Теоретико-методологічні засади дослідження урбанізаційних процесів у географічному вимірі
Альтернативна назва
Theoretical and methodological principles of researching urbanization processes in the geographical dimension
Вантажиться...
Дата
2025
Науковий керівник
Укладач
Редактор
Назва журналу
ISSN
2303-9914
E-ISSN
2415-315X
Назва тому
Видавець
Одеський національний університет імені І. І. Мечникова
Анотація
Стаття обґрунтовує теоретико-методологічні підходи до аналізу урбанізації в географічному вимірі та порівнює Україну, США і ЄС. Урбанізацію трактовано як комплексний соціально-економічний і просторовий процес. На основі статистики динаміки міського населення та структури агломерацій виявлено відмінності у концентрації метрополій, поліцентричності та диспропорціях, окреслено ключові воєнні виклики України і напрями подальших досліджень.
Problem Statement and Purpose. Urbanization in the early twenty-first century is a leading driver of spatial, demographic and socio-economic transformation, yet its trajectories and spatial outcomes differ markedly across national urban systems. This makes comparative, geographically grounded analysis essential for clarifying universal and country-specific patterns of urban change. The purpose of the article is to substantiate theoretical and methodological approaches to studying urbanization in the geographical dimension and to compare urbanization in Ukraine, the United States, and leading European Union countries, focusing on similarities and differences in urban systems, the dynamics of urban population shares, the spatial organization of agglomerations, and the socio-economic consequences of urban development, with special attention to contemporary challenges for Ukraine in the context of war, post-war reconstruction, and European integration. Data and Methods. The study combines classical and contemporary theoretical frameworks with a multi-method geographical toolkit. The theoretical basis includes classical sociological interpretations of urbanization (Tönnies, Durkheim, Wirth), spatial models of city structure and internal differentiation (concentric, sectoral and multiple-nuclei models), the central-place framework and rank-size regularities, the concept of the urbanization transition with its sigmoid dynamics, and globalization-driven approaches such as global-city and polycentric urban-system theories. Empirically, the article relies on open international databases (World Urbanization Prospects, World Bank indicators), U.S. Census materials, EU-level statistical and analytical sources, and harmonized comparative series for Ukraine. Methods include analysis of time-series indicators of urban population shares, comparative assessment of agglomeration scale and structure, and interpretation of spatial patterns through a geographical lens, taking into account definitional differences in “urban population” across countries. Results. The comparison shows that Ukraine, the U.S. and the EU have reached a mature stage of urbanization, with urban population shares in the early 2020s ranging from about 70% to over 80%. However, their recent dynamics diverge: Ukraine exhibits near-stagnation of urbanization since the 1990s under demographic decline; the U.S. continues to increase its urban share through overall population growth and sustained suburbanization; the EU demonstrates moderate growth approaching saturation. Structural contrasts are sharper than aggregate indicators suggest. Ukraine’s urban network is formally polycentric but characterized by pronounced economic over-centration in Kyiv and deep capital-periphery disparities, now intensified by war-related destruction and internal displacement that have reshaped settlement patterns and the hierarchy of centers. The U.S. model is dominated by numerous large metropolitan areas with extensive suburban belts, strong concentration of GDP in major metros, and marked socio-spatial segregation alongside regional contrasts such as the coastal-core versus “Rust Belt” divide. The EU displays a comparatively balanced polycentric system where large, medium and small cities collectively sustain territorial cohesion, though east-west and core-periphery gaps persist. Overall, the findings confirm both universal regularities of urbanization and distinct national trajectories, implying that Ukraine’s post-war spatial policy should prioritize strengthening polycentricity, reducing regional inequalities, and integrating reconstruction into a long-term sustainable urbanization strategy.
Problem Statement and Purpose. Urbanization in the early twenty-first century is a leading driver of spatial, demographic and socio-economic transformation, yet its trajectories and spatial outcomes differ markedly across national urban systems. This makes comparative, geographically grounded analysis essential for clarifying universal and country-specific patterns of urban change. The purpose of the article is to substantiate theoretical and methodological approaches to studying urbanization in the geographical dimension and to compare urbanization in Ukraine, the United States, and leading European Union countries, focusing on similarities and differences in urban systems, the dynamics of urban population shares, the spatial organization of agglomerations, and the socio-economic consequences of urban development, with special attention to contemporary challenges for Ukraine in the context of war, post-war reconstruction, and European integration. Data and Methods. The study combines classical and contemporary theoretical frameworks with a multi-method geographical toolkit. The theoretical basis includes classical sociological interpretations of urbanization (Tönnies, Durkheim, Wirth), spatial models of city structure and internal differentiation (concentric, sectoral and multiple-nuclei models), the central-place framework and rank-size regularities, the concept of the urbanization transition with its sigmoid dynamics, and globalization-driven approaches such as global-city and polycentric urban-system theories. Empirically, the article relies on open international databases (World Urbanization Prospects, World Bank indicators), U.S. Census materials, EU-level statistical and analytical sources, and harmonized comparative series for Ukraine. Methods include analysis of time-series indicators of urban population shares, comparative assessment of agglomeration scale and structure, and interpretation of spatial patterns through a geographical lens, taking into account definitional differences in “urban population” across countries. Results. The comparison shows that Ukraine, the U.S. and the EU have reached a mature stage of urbanization, with urban population shares in the early 2020s ranging from about 70% to over 80%. However, their recent dynamics diverge: Ukraine exhibits near-stagnation of urbanization since the 1990s under demographic decline; the U.S. continues to increase its urban share through overall population growth and sustained suburbanization; the EU demonstrates moderate growth approaching saturation. Structural contrasts are sharper than aggregate indicators suggest. Ukraine’s urban network is formally polycentric but characterized by pronounced economic over-centration in Kyiv and deep capital-periphery disparities, now intensified by war-related destruction and internal displacement that have reshaped settlement patterns and the hierarchy of centers. The U.S. model is dominated by numerous large metropolitan areas with extensive suburban belts, strong concentration of GDP in major metros, and marked socio-spatial segregation alongside regional contrasts such as the coastal-core versus “Rust Belt” divide. The EU displays a comparatively balanced polycentric system where large, medium and small cities collectively sustain territorial cohesion, though east-west and core-periphery gaps persist. Overall, the findings confirm both universal regularities of urbanization and distinct national trajectories, implying that Ukraine’s post-war spatial policy should prioritize strengthening polycentricity, reducing regional inequalities, and integrating reconstruction into a long-term sustainable urbanization strategy.
Опис
Ключові слова
урбанізація, міська система, агломерація, урбанізаційний перехід, просторовий розвиток, поліцентричність, Україна, США, Європейський Союз, urbanization, urban system, agglomeration, urbanization transition, spatial development, polycentricity, Ukraine, United States, European Union
Бібліографічний опис
Коломієць К. В., Рутковецький О. І. Теоретико-методологічні засади дослідження урбанізаційних процесів у географічному вимірі. Вісник Одеського національного університету. Географічні та геологічні науки. 2025. Т. 30, вип. 2(47). С. 191–203.
УДК
911.375:314.8