Equilibrium versus Dynamics in Urban Modelling

David Simmonds, Paul Waddell and Michael Wegener
Additional contact information
David Simmonds: David Simmonds Consultancy Ltd, 3-14 Mill Lane, Cambridge CB2 1RQ, England, and Institute for Housing, Urban and Real Estate Research, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland
Paul Waddell: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, 316 Wurster Hall, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720-1870, USA
Michael Wegener: Spiekermann and Wegener Urban and Regional Research, Lindermannstrasse 10, D-44137 Dortmund, Germany

Environment and Planning B, 2013, vol. 40, issue 6, 1051-1070

Abstract: The use of equilibrium formulations in urban modelling is increasingly challenged by models that explicitly address the dynamics of urban change. Equilibrium models assume that urban land use and transport converge to equilibrium between supply and demand and focus on comparative static analysis of these equilibria. Dynamic models consider the different speeds of processes of urban change and concentrate on their outcomes over time and the path dependence this implies. It is becoming increasingly apparent that without understanding the inherent inertia of different subsystems of cities it is impossible to assess their likely responses to land-use or transport policies. With new challenges from energy scarcity and climate change, the time horizon of urban planning is extending beyond the present generation; this makes a long-term perspective of urban models even more important. In this paper our aim is to revive the debate on whether modelling intended to inform decision making can reasonably represent cities as if they were in or near equilibrium or whether it needs to recognise explicitly that they are continuously changing and far from equilibrium. We start with a classification of urban change processes by speed of adjustment and show how equilibrium models fail to deal with them. We discuss options of modelling dynamics and argue for recursive dynamics or quasi-dynamics as a rational trade-off between theory and operationality in spatially disaggregate urban models. We illustrate this by comparing how three existing recursive or quasi-dynamic urban models address temporal dynamics and close by suggesting research needs.

Keywords: urban change; urban modelling; equilibrium; dynamics; new challenges (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2013
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/b38208 (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:envirb:v:40:y:2013:i:6:p:1051-1070

DOI: 10.1068/b38208

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Environment and Planning B
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().