The Dictionary of Human Geography

Comp. by: VPugazhenthi Stage : Revises1 ChapterID: 9781405132879_4_S Date:1/4/
09 Time:15:23:36 Filepath:H:/00_Blackwell/00_3B2/Gregory-9781405132879/appln/3B2/
revises/9781405132879_4_S.3d

over succeeding generations: urbanization

is both the outcome of social stratification

and a means wherebyhegemonyis perpetu-

ated. Themorphologyof pre-industrial cities

reflects this interdependence between social

and spatial order:poweris consolidated by

the ruling class through its residential location

in the city centre, the most protected and

most accessible district. Here, residents forge

a social solidarity based on their literacy,

access to the surplus (which is stored in the

central area of the city), and shared upper-

class culture, which includes distinctive

manners and patterns of speech. Elite cluster-

ing in the city centre is reinforced by the lack

of rapid transportation.

The privileged central district is surrounded

by haphazardly arranged neighbourhoods

housing the lower class. Households in these

areas are sorted by occupation/income (mer-

chants near the centre, followed by minor bur-

eaucrats, artisans and, finally, the unskilled),

ethnic origin and extended family networks.

Merchants are generally not accorded elite

status, since power is achieved through reli-

gious and military control, while trade is

viewed with suspicion. The model is less

clear on the residential placement of outcast

groups (typically slaves and other conquered

peoples): some of these perform service roles

and are intermingled with the rest of the urban

population, while others live at the extreme

periphery of the city – frequently beyond its

walls.

In formulating this model, Sjoberg reverses

the logic used by Burgess – who placed com-

mercial activities at the centre of the city, and a

succession of poor through wealthy residential

districts around it. Sjoberg notes that the

Burgess model is applicable only to industrial

cities, where production and commerce propel

economic growth and where capitalists are

accorded high social standing. Further, he

argues that human ecology incorrectly treats

urbanization as an independent social force,

when in reality urban growth should be seen

as a ‘dependent variable’, as it depends on the

distribution of social power, and on available

technology. Empirical investigations of the

Sjoberg model have been generally supportive,

but caution that the model cannot account for

the intricate details of urban development

across different cultural contexts. Others have

criticized the theoretical content of Sjoberg’s

work, especially his stress on the role of tech-

nology and his uncritical view of social power.

Sjoberg’s functionalist logic (which blurs dis-

tinctions between causes and consequences),

however, remains largely unnoticed and

unchallenged (seefunctionalism). dh

Suggested reading

Carter (1983); Langton (1975); Ley (1983);

Morris (1994); Radford (1979); Wheatley (1963).

skid row Essentially a North American

term, ‘skid row’ traditionally referred to areas

characterized by concentrations of rooming

houses and accommodation for single men

working in the timber industry: over time,

the term has become a more general short-

hand for areas wherehomelessnessis evident.

Often offering hostel or temporary accommo-

dation, skid rows are thus notorious as spaces

of rough sleeping, with temporary pavement

encampments or ‘cardboard cities’ offering

refuge for those who congregate in these areas.

In the larger skid rows, intricatesocial net-

worksand relationships may develop within

the community, as well as between the

service-dependent and those service providers

who seek to assist them with welfare, alcohol,

drug andhealthissues (Rowe and Wolch,

1990). In many instances, dwellers of areas

described as skid row districts have fought to

contest this designation: despite this, the term

persists in the North American social imagin-

ation as a pejorative description of the social

margins of the city.

Studies by urban sociologists and geograph-

ers have suggested that the development of

skid row areas in North American cities has,

in some cases, been connected to policies of

containment designed to remove street home-

less populations from wealthier locales. Yet

currently the number of skid row districts is

declining markedly, as corporate gentrification

of the central city squeezes homeless popula-

tions from sites that they have sometimes

occupied for decades – see, for example,

Smith (1996b) on the forcible removal of the

homeless and itinerant population from

Tompkins Square Park, New York. In such

instances, anti-begging ordinances and zoning

laws have been used to disperse visible home-

less populations and ‘sanitize’ areas prior to

gentrification. Although the erasure of

such ‘landscapes of despair’ should not be a

cause for regret, it generates some significant

questions about how welfare providers

might best target resources to increasingly

dispersed homeless populations (Lee and

Price-Spratlen, 2004), as well as raising the

spectre of the increasedprivatizationofpub-

lic space. As such, the disappearance of skid

row areas is rarely taken as evidence of an

Gregory / The Dictionary of Human Geography 9781405132879_4_S Final Proof page 686 1.4.2009 3:23pm

SKID ROW