist insofar as development attributes for settlements depend on their regional location for the three time periods. In this case it will be assumed that there has been very little, if any, change in the pattern of regional inequalities in development in Ghana. Finally, to determine any variations in inequality or development scores between settlements a multiple regression analysis could be used. Variables such as population size, its rate of growth, proportion of population not employed in agriculture, distance from the coast and distance from a service center on which data are readily available could be used as independent variables. Instead, to avoid possible problems of multicollinearity between the independent vari— ables a correlation analysis, which measures associations be— tween development scores and each of the independent varia~ bles, will be used. These measures of association will then be individually used to explain variations in development scores and hence inequality. 16 Assumptions to be Tested This study maintains that the colonization of Ghana by the British did not result in an efficient and equitable set- tlement pattern and distribution of development benefits. Settlement patterns were established to fulfill colonial ob— jectives of resource exploitation. Development schemes and projects were also selected and located in ways which were likely to promote the exploitation of natural resources. The rationale for this discrimination in the choice of schemes and their location and distribution which gave rise to the imbalances in development is historical. Howard (1978:157) offers an explanation as to why the Colonial De— velopment Advisory Committee practices such discriminatory policies in the physical development of the country. She notes that: The policies of the Colonial Development Advisory Committee responsible after 1929 for allocating funds for development pro- jects to the colonies under the Colonial Development Act, reflected this conservatism. Although the Committee had been urged to "Take risks. Take some initiative" in dis- tributing its resources, in practice it was limited to financing schemes likely to aid and develop agriculture and industry in the colonies, Protectorate and Mandated Territ— ories, and thereby (likely to) promote com- merce with, or industry in, the United Kingdom. The spatial pattern of development inherent in this strategy was to concentrate all development in the resource b/ exploitation areas most of which are located in the southern 17 part of the country. The resulting pattern of development, once institutionalized, was followed and used as the basis for post—colonial planning. Over the years this resulted in a spatial concentration of poverty in most settlements and .regions and the concentration of social facilities and econ- omic opportunities in only a few regions. The spatial im- balance between areas of the country, particularly between the north and the south, can thus be explained. The present study, therefore, hypothesizes that the // pattern of physical development has not changed during the post-colonial period and that the general issue of regional inequalities in development can be understood in its his— torical perspective. Since a few plans have attempted to redress the problem of spatial imbalance, some using the growth pole strategy, it is plausible under the dictates of deductive reasoning to assume that there is regional equality in development or that there is a movement towards it. If the foregoing is shown to be the case then it can be con- cluded that there has been a change in the pre—independence pattern of regional development and hence regional inequal— ities. Sources of Data Data for the present study are collected from documen- tary sources and mailed questionnaires. The former will pro— vide information on all the indicators used in the first part 18- of the analysis and the presence or absence of development attributes in Ghanaian settlements for 1960. Among the sources used are books, published and unpublished articles and offi- cial reports on aspects of development in Ghana by such agen— cies as the United Nations and the United States Agency for International Development. This method of data collection is very economical but automatically inherits all the limit— ations of the earlier studies in which such data were used. Data obtained through the mailed questionnaires pro— vided information on the presence or absence-of facilities in Ghanaian settlements for 1970 and 1980. Such data were ob- tained from eight Regional Planning Offices and nine Regional Town Planning Offices in Ghana. There was no reliable way of checking the accuracy of information received from these of— fices. However, similar information inferred from the 1976 ‘ Ghana Telephone Directory was cross-checked with the infor- mation received from Ghana. This was useful in checking the 1980 information because it may be assumed that a listing for an agency performing certain functions in a settlement in 1976 is indicative of the presence of that agency in the set- tlement in 1980. While a service listed in the 1976 Ghana Telephone Directory could have been discontinued before 1980, it is plausible to assume that this would be the exception. Using qualitative data on the presence or absence of development attributes helps improve on the accuracy of the 19 otherwise quantitative data which would have had to be col- lected from similar sources and which would have doubtful accuracy. Thus utilizing qualitative instead of quantitative data in this research helps improve reliability of the re- sults. Definition of Key Concepts Equality. This concept has different meanings for people of different ideologies and orientations. In this study, however, the concept is viewed from a perspective which falls between the two major political ideologies of capitalism and socialism. A certain amount of inter—regional inequality is accepted as the price of economic efficiency rendering equitable distribution of regional development not necessarily egalitarian. Inequality in development will therefore mean the uneven distribution of development rela— tive to the proportional spatial distribution of the popula- tion. To facilitate measurement, equality is approximated to equity to enable the researcher to use some of the well— developed techniques such as gini coefficient. The foregoing definition implies that ideally develop- ment benefits should be distributed in a manner which is similar to the spatial distribution of the population. Any deviation from this ideal pattern is considered inequality, the magnitude of which is measured by a gini coefficient. 20 Development. There are numerous definitions of de— velopment in the literature but in this study it will mean 7a continuous process whereby Ghanaians learn how to use ef— fectively the available human and material resources to attain what they perceive to be a better life. Being a process it presents numerous measurement problems but it will be opera- tionally measured in terms of socio—economic indicators, such as a region's number of physicians and the variety of services and facilities a settlement possesses. In the latter instance the presence of these services and facilities in a settlement is seen as being indicative of the fact that these services will be used effectively to improve the residents' standard of living. The indicators are seen as mere pointers of de- velopment. Spatial imbalance or regional inequality in development. This is used, in this study, to refer to differences in levels of development as measured by the various indicators or variety of services and facilities between one area or region and another. It refers to the lopsided nature of spatial develop- ment in Ghana. Throughout this study, the terms spatial im— balance and regional inequality in development are used in- terchangeably. Region. In this study the concept of region takes two // :Eorms. First, it is used to denote an administrative area or di.vision. It is also used to denote geographical areas which P<>8sess similar development or ecological attributes. The 21 Eastern, Western and Upper Regions are examples of the former‘ type of region and the Coastal, Forest and Savannah are ex- amples of the latter type. Figure 1 illustrates the admin- istrative regions of Ghana. Organization of the Study A review of pertinent research is in Chapter Two. This help identify what constitutes inequality and how development affects it. It also identifies factors which influence re— gional inequality. The review offers useful insights into how development cou1d_have influenced inequalities in Ghana and how it is likely to do so in the future. This chapter therefore provides a good theoretical background for discus- sions in subsequent chapters. I A brief description of the geographical, historical, and contemporary context of Ghana is the subject matter of Chapter Three. This provides pertinent information to serve as general background material in the review of development plans in Chapter Four and analysis of regional inequality in Chapter Five. Chapter Four is a review of past development plans in Ghana. The major concern is how the various development plans have tackled the problem of regional inequalities or spatial imbalance in Ghana. This Chapter also discusses how various development objectives have been articulated over the years 22 o“ -’\ .—--_..——-.’—b_—v"._""p'~'"‘. -’"~l /- . V ' N l UPPER REGION .Bolgatangfi ’0’)“ (, ’\”~\’/’ \\ \ 1‘ / . 1 ’ \J «H ‘ O 3 .1 I I ) 1-12 2 v” NORTHERN REGION \. . (u! I o Tamale 6/ \' i 'J \ \ L ..J ‘ \ ’~,\-’ /‘-\ \ \ x’ ) I ‘ ‘ \\ xi) \ ,z\ /\:;I I: .d‘ \” \\ ’\) \\‘l: i I.) \ / \\VOLTA . - “ REGION / BRONG AHAFO REGION \\ \. / \ {'l /\ \ . ‘ / ~_. ’%-_—-— n .( Sunyani 5 fix,” 1” \\ \\\ \ z ,‘3 ,/—i—-'. I A__ /’ ASHANTI /" i / k \ ’ - / ’ ' l I .Kumasi ,’ ‘) \‘ / K.) / EASTERN 1 HO. ‘ \ ”x h / REGION ‘\ \ \4 l / ‘ '\' \ b" l \ I7 ' f( / . \ ‘ \ ‘\1\ \Kofor1dua 0 ‘ \ \\ j \ '\/‘ I WESTERN \ \‘ rT‘v’ 1.. REGION ‘ ‘1 _. \_ /,_cENTRAL REGION l\ GREATER ) \ ACCRA REGION 0 50 miles Sekondi L—L_L_LJ_J FIGURE 1: ADMINISTRATIVE REGIONS OF GHANA 23 to explicitly address the issue of spatial inequality. It, therefore, reveals factors which might have contributed to the present pattern of regional inequalities. Chapter Five is an analysis of data concerning the dis- tribution of development benefits in Ghana and presents a description of the pattern of regional inequality. ‘It is divided into two sections. The first uses socio-economic indicators as surrogate measures of regional development from which inequalities are inferred. This help demonstrate that there have been regional inequalities in development in Ghana and also help describe the patterns of these inequalities. In the second section, the maximal Guttman scaling technique for three time periods is used to examine the dynamic aspects of regional inequalities in Ghana and also to test the study's hypotheses. Variations in development scores or inequality are also determined and factors which give rise to these vari- ations are also discussed. Chapter Six is devoted to a general summary and the dis— cussion of the study's findings and recommendations. CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND EMPIRICAL RESEARCH Introduction This chapter has three main objectives: to present a concise and workable definition of inequality, to present an overview of pertinent research on regional inequalities and how development affects these, and to indicate where and how the present study fits into the context of current literature and its contribution to present knowledge on regional inequal- ities in development and ways and means of reducing these. This chapter will therefore help identify what constitutes inequality and how development affects it. It will also identify factors which give rise to regional inequalities and also offer