The Central City Elasticity Hypothesis: A Critical Appraisal of Rusk's Theory of Urban Development

Abstract

This paper critically analyzes the elasticity hypothesis proposed by David Rusk in his book Cities Without Suburbs. Rusk argues that cities that can expand their borders to capture vacant land for new development are associated with higher levels of economic growth and development. This paper points out the theoretical and empirical limitations of Rusk's analysis. Systematic empirical evidence from 117 central cities revealed necessary but not sufficient evidence in support of the elasticity hypothesis. Although indicators of metropolitan growth appear to support the hypothesis, indicators of metropolitan economic welfare are not consistent with it. The paper concludes that theoretical limitations and weak empirical support show the potential benefits of expanded central city control over regional development to be less significant than the elasticity hypothesis implies.