• No se han encontrado resultados

ACTIVIDADES DE RECUPERACIÓN

In document PROGRAMACIÓN DIDÁCTICA DE SAXOFÓN (página 46-51)

McCarty, J.W., ’Australian Capital Cities in the Nineteenth Century', Australian Economic History Review, 1970, 10, p.127.

3

Hall, Peter, The World Cities, World University Library, London, 1968, p .17.

large urban populations which was rapidly emerging in the mother country was transferred to the colonies. Victoria was settled by a

technologically advanced people with the intention and the means of developing a complementary economy oriented to markets in the United Kingdom.

The founding of Melbourne in 1835, prior to the opening up of inland areas, gave the town an initial advantage which was later to become unassailable. The absence of historical antecedents and the nature of the resource base favoured the development of a primate urban system, that is a settlement pattern dominated by a single city. Few rural areas acquired dense populations because the main rural land uses, sheep grazing and wheat farming, did not require a large labour force. The only sizeable inland towns, Ballarat and Bendigo, grew up on gold fields. Beyond the gold fields, conditions were unfavourable

for the creation of large inland towns because rural development

4

coincided with road and rail construction which limited isolation. Although the construction of overland communications linked port and hinterland, the very nature of the communications system helped to perpetuate some forms of isolation and foster metropolitan

aggrandizement. Railways were built predominantly in a radial pattern focussing on Port Phillip Bay, so that most east-west linkages were possibly only via Melbourne. Politial manoeuvering in Melbourne stifled independent regional development around other ports, notably Portland and Geelong, by cutting back funds for wharves and railways'* and later by introducing a system of freight charges which favoured Melbourne over its rivals.^ The inaccessibility of inland towns from one another and from other ports was further abetted by a lack of co-ordinated planning of communications which led to the anomaly of the construction of different gauge railways in Victoria and New South Wales. This phenomenon,

together with the high cost of overland transport, gave Melbourne economic hegemony throughout most of its tributary area. The settlement pattern

Robinson, K.W., 'Processes and Patterns of Urbanisation in Australia and New Zealand', New Zealand Geographer, 1962, 18, p.34.

Turner, I.A.H., 'The growth of Melbourne: an historical account', in Troy, P.N. (ed.), Urban Redevelopment in Australia, Urban Research Unit, Australian National University, Canberra, 1967, pp.24-7.

Blainey, Geoffrey, The Tyranny of Distance, Sun Books, Melbourne, 1971, pp.264-5.

45

in Victoria, as well as in other states, evolved in isolation with the result that Australia still has no unified urban hierarchy but a series of primate systems based on the states.^ The momentum gained through being the transport, administrative and servicing focus for Victoria, and for some areas over the border, was self-reinforcing. The expansion of Melbourne stimulated the development of manufacturing industry, and the city became the dominant industrial centre in Victoria, enjoying the advantages of having the largest domestic market, the biggest labour supply, good communications, and ready access to fuel and imported materials.

Melbourne's legacy from the nineteenth century of centralisation, which bestowed undisputed dominance in the economic, political and cultural life of the State, was reinforced in the twentieth century by the

continuation or accentuation of earlier trends. The concentration of population around Port Phillip Bay helped perpetuate the barrier of physical distance between Victoria and population concentrations over the border, despite continuing improvements in communications and growing economic interdependence between states. Furthermore, the greater

mobility made possible by the private motor car enabled people to travel longer distances to obtain goods and services, thereby placing small towns at a disadvantage compared with regional centres and the metropolis.

Melbourne's leadership in the early industrialisation of Victoria was strengthened by the emergence in the twentieth century of the market as the maximum profit location, or at least the minimum risk location, for most types of manufacturing industry and associated service industries.

In these circumstances, a metropolis which was also a port obtained unequalled advantages as an industrial centre. Closely allied with the technological changes which freed industry from earlier material, energy or transport orientations was the revolution in employment distribution which made tertiary industry the principal employer. This trend also

favoured metropolitan growth as tertiary activity inevitably became concentrated in the main centre of population and secondary industry.

While the metropolis benefited from the expansion of tertiary

employment, the countryside continued to offer a relatively meagre number of new employment opportunities, since mechanisation and advances in technology increased production without necessitating a substantial increase in the

Johnston, R.J., 'Population Changes in Australian Small Towns 1961-1966', Rural Sociology, 1969, 34, p.213.