useful insights into how development could have influenced inequalities in Ghana, how it is likely to do so in the future. Definitions and Dimensions of Inequality Within the realm of social science, few concepts or phenomena have been studied as much as equality in inequality. This phenomenon falls within the scope of philosophy, 24 25 political science, statistics, demography, sociology, econ— omics, geography, and urban and regional planning. One can therefore discuss inequality in terms of power (Beteille, 1973; Fallers, 1973), economic development (Alonso, 1968; Williamson, 1965; Ahluwalia, Carter and Chenery, 1979); in- come (Kuznets, 1955); spatial development (Soja, 1976); and regional development policy (Friedmann, 1966). For each of these aspects there are dimensions of spatial configuration: international, inter-regional, intra-regional, inter—urban, intra—urban and rural-urban. In this study, however, the main concern will be on inter—regional inequality within a country. The definition Of inter-regional inequality is viewed from two major political perspectives. An Operational defini— tion of inter-regional inequality for the purposes of this study, is best approached by defining equality in regional economic and spatial development. Those on the right of the political spectrum believe in the economic justice of free-market competition in which differences in ability and resources result in greater rewards for the most productive people and regions. Inter-regional disparities in economic and spatial development can therefore be attributed to differences in regional productivity. Those on the left of the political spectrum tend to be- lieve in a "social justice" based on a broad principle of same— ness in outcome, without regard to inputs. The definition of inter-regional inequality to be adopted in this study falls in between these extremes. A certain amount of inter-regional I¥—"—__‘ 26 inequality is accepted as the price of economic efficiency rendering equitable distribution of regional development not necessarily egalitarian. However, it should reflect a criter- ia Of need, contribution to a common good, and merit. At the same time, equitable distribution of regional development should ensure that the prospects of the least developed re- gions are maximized. Inter—regional inequalities in development will, there— fore, mean the uneven distribution of development relative to the proportional spatial distribution of the population. For the purposes of describing, measuring and analyzing regional development, this research views it solely in terms of inputs to the development process, as reflected by the provision of social services and facilities. In order to measure equality, this definition approximates it to equity, making it possible to use a number of well—developed techniques to evaluate spatial distributions of development. Review of Literature Inequalities in development can be discussed in terms of a social (including economic) or a spatial categorization of people and activities. Much of the existing literature on the subject in relation to developed countries has been couched in non—spatial terms, however, a wealth of material on the spatial aspects of development in advanced and developing so- cities has recently become available in development literature.l 1For examples, see Johnson (1970). 27 In the developing countries, social discussions of de— velopmental inequality are undertaken, exclusively, with a total negligence of the spatial context. In the same light, any treatment of the spatial aspects of inequality will almost always neglect the social context. If the complex dynamics of inequalities in the development process are to be fully understood, it is essential that spatial and non-spatial di- mensions be studied together. Soja (l976:1) puts this in a more succinct manner; "the social and spatial structures of inequality are sensitively and dialectically interactive to a degree which demands more consideration than hitherto given”. Even though the present study is primarily focused on spatial inequality, it is considered pertinent to include the social (particularly economic) aspects. To introduce a discussion of these two aspects of inequality, the major determinants of regional or spatial inequalities are presented. Determinants of Spatial Inequality Spatial inequality can be explained from a number of different perspectives. No two regions are intrinsically (equal in all respects and a factor that explains spatial in— equality in one may be inappropriate for Others. It should be pointed out that while each of these factors is presented separately, spatial imbalance will most frequently be attri— buted to the interplay of two or more of them. Indeed, it would be almost impossible to satisfactorily explain any spatial inequality by using a single factor. 28 Historical Explanations of Spatial Inequality. There is a school of thought that attributes international and even inter-regional inequalities in development to historical and social circumstances (Dos Santos, 1970; Wallerstein, 1976; Rodney, 1974). According to this framework, the development of a core region (or class) can be explained by a concentra— tion of material wealth and power able to efficiently exploit resources from periphery regions. This framework also stipulates that the social, economic, political and spatial systems in the periphery regions do not serve their own needs but the needs of the core regions. Or- ganizations of space is thus designed to facilitate resource exploitation with a concentration of expensive infrastructural development in a single primate city and periphery settlements serving as satellites. The cumulative effect of such arrange- ments over time has been inter-national, intra—national, and rural-urban disparities in development; particularly in the less developed countries. Quantitative attempts have been made to assess the validity of the foregoing framework as a plausible means of explaining regional or spatial inequality but, lacking convin- cing evidence, the issue is still heavily debated in profession- al journals.2 One problem has been difficulty in obtaining reliable historical data. ZSee O'Brien's "A Critique of Latin American Theories of Dependency" in Oxaal, Barnett and Booth (1975); and Kaufman, Geller and Chernotsky (1975). 29 Other writers such as Omuta (1979) and Onokerhoraye 0978) have argued from a historical perspective that regional disparities in development in most African countries can be attributed to neglect of the spatial aspects of development planning. They attribute such neglect to a system of plan— ning focused on non—spatial sectoral allocation of resources to specific project areas, such as education, transportation and health. Ecological Bases of Spatial Inequality. According to an ecological perspective, spatial inequality can be explained by differential resource endowments. Certain regions are more heavily endowed than others and, by virtue of this fact, are likely to develop more than other regions, resulting in regional inequalities. The basis for this assertion holds that a region's physical environment is the prime determinant of its levels of productivity and wealth.3 Kamarck (1976) sees climate and the environment as some of the ruling constraints on economic development and, therefore, explains regional inequalities from this point of view. In Ghana for example, the disparities in development between the northern savannah regions and the southern coastal regions could be partially attributed to the differences in their environmental conditions. 3For an example of this axiom see Kromm (1972) and Grergerson's (1973) subsequent rebuttal. 30 In a limited sense, environment and climate can be used to explain differences in development between regions. However, in this era of long—distance trade, permanent urban settlements and urban—based industrial development, resources and production are able to circulate faster, weakening the localized ecological bond. This is best illustrated by the case of Japan which has a poor resource base but compares favorably in industrialization with other countries that are heavily endowed with natural resources. Thus ecology may not be as strong a determinant of regional or spatial inequalities as it used to be, emphasizing the role that technology and infrastructure play in development. Technological Advances. These are often divided into those which encourage concentration and those which encour- age dispersion such as communication technologies. If, for example, one aim of development planning is to increase ac— cess to public facilities and services, then it could be argued that access may increase as technological advances are put in place. This is likely to result from technological innovations that increase economies of scale and require large threshold populations. Since large populations are usually associated with urban areas, the tendency will be for such innovations to encourage development concentration rather than dispersion and increase regional inequalities. This becomes even more critical in developing countries which are 31 endlessly seeking to "industrialize" and, at the same time, make off of their populated regions equally accessible to public services and facilities. The distribution of such facilities is usually considered in terms of efficiency and equality, leaving no doubt these considerations have become germane to urban and regional land use decisions. Favoring'.Efficiency Over Equality. National develop- ment goals can also result in spatial inequality when effic- iency is favored over equity considerations in development planning. Such considerations can create inequalities by con- centrating investment in the most productive regions. TO ,date there are no Objective standards that can be used to assess trade-Offs between efficiency and equity. This issue has long been recognized in welfare economics literature and continues to be a bone of contention among various scholars. Writers like McAllister (1976) argue that no objective means exist to balance equity and efficiency considerations in land use planning and that most decisions in this regard are ultimately subjective. Goldman and Sussangkarn (1978) support McAllister by arguing that equity and efficiency may be incompatible. Others, like Gaile (1977), argue that equity and efficiency are compatible and that they can be resolved by trading one with the other. How much equity is to be traded with efficiency is not quantitatively assessed. To date the issue has not been resolved in any meaning- ful manner but it appears as if efficiency considerations 32 override equity in the location and distribution of public facilities. However, there are instances where equity has been given an unprecedented consideration over efficiency and this has resulted in spatial inequality. Fuchs and Demko (1979) have observed that spatial in- equality in development (in the U.S.S.R.) is the result of supporting efficiency through concentration at one time and equity through dispersion at another. In a final analysis, they hold that strategic considerations override equity and efficiency considerations and see this as another dimension to spatial inequality. The controversy surrounding equity and efficiency con— siderations in development planning is reflected in the range of spatial investment or development strategies implemented by various African countries. They range from the dispersed, equality—oriented development strategy of Tanzania's Ujamaa to the primate city concentrated, efficiency—oriented stra— tegy of the Ivory Coast. Most of the countries, however, es— pouse a "deconcentrated concentration" policy which is sup- posed to balance equity and efficiency considerations, but which almost invariably results in concentrated development in urban areas and increased regional inequality. Brown (1978) has shown this to be the case