Ten millennia ago, there were no cities at all and people spent almost all their time seeking for food through hunting and gathering . With time, however, the concept of farming was developed but the tools available were not adequate. Farmers would find themselves having to work almost all the time for food and also move from place to place in search of suitable environment. The advent of the city can be associated with the advent of tools which enabled a larger scale of farming and for one person to cultivate enough for a few people. This allowed some people free time to create careers that were not tied to food production. The combination of a stable food source and crafts led to the advent of cities. Better food and water sources, as well as improved craft, led to bigger cities. Big in this instant did not mean a large area but rather a large population squeezed into a small area and for security behind a high wall. These forms of cities endured with small modifications such as storied buildings until the industrial revolution. This is what led to the advent of larger cities akin to what we have today. In summary, one constant that has attracted people to cities is employment. Security, food, and water have on the other part acted as enablers to the advent of growth of cities.
Urbanization Changes in the United States over the Course of the 20th Century
Considering the 10000-year history of cities above, the beginning of the 20 th century found the USA at the height of the larger cities that came with the industrial revolution. Compared to their European counterparts, American cities were relatively younger but growing at a very fast rate (Tindall & Shi, 2013). A large cross-section of Americans was living in cities but the majority was still in the rural areas. Towards the end of the 19 th century, the concept of the suburb had started to take root and the affluent in the city had begun moving into them. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 21% of all Americans were living in cities with 7% living in suburbs. The city population, as well as the suburb population, continued to grow through the century and by the advent of the Second World War, 32% of all Americans were living in the cities with 15% living in suburbs (Hobbs & Stoops, 2002) . This marked the epitome of the city population. From the city, population ratio stagnated until it started reducing at a very slow rate to stand at 30% in the year 2000. It is worthy of notice that cities did not get smaller as between the 1940s and the year 2000, the US population tripled. At the same time, the suburb was steadily growing, getting to 23% of the entire population in 1950, 44% of the entire US population in 1980 and finally a half of the entire US population in the year 2000 (Hobbs & Stoops, 2002) . The suburb indeed grew to become akin to smaller cities leading to the development of suburbs of suburbs which are populated rural areas near cities.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Three Reasons why the United States has shifted from Rural to Urban Settlement Patterns
Labor
Labor is the main driver for rural to urban settlement in the USA. At the advent of the 20 th century, most Americans lived in the rural areas but were gradually moving to cities to seek for labor opportunities. The growth of industries is key to this factor because people naturally congregate where natural resources favor human settlement. Industries on the other hand, congregate where resources such as raw materials and energy favor industrial activities. To get work, people follow companies to the cities (Tindall & Shi, 2013).
Availability of Amenities
No matter how crucial labor is, people will not move to cities unless there are enough amenities such as food, housing, water, sewerage, and entertainment. These facilities were available in a state only capable of supporting a few people leading to small settlements in the rural area. The ability of technology to provide these facilities in massive volumes in the cities was another cause of movement from rural areas to urban areas (Tindall & Shi, 2013).
Better Transport and Communication Facilities
The ability to move to the city from the rural area as well as the capability to occasionally visit the rural area is among the other major drivers of rural to urban settlement patterns (Wiewel & Persky, 2015). Key among this is the development of good road networks as well as railways. A lot of rural to urban migration happened along railway lines and areas where new roads have been built. The ability to better communicate and keep in touch has also been an important factor for rural to urban migration (Tindall & Shi, 2013). One among this is the ability for real-time communication such as the proliferation of phones.
How Transportation Systems Influenced the Growth of Cities in the United States
In spite of the city zone model, good transport is always a bearing factor on the size of a city. According to Duranton and Turner (2012), for every, an 10% road stock increase leads to a 2% population increase. This is because more and better roads breed more work thus more workers. Further as indicated above, better transport creates an ability to travel to the city and also occasionally visit the rural areas. This also leads to larger cities. Better transport also leads to better amenities hence a larger city population (Wiewel & Persky, 2015).
Concentric zone model
The concentric zone model is perhaps the most common format of unplanned town in the USA and takes the form of rings. The nucleus of the city which is the central business district (CBD) is at its very center (Wharton County Junior College, 2017). With other rings surrounding it, the poorest settlements being nearest while the most affluent are furthest. Among the most important members of a city is the relatively poor worker since they can only reside near their places of work due to pecuniary limitations (Groffman et al, 2014). Good transport means bringing supplies to these group enabling the city to keep growing. Further, a good transport network increases the distance that the other city dwellers such as those in the Residential zone can stay from the city. The affluent zones will be swallowed by the poorer residences with their inhabitants moving to the suburbs and local areas near the city. The further they can stay, the more room for the city to grow. Poor transport can lead to the stunting of a city under this model (Groffman et al, 2014).
Hoyt Model
This is a modification of the concentric zone model where the CBD remains at the center but each of the outer layers is designed in a manner to allow for expansion outwards (Wharton County Junior College, 2017). The design had not factored cars which, however, will apply for the purposes of this essay. Good transport facilities will cause the city to grow and increase outwards. The segmentation will remain intact but each segment will continue to increase in size as the city keeps growing in an irregular circle (Duranton & Turner, 2012).
Multiple Nuclei Model
This is a city model where the central business district is detached from the rest of the city a good example being San Francisco (Wharton County Junior College, 2017). Unlike the other two city models, a good transport system is necessary for the city to exist in the first place. A good transport system is also necessary for its survival. Improvement of transport systems will cause the city to increase in size. It will push the affluent members of the city further away from suburbs and rural areas causing the enlargement of the poorer areas (Wiewel & Persky, 2015).
References
Duranton, G., & Turner, M. A. (2012). Urban growth and transportation. Review of Economic Studies , 79 (4), 1407-1440
Groffman, P. M., Cavender-Bares, J., Bettez, N. D., Grove, J. M., Hall, S. J., Heffernan, J. B., ... & Nelson, K. (2014). Ecological homogenization of urban USA. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment , 12 (1), 74-81
Hobbs, F., & Stoops, N. (2002). Demographic Trends in the 20th Century (Census 2000 Special Reports, Series CENSR-4). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office
Tindall, G. B., & Shi, D. E. (2016). America: A narrative history . New York City: WW Norton & Company
Wharton County Junior College. (2017). Changing cities: Three models of urban growth (Land Use). Retrieved from http://facultyweb.wcjc.edu/users/jonl/documents/urbangrowthmodels.pdf
Wiewel, W., & Persky, J. J. (2015). Suburban sprawl: Private decisions and public policy . New York City: Routledge
