2.1.6.

John Friedman’s core-periphery theory

Core-periphery theory has been proposed in various forms by several theorists,
but John Friedman’s theory has taken into consideration over other theories.
John Friedman is one of the experts that presents more or less coordinated
framework for such a structure. He goes towards creating a link between the
polarization of regional, interactions, and modernization theory while staying away a
debate merely economy. According to him, every country is formed from one or some
cores and periphery regions. In fact it is the system of a city that forms core areas and
periphery areas are defined based on the relations that they have with related core.
(Guidelines for rural center planning; 1992:48 ) . In Friedman’s theory , dominance of
the core to the surrounding is multilateral and it applies its superiority in the following
ways :
· The effect of dominance - the surrounding area is weakened due to the
permanent transfer of human resources, natural and capital to the core;
· The effect of information – reciprocal actions and potential contacts are stronger
in the core regions;
54
· The psychological effect - success in innovation;
· The effect of modernization - social values and behavioral changes in the core
region adapt more quickly to new innovations;
· The connection effect - with creating innovation by innovation;
· The effect of production - creating a fascinating incentive system for innovations,
including specialization and growth characteristics of the economic scale.
(Guidelines for rural centre planning; 1992:48 ).
These works have close relationships with each other and between them is a
cause and effect relationship, for example, interactions and potential contacts in the
core regions can lead to innovation, and innovation leads to modernization.
In the model of core- periphery, which can be extended to growth pole theory
in the development of region, Friedman has lost his optimism in the integration of
regional conflicts in the developing countries and under the influence of dependence
perspective, which sprouted in the same years in South America, he knows the
process of the polarization and dualism in mechanism the core – periphery as a
reinforcing. In particular, it has an integral relationship with the environment systems
and it has surrounded on it. In other words, while in a developing country, there are
two sub-systems of center and periphery, that country is a periphery sub-system of the
world system, that, sub-systems of center in this system are the developing country or
countries. On the other hand, in the system of every country, there are sub-systems
that can be divided to center and periphery, and hence there is a hierarchical system
within each other, that it is a periphery discharge flow to the centers in the upstream.
Although every center is rather a periphery, but it causes resources flow to activate.
(Sarafi ;1998:121)
Core-periphery systems in every surface created from a region in a metropolis
to national or global. As "Brookfield" mentions in interpretation about Friedman’s
work, the innovation is more in the central areas and shapes a part of the upstream
systems. So that a uncoordinated process appears spontaneously, and it is not possible
easily for veering of it. According to Friedman this spontaneous quality in the
regional growth may have positive results, but it will be unpractical finally, unless the
55
effects of the expansion regional development of core be extended to periphery areas,
and dependence to core area decreased.(Freedman 1996 quoted by Guidelines for
rural center planning;1992:49 ).
The important issue in all the polarization theory is a vague method where in
the core and periphery zones have been defined. For example, "Friedman" and
"Hilhorst" do not describe any of the nature surrounding areas. These areas are
defined only in relation to core areas and have not their own identity. It is clear that
the core regions are in fact systems of urban hierarchy. (Guidelines for rural center
planning;1992:5 ).