in Ghana. Inequalities in Income Distribution. Since there is inequality among various occupational groups in any region, in addition to the fact that occupational groups tend to be 33 spatially clustered, it is plausible to argue that regional income differences reflect differences in regional occupa- tional structure. The spatial inequalities which exist be- tween regions could then be considered to reflect regional clustering of the occupational groups and their different levels of income. Tetteh (1971) in his study, The Spatial Structure of the Labor Force in Ghana, identified urbanization, education and long distance migration as the most important variables influencing labor force quality in a particular area. These same factors, in effect, influence regional income levels and can be used to explain disparities in income between var- ious regions and, hence, their spatial inequalities. Tetteh's regionalization of Ghana, based on employment by industry, consistently showed the Northern Region and the Brong Ahafo local authority areas as different from the rest of the coun- try. He attributed these disparities to the underdeveloped economy (and low regional incomes) of the Northern Region relative to other parts of the country. Government Policies. Apart from the foregoing, there are factors like politics, economics, government investment ‘and subsidy policies that can create regional imbalances in development. Figure 2 illustrates these factors and the var- ious linkages between them. They include external and inter- nal forces which influence government policies in various ways. These government policies influence migration and urbaniza- tion, industrial location, job concentration and, finally, 34 wBHJ00 ”N mmDOHm chfloom Econommfiu mo mnowoom cmnna\amu5m mGOHmom canvaz pcosdoHo>mo mo HO>Q~ coo3pmm >pHHmSUOCH ucmEQOHo>OD CH >pflamsvocH coo3vom >uaamsvocH _ >uHHmSOOCH amcoammm\HmHymam%\\\\\l\\\\l\ll\lll A a I mmHUHHOm moaccmam .>OQ nu>oo pommflm chnD . .. u 5 .0pm .coHpmupcoocou 1. mamoom .coaumnwcoocou now A #1 Wflcoflumooq Hmfiupmsch pozoxm A a l. coaumnacmnus \cOHumuonwH ._. a a. J >Uflmnsm .oom.mscm2 a ucoe soap mafipoouonm . oumm buzouw mOHOHHOm Tl Honeymouex upmo>cH.T.|mOOHHOU H emum>m Hmunuasu pom oaeocoom .Hmoawaaom 35 what seems to be an urban-based development strategy. The overall effect of this can be "place prosperity" develop- ment which enhances a few, instead of all, settlements re— sulting in spatial and regional imbalances. The list of factors presented in this chapter is by no means exhaustive, as it only highlights those factors prevalent in the various sources searched. These factors can be useful in attempts to assess regional inequalities in Ghana, however, the importance of each can only be evaluated after the various national de- velopment plans have been reviewed. In spite of the fact that the present study is con- cerned solely with spatial inequality, it is necessary to _discuss the economic aspects of regional inequality because the two are "sensitively and dialectically interrelated" (Soja; 1976). In the next sectiOn, therefore, the effects of development on regional income disparities and spatial dimensions of inequalities are examined. Effect of Development on Regional Inequalities in Income. Some of the pioneering works in regional inequality appeared in the development literature as early as the mid- 19505. As will be shown in this review, between the 19505 and 19605, much of the literature on development was primar- ily concerned with reducing inequality at international and intra-national levels but remained generally optimistic about 36 the long-run effects of economic growth on inequality. It was not until the 19705 that the issues of internal inequal- ity within developing countries were emphasized. One of the pioneering works on inequality was by Kuz— nets (1955) who set out to examine whether economic develop- ment could lead to increase or decrease in income distribu- tion within a country and, if so, what factors determine the trends in income inequalities. With very limited data, for a limited time periods, he studied income distribution in the U.S., England and Germany on one hand and Ceylon, Puerto Rico and India on the other. He concluded that the relative distribution of inCome (as measured by annual income in rather broad classes) in the developed countries was moving towards equality and in the developing countries was more unequal than in the developed countries. Critics of Kuznets raise questions about the methodology and indices he used and the relevance of his late 19405 findings to contemporary economic development situations. Other limitations include scanty data and errors in his data. In spite of these limitations, Kuznets' conclusion prevailed through the 19505 and in 1960 was empirically sup- ported by Kravis (1960:408-416). After comparing before-tax income in ten other countries with the United States, Kravis concluded that the greater equality of income found in the developed countries could be attributed to the social and economic conditions that distinguish them from the under- developed countries. 37 Table l is a summary of the five measures of inequality that Kravis used. Kravis' criterion for judging inequality was based on the Lorenz curve, which is itself based on an egalitarian pattern of distribution. However, an egalitarian distribution of income is not possible under most economic sys- tems. This might explain why much of Oshima's'(1962) criti- cism was centered on Kravis' five measures.' It is interesting to note that, despite these criticisms, Oshima has implicitly concurred with Kuznet's and Kravis' findings: ...and with the completion of consumer asset formation, middle incomes may go increasingly into the ownership of securities, causing a ‘ decline in the concentration of stock and bond ownership, just as the spread of home ownership is now reducing the concentration of rental incomes. These fugure possibilities, together with present tendencies, may imply further declines in equality as the United States develops beyond the stage of consumer asset formation. (Oshima, 1962:444). In spite of this, Oshima warns his readers that it may be risky to put much reliance on Kravis' conclusions that there is greater inequality in developing countries than in de- veloped countries. Until the mid-19605 the relationship between economic development and inequality of income had not been explored in any convincing manner and the prevailing thoughts on the sub- ject were those expressed by Kuznets and Kravis. It will be Observed that these studies and their conclusions relate to socieites at the extremes of the development continuum. In other words, the evolution of societies from one end of the spectrum to any other point was never stated explicitly even .mcv.m .ooma Moneo>oz .v .05 .Ne .Ho> .muaumflumum pom nudeocoom mo Sufi>om :.oeooca mo GOHpSQHHumflU may ca mOUCOHOMMHU HmcoaumGHOch: .m GGH>HH .mfl>mux ”momDOm .uanH Mona: one ou pmoa Hozoa onu EOHM Hmcoomflp may we xuflamsvo muoam 1500 MO mafia on» cam .Amflxm HmucoNHHonv muo>Hooou OEOOCA mo mommpcoonmd O>Humassso >9 po>flmo Ion Amaxm Hmoawuo>v OEOOCH Hmuou mo maoaunoaoua on» #50 mmomuu m>nso Ncouoq one .>ufiamsvm mumameou mo OGHH on» cam O>HDU Ncouoa coozuwn moum onu ma OHpmH COHumecmocoo one .coausnfluu than cmOAHoee manmumdeoo >Humo: umOE osu mom mousmmoe on» mo mo>flumaou mm pommoumxm con» pom .mump pomzouo EOHM pousaeoo who: mousmmoe HH< "meoz .chmHHmQEOO OBu mo ommum>m co pommmm mma mma mva Hma mm muopm>amm am am mad new HNH oca COH>OO oHH oma ova HNH voa ooam Opposm an won maa «an oaa SamuH .m.D cmnu >yaamsqmca who: .0 wHH OOH em ooa on mpmcmo oaa HHH Noa eoa om acmmmh Hm ooa mNH ooa Noa campflum “comm .m.D mm % >pflHmDGOCH memo uson< .m mm am we mm mm imaao .QOQ cmHBOHV HmmumH mm mm m: ooa Hma mmpcmauonuoz mm mm em mm mma xumecon .m.: Ems“ >uHHm5Uoca who; .a Amy lav Ame Awe AHV OEOOCH mo oflumm coflymfium> mo oHHchDO maflucfloo mqoa mob. coapmuucoocoo HCOHOHMMOOO “nonmam umozoa mo.mumcm Aooa H .m.DV m.ommH >Am¢m .>8H4uflmuo>flc3 cumpmo3£uuoz .COumcm>m .H .Ho> .mcmco mumuomemucou mo xpsum < A.mpov .dmm MWm Aw3 .Echcmwwmm "mumsom o.ooa h.m v.hm m.H m.o H.0H m.o o.N m.m m.oa m.v m.o~ m50aoom Had o.ooa v.w m.NN m.o m.o H.oa II m.o 11 it v.v m.em cuocunoz c.00H H.m N.Nm m.o m.o ~.e II m.o It h.om h.m o.em ounce locoLm o.ooa n.v w.mm m.o m.o v.> H.o m.N m.v H.HN N.m N.>H Hucmcmc o.ooa q.m m.am m.o m.c m.m II In In m.m m.m n.~v muao> o.ooa h.m H.Hm m.o m.o m.m N.o v.0 o.vH n.ma m.v. m.wm cumummm o.ooa w.v m.mm m.m o.a o.h v.0 m.m v.aa m.m m.m m.ma compmoz o.ooa m.m n.mm m.H m.H m.mN m.o m.m II II 0.0 m.a o0 muoo< muouoom coHu mooa> moauaaflua doom cofiu >uwu on“ and moooo ”up whoa acamom HH< Idesmcou Iuom oaansm toouum vauu lusuomm |>uumso [mouom IHDUHHO< uaansa Icoo nomam nscmz a acacaz coma .zHono mo mmoeomm am w .mmaaa:moa<> mmomo s9 poafimsoo " oowsom coflymo mxuoz OHHQSE lacsseoo o owmalmema coam coHymosom I.moHpHHHwD #HOchmHE onowHDOHum< pcosdoHo>oo nooxlo>flm .HH .Opo soap oxuoz OHHQDQ Hemalonma cmam oomue .OCchmm ouspazofiuoc ionpmflcfiep< .umoflpaaflpo pcoEdoao>oQ umowtoco .oa coflpoo lacoesoo can mxuoz OHHQSE oemalmmma Goad ou5pasoawo< coflpmoscm #HOchoue .Imoauflaapa pcoEQoHo>oQ Hmowloze .m meaamao a suomouoo acacaz oaaauaoma cmaa mpmom coawoospm ouswasofluo< o >uwn5CCH wcoEQoHo>oo noowlco>om .w Noma swam pcoEQOHo> Ammoum coozyon ycoEQoHo>op ca mom ocw ompflumv tom Hooao>cm HmCOHpmz .h ouoflona mcacaz womalamma cmaa ucoeao oncowoa oxoq owao> o >uymSOCH usonuom 6509 1Ho>oo noowlo>am pcooom .o mmmaummma macmczoe flpmuoxme mpmom coawmosom noonum: meoe coda coaumpaaomcoo .m 9 m>m3uownz mmmalamaa coam pcoe 8 UCMHCH w >o3HHmm bongo: nave coflymospm monomldoHo>oQ umo>lo>flm umpfim .v Homa (HmmH wnmoo CHOU orb moofl>uom coaposp mo0a>uom macaw Mo ycoEdoHo>oo Hoaoom mooH>uom COEEOU noun a anocoom Hmaoom IoOchEEOO one now swam umowicoe .m mmaauwvma wmmoo cofipopflcmm owsw CHOU one How pcoEQoHo> >pa0auwooam o guano: coaomusom IosupnoumcH loo mo cmam HoowncoB .N mwmzuowoz masonwmm UcmHCH cmam wcoEQoHo>oo mpmom mmcHoHHDQ oaanzm o monom o m>m3aflom umowlcoe onoflmfiooso .H cousom Unace pcooom pmnflm nomad m m H a H m 0 H m m mmHEHmOHmm mHMEB Qz< mzmHMCOHu5Ho>mm mmuuom ©®EM< mbmHImhmH mUCflazmm .o.h .pq .pHm Hancsoo anooaaaz oeonoom mamalwnma ommaxe .x.m .coo .ps Hancooo snmoaaaz msonmom momaumnma moonstonoe .x.H .Hoo Haocooo ceapoeoomm Hmcoaomz maaalmnma oconenonoa .x.H .Hoo spoon nmonoona Nomaiaomfi mamsm .<.z .no Haooaoo coaunnonaa Hocoaonz mooaxooma onoxoa .<.o .coo .ua >uumm .mmamomm coHDcw>coo ommalbmma cmesuxz mEmBM .HQ coaumuumHCHepé poaumm mumum mo 6mm: mU mo H0>®H m>flumamu Op momma aflmmsucmumm CH mmusoflm .N xflpcwma< mom .maflm#o© now .mwousom mSOHHm> EOHM UmHHQEOU ”mwuusom Ao.mmc m.mw Am.awv m.mo Ao.oac 4.4 1N.mc o.a Am.omv om noono. Aa.smv m.om AH.NmV o.mo Am.mmv m.m Ao.ome m.om 1m.mmc om onoonnoz 1a.omv o.om 1o.oov o.mm Ao.omv m.mm As.mmc o.NN AH.NoV ma ommn< acoum AN.Nsl o.oo AH.omc o.oo 1m.moc «.ma AH.mmc 0.0m 14.440 ma anonona 1m.mol o.no 1H.mac N.Ho 1m.sav m.e As.mav o.oH 14.440 ms noHo> 1m.nnc 4.14 As.omc N.oo 1o.mmv m.oa In.mmv m.oN 11.nol ea nnopnnm Ao.ooal N.Nm 1o.ooav o.nm Ao.ooav N.No Ao.ooal m.mm Ao.ooal m onooa pwummuw 1m.Nol m.Hm Ao.smv «.mm AH.omv s.NH 1m.mme m.mm AH.Noc ma Honoooo 1a.woc n.oo 1o.ooal o.sm la.oov o.nN 1o.amc o.n~ Am.mmc ma onwomoz 21.5 G p1.I D ID H 1._L1 a 9T.U 1 :1 e 1.00 d 301. 0. On 5 Sud 9 Que 8 00. I. U 0 ..u I. 1 u 09 O 9M1 p UM. I. T. U Sq} e 2.11 2 Q D._OT.. U 1.1.8 B a 0 D TUE 1. E Squ rA o .L. T. 1. DE UJO 0 U. U.A0 ua Eeu U 081. E be H O 1. T..|. H E TLU d T o e 1 990 0 um 1 8 Ad .V T. I. an 95 0 d 1 I s 1 Z a J. J. i mo dflZOHomm m0 mqm>md ma mqmu3m ofleocoum mn.o .oanH zoom oooaneoo .v.m. .on.m .nnna .goummmom oaeocoom too anaoom .Hmoaomaunum mo oozuaomcH w m N .coow; .mcmzo an acme on>mQ ampsm announce: how muoumoHUCH UHEocoom pcm Hmfloom .o3vox .Hmszm .mmw .mmuswflw an pom .wamuflamon wum>flum cam mmcfle .wamundmon scammfle .mamuHQmon ucoecum>o© ®UDHUCH mmusmflw HmCHmHMO .H mmomsom Qz< mmBoz An.HV ma In.nmv m.oa Ao.ooc MH.om1m.na oma.m Ao.o~v nom.a 1o.oc oon.»oaqlm.ovc oo.o noun: 14.ne N4 Ao.oml n.n Ao.moc no.041n.mo mnm.n .H.nac moo.1 An.ol Hon.