Rural-urban continuum

The idea of the rural-urban continuum

emerged as a response to the perceived
rural-urban dichotomy, a sociological
phenomenon whereby cities and
villages are considered to be
fundamentally different in terms of
culture, economy, and infrastructure
among other factors. Subscribers to the
continuum theory challenge this
dichotomy with ‘the belief that Illustration from http://geohaunt.org/geohaunt/site/CH.php?i=147
between the truly rural and the truly urban are many shades of grey’ (Oxford Reference, 2017), largely
made evident in the 21st century by the prevalence of transport links and individual car ownership
which enable commuter towns to emerge in between the cities and rural areas. It appears to be a
question of definition, or rather, the lack of definition that can be applied to city boundaries and village
boundaries. This creates a blurred border – the rural-urban fringe – around the urban city metropolis,
in which the land is used for a mixture of housing, business parks, airports, and recreational purposes
such as golf courses.

Around Melbourne, the airport lies 22km northwest of the city (Daly, et al., 1999), far enough away
to cause minimal disruption to the higher population density that lives and/or works in the city centre
and its immediate
suburbs. The three
largest business parks
(shown) – the Aviation
Precinct, Northpoint and
Clayton – are situated far
from the CBD, in
suburban areas where
more land is available at
less expense for the
construction of these facilities. However the crossover point of the continuum, the bridge between
the rural and the urban, is suggested by the zoning system of the city’s train map (shown). The yellow
areas are ‘urban’, with the CBD framed by the City Loop line; the blue areas are more ‘rural’, and link
to towns or villages further away from the city centre.

Changing land use

These suburban areas are at risk of urbanisation at the current rate of Melbourne’s urban sprawl.