Chicago School's Ecological Theory/ Monocentric City

- Concentric Zone Hypothesis: This theory is essentially based on Chicago's growth pattern identified by
Burgess (1925), a sociologist at Univeristy of Chicago. He theorized that there were five concentric
zones in a city, which were determined by spatial competitition.
a. The Loop (or Downtown, or Central Business District (CBD))
b. Transition Zone (Dense settlements, with business and light manufaturing)
c. Workingmen's Zone of homes (where laborers working in nearby factories reside)
d. Residential zone (Exclusive residential districts)
e. Commuters' zone (outlying suburban areas and satellite cities from which residents commute to
CBD).
Spatial competition decreases with distance from CBD, so that property prices are highest at CBD and
gradually decline towards the city's edge. The Hypothesis holds significance for its simplicity and for
how other more complex models like the ones below became variants of this model.

The Sector Theory

This theory is essentially a critique of the Concentric Zone Hypothesis proposed by Hoyt (1939). Hoyt
proposed that spatial competition is not the only source of a city's growth; other factors like prestigious
locations (hills, waterfronts), social kinship and affinity also play a role. Thus cities grow in sectors,
rather than in concentric zones. Lower income districts are not necessarily in a separate zone, but could
co-exist with more fashionable/ prestigious areas.
I think this is a variant of the Concentric Zone Hypothesis. For, if we simplify the Sector Theory, it will be
similar to the Concentric Zone Hypothesis. Even Hoyt found that over time, the more prestigious
locations (residential districts) moved out of the city radially along a path begun by the sectors in earlier
years (which implies spatial competition for locations near the CBD; more land could be had for same
price in the outer edges for spacious mansions).

Polycentric City

Again, a variation over the concentric zone hypothesis. As a city grows outward, other (smaller) CBDs
come up near the newly growing areas. Businesses relocate to these newer CBDs because of lower rent
and less problems in comparison to city centre (e.g. overcrowding, heavy traffic). Polycentric cities thus
have more than one CBD. Transportation patterns are more complex in a polycentric city as compared
to a monocentric city, since there is significant traffic between the secondary CBDs (in a monocentric
city, there is traffic only between the residential districts and the single CBD). [You can imagine this
based on your experience in LA. While LA downtown traffic is significant during morning and evening
hours, there is also traffic between Santa Monica, Culver City, Westwood, Long Beach, and so on).

Multiple Nuclei Theory
This theory advanced by Harriss and Ullman (1945) argues that there are distinctive districts where
activities are concentrated. The difference with the Concentric Zone Hypothesis is the following: While
the Concentric Zone Hypothesis proposed that cities grow in zones from the center out, the Multiple
Nuclei Theory proposes that these are not necessarily zones, but that similar activities are grouped
together in certain districts. Thus we have Central Business District, Residential Districts, Light
manufacturing Districts, Low-income Districts, Red light Districts, Suburban Districts, etc. The spatial
distribution of these districts is more complex than that of the monocentric city.