~oa 1m.anc mn.o onwnonoz An.oe nm in.nac N.n AN.voc an.nn1n.oe one.n AH.an nam.H In.mc onn.moa in.ne nn.o onmn<-oconm AN.HNV non im.Hov H.nH io.vsc an.nmln.ma nno.o 1n.va onn 14.nl onn.nna 1o.ooal nN.H Hosanna .o.m. no In.Noe n.na 1o.nav oo.oolo.mu ooo.o Ao.ool mnn 11.40 NNn.mnH Am.nnc Ho.a moao> Ao.ov no In.mnc N.NN In.aov on.nmln.mo moo.o Ao.omv non 11.411nno.no In.onl nn.o cnoommm Ao.ooaonnn Ao.ooae n.do 1o.ooal nm.on a.ooemmn 1o.ood onN lo.ooemnn.o. Ao.onc oo.a mnooe uounouo m Am.nv Ho In.anv n.mm Am.onc no.1mfia.nmvmnn.n 1m.H~c Hmm.a 14.1d nmo.nn In.onc nn.o Honpcoo 1 so.nae Ana Ann.n~l nn.HH AH.mnv on.nofim.~ocnnm.n Ao.nNV ooo.H In.ns mno.ma Ao.oc on.o coopnoz dA V MMd d “d dd ddd 8 ea 3 97:3 0 00 U.O 01.1 8 CU. D 11.1 d Sd rAd d1.0 5 dt. 9 9.40 n dn 5n ned T. TO S I 9 TL TI T...L .LTto 0 9I S EU e 19 DB 251 U . IS T. 331. 1. 81. T....r 1/1. S 0.. no I. II. ET: .L.d_L. I. dad O 0 U0 010 I. .L .050 U O..U ZU UOU 0 T. T_Sd 8 Td 1 1+ .A n d pd d 00 A 151 I S .ta 9 I J TL 02 I I 1 1. I T. 14 TU. 0 U dt. N 00 0 D. 00 n US 0 e 1.U 1 _ X E S O 9 a. e I. I V a AHCOUV m4 mqmmm on» a: wme mGOamom pond: 0cm cuocpuoz .m .coammm ummuom 05p snow mcoaomm owmn< ocoum cam apcmcmc .N .mcoaoom maao> cam cumummm .amuucmo .cnmpmmz mo as done ma coamom amummou one .a ”mmBOZ b.0a v.ma c.ca N.NN m.mN c.mm a.ac >.mm c.wm UmQan>®c c.m c.c c.va c.mm m.nm c.vm c.mc >.cc c.Nc ©CaQ0a0>mQ m.mm m.aN c.cN m.ma m.ma c.ma c.wm m.ac c.ac pommwumoc cwma cnma coma cwma chma coma cmma cnma coma acmemoam>wo cmccm>mm ummnom amammoo mo a®>wq mZOHomm mm? ZH Bzmzmoqm>mm m0 mm0 HIE B< MBzmszEBmm ho mOeemawcemm wmr>eHozm$Hw wmazmmz Zczwmw Ow mmHHFMZMZHm >20 136 services they possess. In some ways this indicates a gradual spread of the benefits of development from the growth centers to the surrounding areas. In a way this supports Hager— strand's assertion (Haggettzl979) that an innovation tends to appear near the place where the innovation already exists, and that with increasing distance from this center the like- lihood of'seeing the innovation decreases. Table 26 sheds some light on Hagerstrand's thesis, but with some modification, showing that in the coastal re- gions where development was initially introduced, there is a high average rate of increase in development attributes. As one moves away from the coastal regions to Ashanti and Brong Ahafo Regions, the average rate of increase in development attributes increase slightly. This slight increase, instead of an expected decrease, can be attributed to the rich agri- cultural and mineral base of the Ashanti and Brong Ahafo Re- gions which indicates that perhaps regional development bene- fits are distributed according to each region's resource base or degree of economic activity. The Northern and Upper Re— gion, being further inland and with the least intense econ- omic activity, had the lowest average rate of increase in development attributes. The foregoing discussion has established that, in gen- eral terms, as one moves from the coastal regions to the Northern and Upper Regions, the rate of increase in development 137 TABLE 26 . RATE OF CHANGE OF REGIONAL STRUCTURAL ATTRIBUTES* Region 1960 1970 1980 Average Rate of Change** Western, Central Eastern and _5 Volta 1457.5 2367 2709 1.32 X 10 Ashanti and _5 Brong Ahafo 573.5 1003.6 914 1.52 x 10 Northern and _5 Upper 384.5 590 534 0.94 x 10 *Figures refer to regional development scores. **Adjusted for population. 138 attributes decreases. Thus, in general, regions in the southern parts of the country are likely to receive the bene- fits of development more rapidly than the Northern and Upper Regions. What this discussion on regional diffusion of develop— ment in Ghana does not address is the effectiveness of growth poles or centers of development in transmitting development to surrounding settlements over time. Does development in Ghana start from individual centers and spread outward or simply take place in a hierarchical manner? Answers to this question will help evaluate the effectiveness of growth poles g in transmitting development, and thereby reducing regional inequalities. Assessing the Effectiveness of Growth Poles To evaluate the effectiveness of growth poles in trans— mitting development benefits, "development contours" were drawn for 1960, 1970 and 1980. The spatial diffusion of development was then inferred from these maps and used as a surrogate index of—effectiveness. The foregoing was accomplished in a series of steps. First, a base map of Ghana was obtained, its outline traced and defined by a set of 325 points. The sampled settlements were located on the outline map next and the X and Y coordi— nates of both sets of points were determined using a digiti- zer and the MSU 6500 computer. Finally, these coordinates 139 were used with development scores obtained from the scale lines to run a SYMAP program, from which development con— tour or surface maps were extracted using the program's interpolation routine. Figures 8, 9 and 10 represent the development sur- faces or contours for 1960, 1970 and 1980, respectively. From Figure 8 it is apparent the development surface is domi— nated by about ten "peaks” most of which occur in the coastal and forest areas. These centers include Accra-Tema, Sekondi- Takoradi, Tarkwa—Prestea, Kumasi, Sunyani and Tamale. Secon— dary peaks occur in areas like Wa, Yendi and Hohoe—Kpandu. The Damongo—Wenchi strip, areas around Salaga, Yendi, Enchi and Nkawkaw fall in the third category and may be considered transitional zones between the "developed" and ”developing" areas. Large areas to the northwest and northeast of Tamale present the largest concentration of least developed areas. In general terms, it appears that the "developed" areas coin— cide with areas of mineral exploitation and commercial or early administrative towns. Again, what is clear from this analysis is that while the largest concentrations of least developed areas are mostly located in the Northern and Upper Regions, there is an absence of these concentrations along the coast. In fact the only large concentration of least developed land occurs in an area in the north-eastern section of the Western Region. It will 140 42+ wndi/Tolemd; LEG E NP 1 Lou): D4v¢\oful 1 9.0.9.3 mauata, 3 Dm‘mo 4 Doubpui Most 5 9.0.1.?“ FIGURE 8: DEVELOPMENT SURFACE FOR 1960 LEGEND SNMLQS¥SNM 8 'oCuut ’ Lkbfidd/Tak" Pad-I"- FIGURE 9: DEVELOPMENT SURFACE FOR 1970 142 ‘. a». . LEGEND ‘- .-- Smufijme 1x¢h~3m Kata. ‘ nltjq a , (;> chnfm~ =- Winneba. of». Con-d: (9 ckondi/Takoradi. FIGURE 10: DEVELOPMENT SURFACE FOR 1980 143 be seen that this pattern of development is fairly consis— tent with results of earlier analyses of regional develop- ment using socio—economic indicators and the classification of settlements into the various categories of development. The 1970 development surface (Figure 9) reflects changes which occurred between 1960 and 1970. In addition to the 1960 peaks identified earlier, Oda—Kade, an area around Wa, Salaga, Hohoe—Kpandu—Jasikan, Mampong, Dunkwa and an area around Sunyani appeared as secondary peaks (See Figures 8 and 9) which can be associated with the emergence 1 of sub—regional centers in the various regions. Large sec— tions of the Eastern and Western Regions, previously de- scribed as being "least developed“, moved into the third cate- gory of development. Other large areas of ”least develop— ment" in the Northern and Upper Regions in 1960 saw no major changes by 1970. The area from the Volta River to the border town of Aflao along the east coast registered noticeable changes. This latter development may be traced to abrupt governmental enthusiasm for Volta River development whenever this region threatens seccession to join the Republic of Togo. Also evident from the development surfaces for 1960, and to a limited extent for 1970, is that there are no large areas of the country which can be defined as ”developed". The developed areas appear as isolated spots on the develop— ment surface in places like Accra—Tema, Sekondi-Takoradki, 144 Kumasi, Sunyani and Koforidua. In 1970, Kumasi, Sunyani, Na and their immedaite environs appeared to be peaks of the highest category of development (See Figure 9). However, it appears that as one moves away from these centers (generally in any direction) the probability of the existence of various development attributes decreases, confirming Hagerstrand's observation, that with increasing distance from the center of an existing innovation, the probability of the appearance of an innovation decreases. A comparison of the 1970 and 1980 surfaces clearly il— M lustrates that changes in development have occurred, espec- I ially in the coastal and forest regions. Many areas in these two regions have progressed to higher levels of development, indicating that diffusion of development has taken place. What is peculiar about all the three surfaces is that the areas lying north of Tamale and in the Upper and Northern ) Regions have remained almost unchanged with three exceptions. These exceptions are the Tamale-Yendi—Salaga section, the Wa environs and the area around Gollu. The large unchanged areas indicate that development is diffusing very slowly from the service centers in the Northern and Upper Regions. This may be attributed to a lack of well developed transportation net- works within these regions, demonstrated by the fact that these two regions have low accessibility indexes compared to other regions (See Table 15). Lack of transportation and 145 communication, therefore, appear to create barriers to the rapid diffusion of development benefits in the Northern and Upper Regions. This is not to suggest that in regions with well developed transportation networks the growth centers were effective in transmitting development benefits to sur— rounding settlements. Apart from transportation development, other factors such as politics, regional productivity, en— vironmental constraints and accidents of history as discussed earlier may also be viewed as obstacles to development in the Northern and Upper Regions. On a smaller scale the pattern of development illus— trated by the three surfaces indicates a contagious form of spatial diffusion of development. Sub—regional centers and most settlements within their environs increased their num— bers of development attributes during the study period. The present study will assess whether these occurred as a result of their proximity to various growth centers. Apart from proximity there are equally important factors which can in- fluence the number of development attributes a settlement receives. It would, therefore, be erroneous to use the con— tagious pattern of development evident from Figures 8, 9 and 10 to conclude that the growth poles were effective in trans— mitting the benefits of development to nearby settlements. The claim that the growth centers have succeeded in transmitting development benefits to surrounding areas is 146 weakened by a national pattern of spatial distribution of these benefits that follows a hierarchical pattern, indi- cating the importance of other factors than proximity. Fac- tors such as a settlement's population, its rate of popula— tion growth, and proportion of people in non—agricultural activities could conceivably influence a settlement's de- velopment score, the diffusion of development attributes and the effectiveness of the growth centers in transmitting de— velopment. If "proximity to nearest growth center" is shown to co-vary with settlement's "development score" an associa- tion can be inferred and, perhaps, it can be tentatively con- cluded that the growth center has been effective in trans- mitting development benefits. An investigation of this is presented. Variations