46

numbers employed in agriculture. Although agriculture contributed to the development of non-metropolitan urban areas, because of the need for local services or the local processing of goods, low rural population densities

severely limited the absolute growth of such towns. Rural service centres

were able to build up sizeable populations only if more intensive farming was practicable, or if a town was able to draw its clientele from an

extensive area.

2.3 Determinants of the Australian Urban Pattern

Although the evolution of Victoria's settlement pattern appears to be relatively simple, the general determinants of urbanisation in

Australia remain a subject of speculation. Several ideas about these

causes have been formulated, each of which emphasises a limited number of explanatory factors, such as the isolation of the Australian continent, the relationship between population and production, and the effects of

the capitalist system. In the search for the mainsprings of urbanisation

two principle types of ideas have been advanced: those concentrating on

the relationship between settlement and the physical environment, and those emphasising the relationship of settlement evolution to economic

and social processes. Basically, they seek to provide answers to the

following questions: (1) How has the distribution of settlement in

Australia been determined? (2) Why do the majority of people live in the

capital cities? (3) Why is Australia so highly urbanised?

2.3.1 'The Dead Heart'

In discussions of urbanisation in Australia, the physical setting tends to be taken for granted as imposing limits to agricultural land uses and restricting most settlement to the continental periphery,

especially the southeast. The aridity of the interior of the continent

has been a major influence in Australian urbanisation, helping to perpetuate

early settlement patterns. Fewer large towns are needed to service settled

areas than would have been required if Australia had productive soils in the interior instead of deserts and semi-deserts. Mining towns are an exception to the general coastal concentration of settlement, as in recent times even the most inhospitable lands have not deterred companies from exploiting mineral deposits. Yet, mining towns in remote areas can have little generative influence on the surrounding countryside, and remain isolated settlements with limited prospects for sustained population growth.

47

While the role of the physical environment in limiting the advance of the settlement frontier is generally accepted today, in the 1920s it was a controversial idea, the main debaters being the geographer Griffith Taylor and a number of politicians and journalists. Perry notes that the 1920s was a time of optimism about the development potential of Australia, a time when pessimistic population forecasts were regarded as

g

unpatriotic. Taylor’s thinking followed that of Gregory, the originator 9

of the concept of ’the dead heart of Australia'. Taylor contended that: 'The future millions of Australia are going to

find their dwelling-places and occupations in the lands already known by 1865. The 'Empty Lands' of Australia are a burden to the Commonwealth rather than an asset, and their vast potentialities exist only in the mind of

the ignorant booster.^-0

Writing in the 1940s, Taylor summed up the argument of his former opponents as follows:

'There have been many suggestions as to the future population of Australia. The politician of a few decades ago had a simple technique based on his admiration for American progress. Since Australia and the United States have the same area, in his opinion Australia must be able to support 120 millions of white settlers, when she had been developed as long as U.S.A. Sometimes this kind of investigator went a little more deeply into the problem, and fitted most of the countries of Europe into the map of Australia. Since the southern continent is three-quarters of the area of Europe, simple division will tell us that ^ Australia should support about 380 million people.'

Fortunately, the popularity of such naive reasoning did not endure, and although Taylor's own more reasonable conclusions have become dated, there

Perry, T.M., 'Climate and Settlement in Australia 1700-1930: Some Theoretical Considerations', in Andrews, John (ed.), Frontiers and Me n , Cheshire, Melbourne, 1966, p.151.

9

Cited by Perry, p.149.

^°Taylor, Griffith, Australia: A Study of Warm Environments and their Effect on British Settlement, Methuen, London, 1947, p.444.

11

48

is little dispute that ’the dead heart of A u s t r a l i a ’ remains a formidable obstacle to changes in the pattern of urbanisation.

2.3.2 'The Tyranny of D i s t a n c e '

The only aspect of the physical environment which has been given any prominence in recent discussions of urbanisation is the factor of distance. In his book The Tyranny of Distance the historian Geoffrey Blainey argued that physical distance played an important role in the shaping of

12

Australian history, including the rise of cities and regions. His

discussion examined the consequences of distance both between Australia and Europe, and within Australia itself.

In the nineteenth century, distance from Europe made the cost of exporting goods from Australia prohibitive except where cargoes had a high value per

ton. Wool and gold became Australia's main exports as they were valuable

enough to sustain the cost of reaching a world market. While distance

helped to determine the nature of Australia's early exports, Blainey argued further that the role of distance in the production of wool and gold fostered the centralisation of population in Australia.

