The continuing debate about urban bias

Gareth A. Jones and Stuart Corbridge
Additional contact information
Gareth A. Jones: Department of Geography and Environment, London School of Economics and Political Science
Stuart Corbridge: Development Studies Institute (DESTIN), London School of Economics and Political Science

Progress in Development Studies, 2010, vol. 10, issue 1, 1-18

Abstract: This article reviews the current state of the debate around the concept of ‘urban bias’. It first reviews Michael Lipton’s original formulation of an Urban Bias Thesis (UBT), and the initial debates that took shape in regard to his work and the work of Elliott Berg and Robert Bates. The main body of the article, however, considers a recent reworking of the UBT by Robert Eastwood and Michael Lipton, and four sets of objections that can be raised against it. Central to these objections are new accounts of the importance of mobility in constructing rural-urban livelihoods and claims emanating from the ‘new economic geography’ about the economic advantages of towns and cities. The article concludes with a short review of the implication of the continuing debate on ‘urban bias’ for public policy and Poverty Reduction Strategies.

Keywords: urban bias; poverty reduction; development policy; Michael Lipton (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2010
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/146499340901000101 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:prodev:v:10:y:2010:i:1:p:1-18

DOI: 10.1177/146499340901000101

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Progress in Development Studies
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().