In Inequality or Development Scores To determine and account for variations in development scores, which give an idea of inequality between settlements, a correlation analysis is used. This analysis will help ex- plain variations in development scores of individual settle- ments and hence regional developmental inequality. The re- sults of this anlaysis will also help determine if the growth centers were effective in transmitting development benefits. Since population is a basic parameter on which most planning activities depend, it is plausible to expect that 147 a settlement's development score will vary with its popula— tion, with larger settlements being better developed than smaller settlements. A settlement's rate of population growth can also influence its level of development. In fast-growing settlements one would expect that efforts to cater to their expanding populations may result in the even- tual development of these settlements. Another aspect of population which may influence a settlement's level of de— velopment is the percentage of the work force that are en— gaged in non—agricultural pursuits, a pointer to the the in- dustrial composition of the settlement. Since industrial towns are known to be more developed than non-industrial towns, it is reasonable to expect that the larger the non-agricultural labor force, the more developed a settlement will be. Hagerstrand“s findings, in his study of central Sweden, seem to indicate the importance of distance in the spread of innovations. In a similar manner distance can also become important in the spread of development benefits with the pro- bability of such benefits decreasing with increasing dis- stance from existing growth centers and the coast where de- velopment started. Thus it can be expected that distance from a growth pole and also from the coast are two variables which can influence settlement's development scores and hence regional inequality. The foregoing factors which can account for variations in development scores of settlements and on which data are 148 readily available were individually correlated with the set— tlement's development scores, using the latter as the de- pendent variable. Simple correlation coefficients were used to measure the degree to which variations in development scores can be attributed to each of these factors. These measures also provided a means by which the strength of the various associations were measured. The extent to which these correlation coefficients could have been influenced by samp— ling error, assuming that the true correlation coefficient is zero, are also assessed by using significance tests. Table 27 is a summary of the various simple correla— tion coefficients and their levels of significance. It will be seen from Table 27 that of all the factors, postulated to havesome association with development scores, population has the strongest relationship. The correlation coefficient of .7551 is highly significant indicating it could not have oc- curred by chance alone, the sample is identical to the list of settlements which possess any of the structural attributes shown in Tables 18 through 20. About 57 percent of the vari- ations in development scores or inequality can be attributed to variations in population. It may also be argued that var— iations in population could be explained by variations in development scores, however, this is not the framework adopted in this study. 149 nnm. hmca. womm. umpcwo .3305 m o» oocmpmao unmanocm mum. vccc. vcmc. unmoo 029 Scam mocmumam ummuuocm acc. mNmm. ovmm. wouowxuoz awhnuasuahm< Icoz mo ucmuumm acc. cmmc. huma. LDBOHU coaumasmom .mpcmsmapumm mo 08mm acc. Ncbm. ammh. mucmEmauumm mo coaumasmom mochawacmam n.50aumcaeumuoa u .pcmauammoou wannanm> mo am>oq N mo unmaoammmoo ceapmamuuou mHm>d025... 3.4801 ,0 .c a .. . motto Sol . ..F; 7 29:48 .8th 99k. :53 U. . F. .. ....O . 5 ., . .. 4 >§m42:LIIUIUlUl(J1UIUI(fifi‘UU‘VV‘JmCOmOOOOOOI-‘HRJU-b##Cf‘mflr-‘HH HHHHHHHHMLJ i. . OOOOOOb-LHb-I-HHHHHHHHn—u—ijfl APPENDIX 7: Continued_ 173 J9&O 05 1&4 00000000000001000000C10C111111L 1960 01 011 0000000000000100110101 100001011 19&0 O? 1&1 000000000000010000011C 111011001 19b0 OD 1&6 000000000000010001000 101011110. 9&0 03 053 CuCCuuCOJ00001 000 000 110101110. .960 02 042 000000003000010000000 011011111 .9&O 01 008 JCCOOJ 00000000100C 0011111111 9&0 03 080 C‘0000000C00000 00101 1010111101 9&0 O4 130 0'00330000000000 0010 010111110 9&0 02 039 0000000(}0000000000010 01101111L 9&0 01 007 OCLCDCCOJOOJOOUOOOOIC 100111110‘ 1960 04 131 000000000000000000 001 100110111; 9&0 07 215 0000000 0 000000000000 1010111111 9&0 07 21& 0000000000000 000000 1110101111 49&O 08 237 000000000000000000000 1011011111 ‘9&O 06 196 000000000000100000001 1001011101 19&O 04 132 00000000 .500:001010000 0101001101 9&0 01 014 CCVC00CCU 00000100001 1100011101 9&0 3 085 00C C000 0000000100010 0000111111 9&0 07 218 C(jOCC 000000000 001000 0010111111 19&O 03 084 00 JUUCCOUCOUOOCOOCOIQ 0001011111 ‘960 01 009 000000000000000000010 0110011111 19&O OS 1&8 000000000000000000 00 1001101111 ‘9&O 01 005 000000003000000000001 1101101101 9&0 05 1&9 000000 0000 00000 01 1011001111 ‘9&O 04 133 000000000000000000000 0101111101 9&0 08 238 000000000000000000000 1010101111 9&0 07 217 CHOCJULOOOOWOOOOUOOOC 1110101111 9&0 01 015 000000000000010000001 1000011101 9&0 03 085 000C00000000000 00100 0101010011 1960 06 19B 000000000000000000011 1001001101 60 04 135 00005 -0000000000000010 0001101101 9&0 O4 134 QCCCu0t M003000000001 1000101111 9&0 Ob 199 0000000000000000 0000 1001001111 9&0 07 029 00000 000 000000000000 0010101111 9&0 06 197 OOCOCCHCOOOOO 0C 1000101111 9&0 01 012 00000000000000000000( 1001101111 960V03 088 OCOOGOOOOCOJOOOOOUOOC10100111111 9&0 03 090 000000000C 0001000000C 1000110001 ‘9&O 03 ‘87 000 00000000000010010 0001010011 19&0 01 013 0'0J00 0000000-000000000 1001001110 9&0 06 200 COuCJDOCOOCJOOOOOOOOC 0000111101 »9&O O7 220 000000 COOOOOOOOOOOOOC 0000101111 9&0 02 045 00003000000001000000C 1000100001 ‘9&0 03 091 00000000000001000000C.0101100001 960 02 041 0000330000000000000100 100010011 9&0 01 021 000000000000000000001 1000010001 ‘9&O 01 01& 00000 000000000000010':0101100001 9&0 03 C39 0000000000 0000000010 0000111001 9&0 04 143 000000000000000000001 1000010001 9&0 07 222 000000000000000000000 1000100011 9&0 02 045 000000 OQOCDOOOOOOOOC 0101010001 9&0 3 095 000000000000000000000 0000011101 9&0 O 139 0.CC000000000000000.0000101101 19&O 08 239 _ 1100100110 1960 5 175 21000101101 19&0 05 170 10100011 ‘960 2 044 ,11010011 19&0 03 092 01001101 4960 04 137 01010101 ‘9&O 2 043 01010011 9&0 2 047 01110001 9&0 02 042 11100011 960 03 094 C ., L1101101 9&0 7 102 JJCC0O~O~U-h**0 HOOK . -l N 177 Continued 0000000000010000 100 000000000000000000‘ 00000000000000010001 00000000000000001011 00000000000000000001 00000001000001000000 00000000000110011010 00000001001000001110 00001000001000000100 00000000010001000000 00000000010000000010 00000000100000000000 00000000000000001001 00000000000000000101 0000 0000000000010100 00000000000-000000000 00000000001000000110 00000000010001001000 00000000000000000100 00000000000000111000 00000000000000001001 00000000000000000100 00000000000000000000 00000000000010000100 000000000010000001 O 000000000000000000 1 000000000000000010 1 000000000000000101 0 000000000000000001 O 000000001000000010 1 000000000000000008 8 0 0 O 1 1 1 00000000000000010 00000000000000010 000000010000000001 00000000000000000100000 00000000000000000100000 000000000000000000000000 000000000100000000000100 00000000000J000100000000 000C=00000000000000000011 000000000000000001100100 0000°3 0000000000100000000 000 30000000000010011100 000000000010000001000001 000000000010000001100001 000000000100000001000000 000000000000010000000001 00000J000000010000000000 00000 0000010000000000010 00000300000J0000000001000 00000000000000000000000101 00000000000000101001100000 00000000001001000000000000 00000000010000000000000000 00000000000000000100001001 00000000000000000010001010 00000000000000000100010010 00000000001000000000000000 00000000000000000000010010 00000000000000000100110010 00000000000J00000100010001 00000000000000000000001000 00000000000 J000001000011000 000000000000000000000000000 000023000000010000000000100 OCCOCDDVJUL 001010001000000 POJCJ0000000000000000000100 CC,11L0360‘01000P000000010 L0””‘300000J00000000000100F1 5'0? 00300'00000000000000000000 00003300000JOOOOOOOOOOOIOO 1 1HOOOHHOHHHOOOHOOOHHOHHOOOOOHHHHO #HHOHHOOOHOHOHHOOQHHOHOOOHHHHHMF‘HH OHOHOOOOOO HHHOOOOfiHOOOHHOfiHHOHHOHOHHHHHOOOOHOHHH O O 1 O o 0 1 O O 1 O 1 1 1 O 1 0 H Oooo“OHHOOOOHOOOHOOOHHOHOOOOOHHHHHHHOH0H o H000HOHOOOHOHHOOQHHHOHHHH‘HHOHHHOHHHHHHH OOOOOH DHOOOOOOOHOOOOOHO HHOHH HOHHHMOMNNHHHHHHHOP—‘QHOHMP‘HHHHHHHHHOHHHHHOHHOOHHHHOH HHQHHHHWHNflr-LHMMHHHHHHHMHHONHMHHNHHHOWHNOHHMHHHHHQOH HHHHOOOHOHHMOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOH H-HHHHHHHHHH-HHHHHHHHOHHOHHHOOHHHHHHMHHid-HH- HHHHHHHHOHHOOHHHHHHOHHF‘HHD—‘MHOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOHHHHHHOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOHHH OHHHHNOOHOHHHHOHHHOOHQMOHMOOI-SHOOHHHHHHHNOMHOHHHHHMO HMHt—LHHHHMHHHHMHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHMHHHHMMHHHHHHHHHHHHMHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHMHHMM HHHOOOOMHHHHHHHOHOHHMHflHHOflMHOOOHOh-‘HHHOHOHHOOOHHHHH OHOOOOOHOHHI-'-OHHHHHOHHOHOHHHHHOHOHHOHHHHHHHOHHHHHHHH HOHOHOHHOHOOHOOOHHOO OHOHOOOHHHQOHHOOOMOH MHHOHMHQHMHOOHHHQQOH HHOHHOOHHHHHHHMOOHHH OMMHMHHMwOMMHMHHQHr-hw OOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHI-l-HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHF‘HHPHHHHH‘HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH flflOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHNMNNNNMNNNUUUUUUL¥thhhhh#mmmmmmmooflflmfififlflflflfl O9 178 APPENDIX 8: Continued PJMHHM omppp onw# 204 105 100 {lJflJHb-LMMHM pommpwww OQONMUNO 0000000000000001000000100010 00000000000100000000000000 o 00000000000000000000000000 0 I o o O O 0HHHHHHHMMHOOMOOHOHHHHHHOHHHHMOHHOOHHOOHO OHHHHHHHHHHMHHHOHHOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOO00OHHHHHHHHHwHOOHOHHHHHHHHHH HMHHHHHHHHHMHHHHMHHHHHHHHHHHHMHMHHHHHHHHHHHHMHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHMHHHHHH 1 0 00000000000000000000010010 10 00000000000000000000001000I O 000000000000000000000000001 1 000000000000000000000000111 O 00000000000000000000000101 01 000000000000000000000001OO 00 I 0 1 1 1 O O O O 'HMOOHOHHH 000000001000000000000000001 000000000000000000000110001 0000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO10 000000000001000010000000018 11 1 OOOOOOOOOwa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v ..HH 1 1 J 1 1 0000000000000001000001 1000 00000000001000000000000 00010 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO10000010 000000000000000000000010000100 000000000000010000000000000010 000000000100000000000000010000 000000000000000000000010010000 0000000000000000000000000001010 000O000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000001000100000000 0000000000000000001001010000000 0000000001000000000000000010001 OOOOOOOODOCOOOOOOOO00000000OOO1 0000000000000000000000000000001 0000000000000000000001000000018 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 o 1 1 o J 1 OOHOOOHOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOO0H 0 O HOOAOHOH 000000000000000000000100000001 000000000000000000000100000000 000000000000000000000000010001O 0000000000100000000000100000000 00000000000000000000011000000001 00000000000000000000011000000001 00000000100000000000000000000001 0000000000000000000000000100000 1 00000000010000000000000001000001 0000000000000000000001100000000 1 000000000000000000000000000000001 OOOOCDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO100001000 0000000000000000000000000001000?O 00000000000000000000000000000100 00000000000000000000000000010011 00000000000000000001000000000000 000C000000000000000000000000001 1 0000000000000001000000000010001 0000000000000000000000001000010‘ 00000000000000000000001000000001 00000000000000000000010010000000J 00000000000000000000001000QOOOOC 00000000000000000000001000000001 0000000000000001000000100000000 1 HQHHMMHQOQHHOHMNHNMOMMOHMMOOMHQHNQHMOOOOMHflwowMHHflH HOHooooflooHH APPENDIX 8: mmpppmwwmppmmmmpm»mmmpnmmmeL mmmxewmomoepepmnopupommmeone M [0 38ng [UPJPJMPJNMHOOOHPJMHP-‘HHHOOONNHHOHM #00 ...L -m 0 0 mm 0o NNPJH mmem HOOUU ommmmmm mummmm U owompmm 'OOOOOOOOJOOOOOOOOOOI0000000000000 179 Continued 00000001000001000000001000000000110 00000 0000000000000000000000000010 01 0000000000000000000000000000000I 11 00000000000000000000100000001000001 OOOOQOOOJOOOOOOOOOOOOOI100001000J01 OOOOOJOOOOOJOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOC111 0000000000000000001000000000000 111 0000000000000000000100000100000 J01 00000 00000000000000000000100000C 01 000000000000000000000000000001O 001 0000000000000000000000000000100 0 0000000000000000000000000101000 0 0000000000000000000000100000000 1 0000000000000000000000000000000 :01 0 1 1 O O QOOOOQNONOOQOOOOOOHHHO OHOOHOOOHHOHHOHOOOOOHOO OOHHOHHOOOOHOHHOOOOOOHHO HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOHH 0000000000000000000000000000000 11 00000JO000000000000000000000000 11 0000000000000000000000000000000 J1 0000000000000000000000000000000CJ01 00000J0000000000010000000100000‘.J00 00000J0000000000000000000000000CJ01 O00C00000000000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOFJ00 0000000000000000001000000000000?