Most sheep runs were widely scattered in inland areas, and farming districts were too thinly populated to give rise to many inland commercial

towns. Before railways were built, inland transport was expensive and

inflated the cost of most goods in the sheep farming districts. Moreover

the sheep runs offered few social amenities such as schools and churches,

and employment opportunities for women were scarce. Such conditions

encouraged married migrants to settle in the main sea ports. As a result,

the demand for goods and services in the sea ports increased rapidly with

a concomitant rise in the demand for labour. Blainey concluded that 'the

13

isolation of the sheep runs swelled the existing towns on the coast.'

Like the wool industry, gold mining had a multiplying effect on population growth, stemming largely from the location of the Victorian and New South Wales gold deposits:

'Because ports were near, the cost of European

goods was cheaper. Because forests were so near,

the goldfields got cheap timber for their

underground workings and cheap firewood for their

Blainey, The Tyranny of D i s t a n c e , p.ix.

13

49

steam boilers. Because fertile soil was so near

they ultimately got cheap grain and meat. Thus

the cost of living for miners was lower. They

could work many gold deposits which would have been profitless if they had lain in a less

accessible and favoured region.'^

Although gold mining created concentrations of population in inland areas the port cities gained added momentum from the trade and wealth generated

by gold. Increased population in inland areas led to the building of

railways which gave factories in the coastal cities a larger market and some of the economies of large-scale p r o d u c t i o n . A t the same time the gold rushes increased the demand for imported goods which had further multiplier effects on the ports.

Blainey's discussion of the conquest of distance and its impact on the growth of the capital cities was mainly concerned w ith the nineteenth century, when the ’tyrannical' reign of distance was at its height.

Nevertheless, he also made reference to the effect of the motor car on 16

settlement evolution, and concluded that the present-day concentration

of population on the boomerang-shaped southeastern corner of Australia - 'the Boomerang Coast' - was a consequence of the role of distance:

'The density of population along the Boomerang Coast, however, is realistic, economically and

socially. As most people and economic activities

are concentrated into one relatively compact region, the cost of transporting raw materials, foodstuffs,

manufactured goods and power is cheaper. Within

that region distance is still a problem but a

manageable problem. Through the concentration

of population on the Boomerang Coast, Australia spends much less of its energy in carrying goods

and supplying services over vast distances. Its

standard of living and its ability to support a larger population are much higher than if its main economic activities and its population had been

scattered around the rim of the continent. The

Boomerang Coast, and the dominant cities on the coast, were the simplest solution to the problems of d i s t a n c e . '17 14 Ibid., p .145 . 15 Ibid., p .145. 16 Ibid., p .296 17 Ibid., pp.146-7.

50

Blainey's explanation of the Boomerang Coast, however, over emphasies the role of distance to the exclusion of other aspects of the physical environment, such as the reliability and effectiveness of rainfall and the nature of the terrain. Australia's arid interior, and physical obstacles in coastal regions such as the Nullarbor Plain and the Great Dividing Range, are more important than distance in shaping the distribution of settlement. The Boomerang Coast is not the result of a logical solution to the problem of distance: peripheral settlement is inevitable since most of the

continental interior is a wasteland and deserts and mountains in the coastal region itself are further inducements to a concentration rather than a

scattering of settlement.

2.3.3 'The Normal State'

Some other generalisations about the causes of centralised development were incorporated into the model of settlement evolution proposed by the

18

geographer A.J. Rose in 1966. At the time Rose was writing two opposing views were current concerning the evolution of urban hierarchies. On one hand it was argued by Berry that the distribution of city sizes in a country tends to assume a 'rank-size' pattern which has the following form when cities are ranked in descending order of population size:

P - Pn / rq r 1

The equation, the so-called 'rank-size rule', states that the population of the rth ranking city (P^) equals the population of the largest city (P^) divided by the rank (r) raised to an exponent (q) which usually has a value close to unity. On the other hand, there was the view, held by Jefferson, that urban hierarchies tend to evolve towards a pattern of 'primacy' where the largest city has several times more population than the second city,

19

In document PROGRAMACIÓN DIDÁCTICA DE SAXOFÓN (página 46-51)

Documento similar