“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’010001 00000000000000000000000000000000 100001 000000000000000000000000000000000100001 00000000000000000000000000000000?100001 000000000000000000000000000OOOOOF100001 00000000000000000000000000000000C100001 000000000000000000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOC100001 00000000000000000000000000000000 100001 00000000000000000000000000000000F100001 00000000000000000000000000000000 100001 0000000000000000000000000100000000 0‘1 3:13... _ ....J..u.....n...m. .. A APPENDIX 9 RAW DATA AND SCALE LINE FOR 1980 180 RAW DATA AND SCALE LINE FOR 1980 APPENDIX 9: BEE?S4442222111110000987777?ébéé055555554443433333222211111100000000 33 33 33 33 3 3 333333 333 3 32 22 2 2 2 22 2 2 2 2 22 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 22 2 2 22 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ...... .11..1.1.1.1.1111111111111111111111111.111111111111111111111111......11.1111111111....1 fia..1...1111111111111..11.111111411111111.11111101111111111111111.1110111111111. 11.11111111111.1.1.11.1.11.11111111111111.11111111.11.111111.11.111.11....A-.11111.111.11J .11111111111111.111411111111111111111111111111100111.1111......AUAUAU1.1.11.11111111151....1...... 11111111411111.0111...11111110111141.1410 11.1111111111110011.1.1.1....11.011011111110.11. 11.111111111111111.11.1111.1111111111111111.11..1.11.11.11.11.11.1411111111111411.1.1131... 1111111111111111.1111111111111111111111.11.111.111.101.1110101111111111111...... 1.11111.1.11111111111011101111111111111110111111111111111111101110111.....1 1.1.1111.11111114111111111.1.1.111.111.11.1111.1.1.100.111111110101137111.1.1.101.11.1.1... 1.1.1.111111111111111.111111101«1.111110111111111111111111J1AUJ....HJ1AU11JLI1111.1......J. 11.11..1.11.1.11.1.101..11001111111110011111101.11.11.1001111110011111101111.115..-.1.. 1.111.111.1111...1.1111111.1.11111111111111111.11.11111.11111101.11..111.11.}.11.11101.-. 1111111111111141.1..1L10111AU11111111111111LIAU11115.-11114111141414.1111.1011114....a141A11.1 11111111111114L1111111111111011111111.1111;1111111111111411L.l1.h11100m.41111.41l 111111111111111.1.11111111111411111111111111.1.10111111011101....111110.A111..HJ..U 1.1.1.11111111111111.11011111111111.11111111.111110110111110.111AHJA1110J11J1101J... .... 11..1.1.1.110.1001.1.111.1111111100011000100011011110000110111110711101011100 1.1.1 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1141.110.111001111141111001.41111.110111110001011110111..1.1-1.1011.1.1.1...1AU1.l 11111.111.1.1.1111.11.1111111111111111111111.1.1.111.1111119100111111.010.101.1111...AU..U......A..1..l 1.11.7.11.11.11111111111111.111.111.1011...0.111111111.1.100111101llAUUfl...1.11AUAH.J100.000 1.1.1.111.1.11111141111111111111111111111.11001.1111111410111111.1.U.A..........A....1.11.1.-.1.102.011. .1 1.1..1......111111111.11.11.111.1111.1111111111101111.1.111010111101111111A..JAJOOOA1.J 1011.00 11.111.11.11.1..111111.1111111111111111111111000110110.11001110110 .10 1:111 J JCAIJ 0.31.. .00 1......11.11.1.1111111.111111111111111111111111111111110011.1113131.1111.1....-.J.H.J_.H_ 1.2.1. 11111111111111111111111011111001101100111011111001100C31131212311113 11.111.11.11.1111101111111111.101111011000.1)1.11.1. .1 11.. 31110.01... .J.JC+.:...1JA1....AU.M.1J.1.J ..JQO .11.11.11.11.111.11011111101111101.10101131.CA1.CA..JflJ.\.J1.1AUnLl1C0101A11A11.....CW1.CA. J ...... U....J1..11.. .U 11.1.11...31.1.1.1:.71001.101..1101100001nJ11000AU111JA43AUAUALAL.AJAUOAUIAUIQAJIAJAJA.A:JAUAUAJA}J A...J.....1A....J1.A.. ..:}. r1111:......L.11...11..111101111001000000011111001.A1...JO9100001100003 ..OAUAHJAUT 1.1.0000 JA1- .A..JA..JA..JA..C.1U 1.11.101...11111110101110 JA J111CJHAC1.0001CCCWJFJIQWJOQCJUAUIOIOOCF/n. AU 1.1.AUn11J1JHJQ A......JA..1.J..J. J 1111-......1.1.111110111111111101091.. JAJOAUAUAUOAJQIJIWJAJAJPJIAJOAJAJAJAUCAJAJCAJIA JA1JJ1A1JA..AJA .JA- .JA... ..A......A.. ..JA.}. 11.11..1.1..1.1.11110111133110101101033110110aJAUJUJlCOCA...O0C07AJQCCA.flJA...J.....1.....AJ11.J.-.J.JA.J.........JA..:..J 1.....10100000000090000111003001900000001?...JA...1H.Q_UA....:.....J ..:... ..1......U.U (AOUO 00000000010. AUAUAUQAUAUAUIOAUIAU .OOAUAUA...J A ...JA. J...U1.JA..JA...... A....1.A1J.JAJA.J..J 11111.. . 00000100010000000 OOOOOOOOCOOOOOOQQfi JO..- JOAJOOAJOQOQ... .... SODA... J.J.. ......................A.-.:...J:.J 11111JCOOOCOOCDOOOOOCOOOOOliOOOOOOOJOOOOOICtDCOnDJCDr:(nnOOODCCQQCCO 1.1.1 ..1.... .1A ...JAUOOOOOAUAJAH .JDOOOOOOOAUAUAUQOOAUOQAHJAUAUA: A...JA..JA.UAJAJA1.A11.JA.AUAUAUAUOOAUA...AUH.A.JA-.. .11..2.....1JA..A»...A1......A..w...u.......1..JA.... 1.. ..Q U1......1.....A.w,J J(.JPJQAUAJLA1,02...;0.1300000000000001 UAJ.1JA.JOAJ1A .....A: .QA.JOA... ..AsJAU...JA....JA.,. . .A....1A. r1JAJA1JA.._A........;H....._.... J. . 1...... _........11 -..,1.....u...... .OOOOOIO A1. AJCC000000000000000000.0.1ZH.O.A-J...JQA.JQCA.AJ.-JOOOu..1A. .J. ......r... :00. A... ...J.-_.(....w_.. ...J 1.4.01...1......17.0.2...J—....Jlnan1.30.8...340107.389254:...0n..:....Jn..._SJ..J.:...J.... 335 007.2,}... AU..1...: .....07A......1......n.... .........;...J ...-..1.....J-A.J. 00. A..1........U.A.....-..A.HA.J ..A.A...J..052..J.JOAJJ2......23352005338133273077m:............3 .11.....:/J,..CA...P..AA.J91A.. 19.... .... _(../....... AA. 0.... ..A ......A... Q0121C10110001Q.12211011011222100000C1C?21CCC:C1122213.. .2....:1CC: 12.357..A...4354AJJ123AJJ400854355201078.84321333123.? .774- 1.031234. -.07 BA...031J ....J......:...A.AJ a 3......J...:......... ......m 00000000000000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH OOOOOOOOQOQQOOC...0C OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0000000000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOA .00 888BBB88888888SBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB88888888BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBS 99999999999999999999999999999999999999 99 9999999999 999999990 Q 99999999 41.111.111.11.1.1.1.11..111111111111111111111.11.111.1111.111111.111111111111111111 181 APPENDIX 9: Continued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i9 980 03 087 00000100000100111 11001110100101101111 18 980 O4 131 0000000031000 1000 100111111011101111L1 28 980 04 13b 000000001011000000 100111111101101110LL 28 980 01 009 UOJO3UOQJ000331101 01011111110010001111 17 980 02 03b 0000010001100000010000011111011011011'1 17 980 03 ”4 000000C0001<30001100C10110011001111“LII. .7 980 04 132 LDJOOJCDOIO3IO 00101001011110011011.21 17 980 05 156 00 3 00000000001003101100111111111 L1 -7 .980 04 143 00 J3 000010010000110101010001111‘1111 -5 ‘980 O3 085 CO“ OICDCOOOOOOOIIOIOOOl1001011011"‘11 L0 980 O2 037 00 000001100000000C01010101111011".i‘ 15 .98 01 013 00w 3C100'3-0030030001111100011111100" 1‘ ‘8 .980 02 0&3 00¢.003033FJ0000131110100001110110‘“11 10 1980 05 177 00 -OCCCQ"IOOCCOOOT31010111111111" 1. L8 980 03 111 000000CCCC310L0-1031iOOllOiOOQllliLi . .8 980 01 012 0000000113000000100101101010010011011 . 25 980 01 014 00000000000000000001110011101111010‘..' L5 980 03 090 00000010001300000100C31100010110111"1 I '5 .980 O4 133 OOOOOOOCDOOOOOOOOOOCOI1001111101111‘J 1 5 .980 O4 154 OOOCQOHDJOOOOOODIOOOI10010110011101.'J 3 5 980 05 170 OOCOOOOOGOOOOOOOOOOCII100101111111 1 '1 ‘5 1980 05 172 000000000003000’000 01 00010110111111'721] L5 1980 05 168 000000-00001000OOIOOCCOIOOiOOi100111‘11 l :4 1980 05 169 C0000 0000 ‘030001000110000001110111'l ' 4 1980 05 175 00003 0000000000000100000011111111‘1 ‘1 14 1980 05 17B 0000000000030000001CIIOOOI1111011101‘" 24 1980 06 198 00000000000000101000000110100011111112. 14 1980 O4 140 0030030000010000000.10111000110100111 ‘1 14 1980 01 004 03300300JL00011100 0100110100011110021' 14 ‘98 O2 057 0000000000000000011111100001011001121‘ 14 .980 02 054 0000300030030000 0111110001111000011‘1‘ 14 “980 04 133 ”30000110000000‘0 Uu110100101111 11 14 98 04 if '.‘ 05001111010111.13 13 .980 O4 1: 1100010110111111‘ 13 980 05 1, 0C000111111111L1‘ 13 980 O4 1‘ 1C001001111111011 13 980 03 ‘. 1C101100111101111 13 980 01 0 0C001011011101111 13 980 03 3‘ 01010110101111111 13 L98 O2 0. 00010000110111101 13 182 O APPENDIX 9: Continued "J 1980.06 196 00000000000000100000000 1980 06 200 00000000000000000100000 1980,06 207 00000000000000000000000 1980 O7 216 00000000000000000000001 1980 07 218 00000000000001011010100 1980 07 222 00000000000000000001010 1980 06 204 00000000000000000100000 1980 05 174 OOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOIOOO 1980 O4 155 00000000000000000001008 0 O O O O OHHOH ...-In 1980 O2 061 0000000000000000001110 1980 02 052 0000000001000000001010 1980 O2 047 0000000000000000000000 1980 O2 043 0000000000000000000001 1980 O2 040 0000000000000000000001 1980 03 091 0000001000000000100000 1980 03 09b 00003000000000000100000- 1980 03 106 00000000000000001000011 1980 01 015 00000000000000100100000 0 1980 01 027 0000000000010000000000010 1980 O2 039 0000000000000000010000010 1980 O2 041 00000000000100000100000 1 1980 03 095 00000000? J000000010000011 0 1980 03 098 000000000000000010000001000 1980 03 101 OOOCOOOOOOOOOOO100001000000 1980 03 104 000000100000000110000100000 1980 03 108 00000000000000001000010000 1980 O4 148 000000000000000001000010000 1980 06 201 00000000000000000000000001 1980 06 206 00000000000000000000010010 1980 O2 062 00000000 300000000010100 000 1980 O2 051 00000000000001010000100000 1980 O2 042 00000000000IOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 239 0000000000000010000000010 1980 O7 219 OOOGOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIO1 1980 06 199 OOOCOOOOOOODOOOOOOOOOOI01 0000000000000000001000001- 00000 00000000000000001000 OOO 300000000000000001000 0000000000000000000111000 000000000000001000000’31000 00000000000000000100000001 OOOOQOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO10000 00000100000000000000010000 00000000000000001000001011 00000000000000001000000100 000003000000000010000000000 0000000000000010101000000001 000000C‘000000000101000010000 00000 00000010000100000010000 00000 00000000000110000100000 0000001000000000100000000010 00000001OCOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOO1 0000000000010000100000010000 44 OOOOOJOOJ00000000000010100 1980 O2 050 000000000000000000100100 1980 O2 0&0 0009 OJOOOOOUOOOOOOOOOI?Q O O o 0 OOH-HH- OFJO "in": fire-H- H OOOHOOHOHHHOOHOHOOOHH H- on—u—s H::HH. J .OOHHHOHHHHOOOOOH OHHOOOH OOOOOHOOOOOOHOOHHOO 0 thHow OOOOOHOHHHHOOOMOO H H fl 0 m m 0 0 O 0 m m HOQONH Uthh noqo Heo~woo~ upmwmmmm ..A 0 m 0 O m CJHQHHHH 100001-40 fin "JHHO g H “10001" Hlull-1-HOCJCJQOOOOOOOHOHOOHHOHOOHHOHHHOHL. LJU HM HHHHHMOHH..HU.OMOOHP‘OHOHHHHHHHHHOOHHOHHHHHHHHOHOHOH HOHHOOOOHOOOHHOOOHOOOOOOOOHOHHHid-HOHHOOHHH000HHHOOHOOHHOOHHHI—‘HHHHHHH ”W 0 O) 1980 01 019 0000000000000000001010 1980 03 107'00000001000000001000000 1980 01 017 00000J00000J000000000000 1980 01 021 00000000000'J001000000010 1980 01 029 OOOOOJOOOOOOODDOOOOOOOOQ 0 1980 02 059 OOUOOJOO“100000000110000000 1980 O2 055 00000 J00J100000000100110000 0000330000‘000001000000JJCJ 000000000000001000000000001 000000000000000000000100000 000000000000000000000001010 000000000000000000000000000 A 5. J: OOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHI-J-I-l-HIf“ 000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOQOOHHHHHHHHHHHHNHMNMNMNMNNNNNUUMUUN OHOOHOOO OHOO€JOOOOOHHHHH HON I—I-CH-I-Q 000 600 00 00 4320~ OOH OHCJOOCDHHHQOOO OOOHHOHHOOHOH t MMMHMooHr-swMOMOHHQHHHHHHHHHr-AHOHHOHHOOOHHMH-QMOHHwHHMHHMw-MHHOMHHHHOHM-MM O- J] H1"OOHOOHOOOOHHOOHOHOHHHQQHHHHOHHHHOHHHMHHHHOHOOQONHMHQHHOHHOHHHHHHHH HHHHMOHHMHHHOHHHHHHMHHHHM‘RHHHOHHHMMOHNNHHHHMHHHHMHHHHHHHNHHHMMOOHHHH P‘OHOHHHHOHOHHHHP‘HOHHHHNHOHH1“COM-HH-MHHHHHHHMHHHHMHHNHHHHHHHwHHHHHfi-‘HP‘F‘W1“ HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHwHHHHHHI—‘HHHr—IOOOOHHHHHHHHHMHHHHOHHHHHHr-AHHHHHHHHHH OOQHMHHOOHHHHQOHHHHHHHOHHOOHHOOOMHHOHHOOOHHHHHHF‘HOHHHOHHHOOOOHRHHMHO HHHHHHHHHHHMHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHMMHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHMHMHHMHHMHHHHHHMHHMMHHH HOOOO:J(:JCJOHOI wmwwo HVUMQ 09 183 APPENDIX 9: Continued ‘980 06 208 0000000000000000000001000000 1 09 4980 06 210 00000000000000000000010100 00 1 O9 1980 07 227 00000 00000000 010000100010010 1 09 '980 08 244 000000000000001000 0000010010 1 09 980 02 046 00000000000-JOO100000001000 010 1 09 1980 08 238 00000 0000000000100 000100010 1 08 1980 05 173 0000000000000000000 000000001 1 08 2980 03 099 0000000000000000000000000101 1 08 L980 0 100 0000000000000000001000000000 1 08 .980 03 110 0000000000000000000000000000 1 08 .980 01 028 00000 000000000000 0000 0000 00100 1 08 .980 01 016 00000.10000000000001000000101 1 08 1980 04 141 0000000000000010 00000000010 1 08 980 01 018 0000000000000001 000 0 1 OO 1 08 1980 02 045 0000000000000000000000100101 1 08 4980 01 024 0000000001000000000000000010 1 O7 1980 01 025 000000000000000000001000001O 1 O7 980 01 02b 000000000000000000000000001O 1 07 .980 02 048 000000000000 0000000000001 000 1 07 1980 O2 053 0000000000000000001001 000 000 1 07 1980 03 119 00000000000000000000000001000 1 ‘1 O7 1980 04 142 00000000100000000000001010010000 L 11 O7 ‘980 04 151 000000000000000000001000000000 000 .1 O7 1980 O 152 000000000001 00000 00100000001000 :1 O7 980 06 20’1 0000000000000000000000000 01000110 1011 O7 980 06 209 0000000000000000000 1000000100 00 1141 O7 980 06 202 O 000000000000 00000000000000000101 1111 07 980 07 220 0000000000000000000 000100010010000 0121 O7 980 O7 221 00000 JCOOO 0000000000000100000010010 01 1 07 980 05 182 0000000000000000000000000000100100 1111 O7 980 03 120 0000000000000000000000000100001001)1111 07 980 08 242 0000000000010000000000100000010000.01.1 07 1980 8 240 0000000000000010000000100000010000.0011 06 980 08 241 0000010000000000010000100000010000.0001 06 980 08 243 0000000000000000000000000010001100L0011 06 980 07 229 00000000000000000000 00100000010001.0111 06 1980 O7 150 000000000 00000000000000100000000000.1111 06 1980 03 114 00000000000 0000 000000000 0100000100131111 06 980 03 115 000000000000000 000000000000000101101111 Ob .980 O2 058 000000000000000000011000000000000001111 06 980 01 022 000000000000000000000000010010000111001 06 1980 01 023 000000000000000000000000010010000011101 Ob 1980 01 020 0000000000000000001000 00100000101100001 ‘ 1980 05 184 000000000000000000100000000000000100111 1980 07 225 000003000000000000000000000001010010101 ‘980 02 049 00000000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 000101111 980 01 030 00000000 00000000000000 0000010000011101 1980 08 245 0 0000000000 0100000000 00001000010011 1980 07 224 00000JOOQCOOOOOOOOOOQOOOOOOOO1OO 01 101 1980 05 188 000000000000000000100000000000010 111 1980 0 22b 00000JC0000000000000000000000000101 101 1980 7 228 00000000000000000000001000000100001 101 1980 O7 200 00000J0000000000000 00000000 00100101 101 1980 O4 153 0000000000000 00 000000000000000000001 011 1980 04 149 000000000000000000'00001000000000000 011 1980 7 223 O00000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO100001 101 980 07 231 00000000000000000000000000000001001 01 980 08 24b C0000000000000000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOC1 11 4980 08 247 00000000000000000000000000000100001 01 1980 08 248 0000 000000000000000 0001000000000001 01 4980 05 185 0000 000000000000000000000000000000O 11 1980 08 249 00000000000000000000000000000000001 01 ‘980 08 250 000000O0000000000000000000000000001 01 1980 08 251 00000000000000000000000000000000001 01 ‘980 B 252 00000000000000000000000000000000001 01 980 08 253 0000? ,000000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO1 01 1980 08 254 000 00000000000000000000000000000001 01 1980 08 255 00000000000000000 000000000000000001 -01 APPENDIX 10 REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED NUMBER OF SETTLEMENTS AT EACH LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT IN 1960. III- 184 APPENDIX 10: REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED NUMBER OF SETTLEMENTS AT EACH LEVEL OF DEVELOP- MENT IN 1960 R E G I O N S Development 1 2 3 Score Range* Coastal Forest Savannah Totals 0 - 7 (Depressed) (75) 75 (27) 23 (22) 26 124 8 —15 (Developing) (57) 58 (20) 22 (16) 13 93 16 -32 (Developed) (23) 22 ( 8) 10 ( 7) 6 38 Totals 155 55 45 255 Expected Values in Parenthesis l. The "Coastal Region" consists of the Western, Central, Eastern and Volta Regions. 2. The "Forest Region" consist of Ashanti and Brong Ahafo Regions. 3. The "Savannah Region” consists of the Northern and Upper Regions. *These scores refer to the Guttman Scale Values. APPENDIX 11 REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED NUMBER OF SETTLEMENTS AT EACH LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT IN 1970. 185 APPENDIX 11: REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED NUMBER OF SETTLEMENTS AT EACH LEVEL OF DEVELOP- MENT IN 1970 R E G I O N S Development 1 2 3 Score Range* Coastal Forest Savannah Total 0-16 . (Depressed) (94) 95 (34) 26 (27) 34 155 l7-22 (Developing) (20) 22 (7) 9 ( 6) 2 33 33—39 (Developed) (41) 38 (14) 20 (12) 9 67 Totals 155 55 45 255 For Explanation of Table, see notes on Appendix 10 *These scores refer to the Guttman Scale Values APPENDIX 12 REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED NUMBER OF SETTLEMENTS AT EACH LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT IN 1980. APPENDIX 12: REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF OBSERVED AND EXPECTED NUMBER OF SETTLEMENTS AT EACH LEVEL OF DEVELOP- MENT IN 1980 R E G I O N S Development Score Range* Coastal Forest Savannah Totals (01-04) (OS—O6) (07-08) 0-11 (Depressed) (71) 68 (25) 18 (20) 30 116 12-26 (Developing) (63) 65 (22) 29 (18) 9 103 27—39 (Developed) (22) 22 ( 8) 8 ( 6) 6 36 L Totals 155 55 45 255 For explanation of Table, *These scores refer to the Guttman Scale Values See notes on Appendix 10. APPENDIX 13 CHI-SQUARE TEST OF INDEPENDENCE BETWEEN A TOWN‘S LEVEL OF DEVEOPMENT AND ITS REGIONAL LOCATION 187 ' APPENDIX 13: CHI-SQUARE TEST OF INDEPENDENCE BETWEEN A TOWN'S LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT AND ITS REGIONAL LOCATION Ho: That Y (or the development score) is independent of X (or the region). In other words, the development score or level of development of a settlement is independent of the region in which it is located. fiifiso 0/75 + 16/27 + 16/27 + 1/57 + 4/20 + 9/16 + 1/23 + 4/8 + 1/7 = 0+0.5925+0.7273+0.01754+0.2+2.5625+0.04348+O.5+0.1429 = 2.78632 xi§609;48 At (r-l) (c—l) d.f. = (3-1)(3—1) = 4 d.f. and 0.050 significance A2 *2 . level X 1960 ‘< X 1960 , therefore cannot reject HO. A2 X1970 = l/94+64/34+49/27+4/20+4/7+l6/6+9/41+36/14+9/12 = 0.010638+1.8824+1.8148+O.2+0.57l43+2.66667+O.2195_2.57143 +0.75 = 10.686878 *2 X1970: 9.48 At 4 d.f. and 0.050 significance level, X21970 > X*i970, therefore, reject HO. _ £21980 = 9/7l+49/25+100/20+4/63+49/22+81/18+0/22+0/8+0/6~ =0.9859+l.97+5.0+0.063492+2.22723+4.5+0.0+0.0+0.0 =13.849355 *2 X1980 = 9.48 At 4 d.f. and 0.050 significance level, Q2 X*2 h f ' H 1980 > 1980' t ere ore reject o' LIST OF REFERENCES LIST OF REFERENCES Addo, N.O. (1968). "Spatial Distribution and Ecological Pat- terns Among Foreign Origin in Ghana," Ghana Journal of Sociology, vol. 4, no.l., pp. 19-35. Adelman, I., C. Morris and S. Robinson. (1976). "Policies for Equitable Growth," World Development. vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 561-582. Adelman, Irma and Cynthia Morris. (1972). An Anatomy of In- come Distribution Patterns in Developing Nations (IBRD Economic Staff Working Paper No. 116). Washing- ton, IBRD. (1973). Economic Growth and Social Equality in Developing Countries. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Ahluwalia, Montek 5., Nicholas G. Carter and Hollis B. Chenery. (1979). "Growth and Poverty in Developing Countries." Journal of DevelopingfiEconomics, vol. 6, pp. 299-341. Alonso, W. (1968) "Urban and Regional Imbalance in Economic Development." Economic Development and Cultural Chang . vol. 17, pp. 1—14. Beteille, Andre (1972). Inequality and Social Change. New York, Oxford University Press. Bigsten, Arne (1978). Regional Inequality and Development: A Case Study of Kenya. Gothenburg, Sweden; University of Gothenburg Department of Economics. Birmingham, Walter 33 31., (1967). A Study of Contemporary Ghana. Some Aspects of Social Structure. (vol. two) London, George Allen and Unwin Ltd. Blackstone, William T. ed. (1969). The Concept of Equality. Minneapolis, Burgess Publishing Company. Blowers, Andrew, Stephanie Goodenough and Grahame Thompson. eds. (1977). Inequalities,Conflict and Change. Milton Keynes, The Open University Press. 188 189 Boateng, E.A. (1959). A Geography of Ghana. Cambridge, England: University Press. Brown, C.K. (1978). Urban Bias and Rural Development. The Case of Ghana. Unpublished Paper Presented at the African Studies Center Seminar. East Lansing, Michigan State University. Caldwell, J.C. (1967). Population Growth and Family Change in Africa. New York, Humanities Press. Casetti, Emilio, Leslie J. King and John Odland (1971). ”The Formulation and Testing of Concepts of Growth Poles in a Spatial Context," Environment and Planning 3i pp. 377-382. Chenery, H. et al.,(l974). Redistribution with Growth. London, Oxford University Press. Chenery, Hollis. (1979). Structural Change and Development Policy. New York, Oxford University Press for the World Bank. Cline, W.R. (1975). "Distribution and Development: A Survey of Literature," Journal of Development EconOmics. Vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 359-400. Coates, B.J., R.J.Johnston and P.L. Knox. (1977). Geography and Inequality. Oxford, University Press. Daily Graphic. (Accra). September 17, 1980, p. 1. columns l and 2. Darko, M.B.K. (1977). "Growth Poles and Growth Centers With Special Reference to Developing Countries —- a Critique" The Journal of Tropical Geography. vol. 43., pp. 12-22. de Grafthohnson, K.T. (1975). "Some Economic and Social 2 Indicators to Measure Development in West Africa,” International Social Science Journal. vol. 27, no. 1, pp.78—86. Dickson, Kwamina B. and George Benneh. (1970). A New Geo— graphy of Ghana. London, Longmans. Dos Santos, Theotonis. (1970). "The Structure of Dependence," American Economic Review, vol. 60, pp. 231-236. Ewusi, Kodwo. (1973). Economic Development Planning in Ghana. New York, Exposition Press. ’ 190 Ewusi, Kodwo (l977a). Economic Inequality in Ghana. Legon, University of Ghana Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research. . (1977b). Social and Economic Indicators For Planning and Monitoring Integrated Rural Development in Ghana. Ghana: University of Ghana. . (l977c)."The Towns of Ghana and Their Levels of Development," Universitas, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 156-169. Fage, J.D. Ghana: A Historical Interpretation. Madison, University of Wisconsin Press, 1959. Fallers, Lloyd A. (1973). Inequality: Social Stratification Reconsidered. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Feinberg, Walter, ed. (1978) Equality and Social Policy. ChicagozUniversity of Illinois Press. Fisher, H.B. (1971) Evaluation of Alternative Plans for New Communities: Toward Application of the Competition- For—Benefits Model. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Folson, B.D.G. (1977). “The Marxist Period in the Development of Socialist Ideology in Ghana, 1962—1966,” Universitas vol. 6, no. 1, pp.3-23. Friedmann, John (1979). "Basic Needs, Agropolitan Development, and Planning from Below", World Development, vol.7 pp.607—613. (1966). Regional Development Policy: A Case Study of Venezuela. Cambridge, The M.I.T. Press. Fuchs, R.J. and G.J. Demko (1979). "Geographical Inequality Under Socialism," Association of American Geographers Annals. vol. 69,pp. 304-318. Gaile, Gary L. (1974). ”Testing Growth-Center Hypothesis," Environment and Planning AG, pp. 185-189. ,(1977) “Effiquity: A Comparison of the Equality of Discrete Spatial Distributions," Economic Geography, vol. 53, pp. 265—282. Gaisie, S.K. (1969). Dynamics of Population Growth in Ghana-— Ghana Population Studies (no.1) Legon University of Ghana. "Ghana: Creation of a Tenth Region". West Africa. no. 3316 16th February, 1981, p.344, vol.2. 191 "Ghana's Golden Prospects". West Africa. no. 3313, 26th January 1981, pp. 149-152. Ghana, Census Office (1962). 1960 Population Census of Ghana. Accra, Government Printing Press. Ghana, National Planning Commission (1964). Seven-Year Plan for National Reconstruction and Development, Financial Years 1963/64-1969/70. (Approval by Parliament on 16th March 1964). Accra; Office of the Planning Com- mission. Ghana (1968). Two-Year Development Plan From Stabilization to Development: A Plan for the Period Mid—1968 to Mid-1970. Accra, State Publishing Corporation. Ghana (1970). One-Year Development Plan: July 1970 to June 1971. Accra-Tema, Ghana Publishing Corporation. Ghana (1975). Guidelines for the Five-Year Development Plan 1975-1980. Accra—Tema, Ghana Publishing Corporation. Ghana (1977). Five-Year Development Plan 1975/76-1979/80. Part I. Accra, Ministry of Economic Planning. Gilbert, A.;Goodman, D.E. eds. (1976) Development Planning and Spatial Structure. New York, Wiley. Gitelson, Susan Aurelia (1972). "How are Development Projects Selected? The Case of the U.N.D.P. in Uganda and Tanzania," The African Review, vol. 2.,.no. 2., pp. 365-379. Goldman, S.M. and C. Sussangkarn (1978). "On the Concept of Fairness”, Journal of Economic Theory. vol. 19, October, pp. 210-216. Gould, Peter. (1964). "A Note on Research into the Diffusion of Development," Journal of Modern African Studies, vol. 2., pp. 123-125. . (1969). Spatial Diffusion. Commission on College Geography Resource Paper No. 4. Washington, D.C.; Association of American Geographers. . (1970). "Tanzania 1920-63: The Spatial Impress of the Modernization Process," World Politics. vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 149-170. Grergerson, H.M. (1973). "The Role of Forestry in Regional Economic Development, An Alternative View," Journal of Forestry, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 98-99. 192 Grove, David and Laszlo Huszar (1965). The Towns of Ghana: The Role of Service Centers in Regional Planning. London, Oxford University Press. Gugler, Josef and William G. Flanagan (1978). Urbanization and Social Change in West Africa. New York, Cambridge University Press. Haggett, Peter (1979). Geography: A Modern Synthesis. 3rd ed. New York: Harper and Row Publishers. pp. 297-317. Harris, Donald S. (1980). Country Labour Profile Ghana. Washington, U.S. Department of Labour, Buearu of International Labour Affairs, Office of Foreign Labour Affairs. Hewings, Geoffrey, J.D. (1978). "The Trade—Off between Aggregate National Efficiency and Interregional Equity. Some Recent Empirical Evidence." Economic Geography. vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 254-263. Hinderink, J. and J. Sterkenburg, (1975). Anatomy of An African Town: A Social Economic Study of Cape Coast, Ghana. Utrecht, State University of Utrecht Department of Geography. Howard, Rhoda (1978). Colonialism and Underdevelopment in Ghana. New York, Africana Publishing Company. Hunter, J.M. (1965). "Regional Patterns of Population Growth in Ghana, 1948-1960". in Whittow, J.R. and Wood, P.D. eds. Essays in Geography for Austin Miller. Reading, University of Reading. . (1966). Review of David Grove and Laszlo Huszar's l'The Towns of Ghana: The Role of Service Centers in Regional Planning". Geographical Journal. vol. 132, p. 111. Johnson, E.A.J. (1970). The Organization of Space in Developing Countries. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Univer— sity Press. Kamarck, Andrew M. (1976). The Tropics and Economic Develop— ment. Baltimore, The John Hopkins University Press. Kaufman, Robert R., Daniel S. Gella and Harry I. Chernotsky (1975)."A Preliminary Test of the Theory of Dependency," Comparative Politics. vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 303-330. Kay, G.B. (1972). The Political Economy of Colonialism in Ghana. A Collection of Documents and Statistics 1900— 1960. Cambridge, The University Press. 193 Killick, Tony (1978). Development Economics in Action. A Study of Economic Policies in Ghana. New York, St. Martins Press. Kravis, Irving, B. (1960). "International Differences in the Distribution of Income," Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 42., no. 4, pp. 408—416. Kromm, David E. (1972). "Limitations on the Role of Forestry in Regional Economic Development," Journal of Forestry, vol. 70, no. 10, pp. 630-633. Kulinski, Antoni ed. (1972). Growth Poles and Growth Centers in Regional Planning. The Hague, Mouton and Company. Kuznets, S. (1955) "Economic Growth and Income Inequality." American Economic Review. vol 45, no. 1, pp. 1-28. Mallock, W.H. (1899) Social Equality. A Study in a Missing Science. New York, R.F. Fenno and Company. McAllister, D.M. (1976). "Equity and Efficiency in Public Facility Location," Geographical Analysis. vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 47-63. McGee, T.G. (1976). "Hawkers and Hookers: Making Out in the Third World City. Some Southeast Asian Examples", Manpower and Unemployment Research, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 3-21. New York Times, September 3, 1980, p.3. Nez, George (1962). "National Physical Development Plan--1. A Pioneering Effort in Ghana," The Economic Bulletin of Ghana, vol. 6, no. 3, pp.18-25. .(1962). "National Physical Development Plan - Content Summary," The Economic Bulletin of Ghana, vol. 7, no.2, pp. 30-35. Niculescu, Barbu. (1958). Colonial Planning. A Comparative Study. London7 George Allen and Unwin Ltd. Niculescu, Margaret. (1956). "Some Aspects of the Housing Situation in Accra Today," West African Institute of Social and Economic Research, Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Conference. Ibadan University College pp. 105-112. Nie, N.H. pp 31.,(1975). Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, 2nd ed., New York. McGraw-Hill Book Company. 194 Omuta, G.B.D. (1979). The State Versus the Local Government Area in Nigeria's Spatial Planning in the 1980's: Requiem or Reality? Unpublished Paper. Benin City, Nigeria: University of Benin Department of Geography and Regional Planning. Onokerhoraye, A.E. (1978). “Planning for Rural Development in Nigeria,“ Community Development Journal. vol. 13 pp. 29-34. Oshima, Harry T. (1962). "The International Comparison of Size Distribution of Family Incomes with Special Reference to Asia," The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 439—445. Oxaal, Ivar, Tony Barnett and David Boodhn eds. (1975). Beyond the Sociology of Development. Economy and Society in Latin America and Africa. Boston, Routeledge and Kegan Paul. Porter, Philip W. and DeSouza, Anthony R. (1974). The Under- development and Modernization of the Third World. Commission on College Geography, Resource Paper No. 28, Washington, D.C. Association of American Geo- graphers. Rao, M.V.S. (1975). ”Socio—economic Indicators for Develop— ment Planning," International Social Science Journal. vol. 27, no. 1, pp.121—149. Republic of Ghana. Central Bureau of Statistics (n.d.). Statistical Handbook 1970. Accra Public Relations Department, Central Sales Division. Roden, D. (1974). "Regional Inequality and Rebellion in the Sudan," Geographical Review, vol. 64, pp. 498-516. Rodney, Walter (1974). How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Washington, D.C. Howard University Press. Sakashita, N. (1967). "Regional Allocation of Investment," Papers, Regional Science Association, vol. 19. Shryock, Henry 8., Jr.; Jacob S. Siegel and Associates (1976). The Methods and Materials of Demography. (Condensed Edition by Edward G. Stockwell). New York, Academic Press. Singal, M.S. (1973). Input-Output Table of Ghana, 1968. Accra, Central Bureau of Statistics. 195 .Smith, T.V. (1927). The American Philosophy of Equality. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press. Soja, Edward W. (1968). The Geography of Modernization in Kenya. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press. . (1976). Spatial Inequality in Africa. Los Angeles, School of Architecture and Urban Plan- ning. University of California at Los Angeles. Soja, Edward and Tobin, Richard (1974). "The Geography of Modernization: Paths, Patterns and Process of Spatial Change in Developing Countries,” In R. Brunner and G. Brewer eds. Political Development and Change: A Policy Approach. New York, Free Press, pp. 197-243. Stohr, Walter and Franz Todtling (1977). "Spatial Equity—- ' Some Anti-Thesis to Current Regional Development Doctrine," Papers, Regional Science Association, vol. 38, pp. 33-53. Symons, J. (1971). "Some Comments on Equity and Efficiency in Public Facility Location Modes," Antipode, vol. 3, mo.1, pp. 54-67. Tetteh, Austin (1971). The Spatial Structure of the Labour Force in Ghana. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. United Nations (1972). Income Distribution in Latin America New York, United Nations Press. United States, General Accounting Office, (1977). Impact of Population Assistance to an African Country. Washing- ton, Department of State, Agency for International Development Report to Congress. "Upper West to be Created," Legon Observer, vol. 13, no. 1 30th January-12th February, 1981, p.23.col. 2. I Villamil, J.J. (1977). "Development Planning and Dependence," Institute of Development Studies Bulletin, vol. 9 no.1, pp. 57-61. I Voelkner, Harold E. (1974). Scalogram Measurement and Mapping for Rural Development Planning and Monitoring. Geneva, United Nations Research, Institute for Social Develop- ment (UNRISD). Ward, W.E.F. (1967). A History of Ghana. Revised 4th Edition, London, Allen and Unwin. 196 Wallerstein, Immanuel. (1976). "The Three Stages of African Involvement in the World Economy,” in Peter Gutkind and Immanuel Wallerstein eds. The Political Economy of Contemporary Africa. Beverly Hills, California, Sage Publication. Whyte, William F. (1981). "Participatory Approaches to Agricultural Research and Development: A State-of— the—Art Paper". Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Rural Development Committee, Center for International Studies. Williamson, J.G. (1965). "Regional Inequality and the Process of National Development: A Description of the Pat- terns," Economic Development and Cultural Change. vol. 13, PART II, vol. 4, pp.3—84. Xiarchos, Stavros (1978). "Empirical Works on the Growth Center Concept," The Review of Regional Studies. vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 28—40. "7111111111111“