Apparent center-periphery effects are natural consequences of common human personal and social behaviors, as shown by simple to complex, dynamic, hierarchical organizations and relationships (locations, patterns, networks, etc.) within and between families, friends, neighbors, businesses, communities, counties, parishes, states, nations, alliances, etc. Many combinations, permutations, and resulting variations. Nevertheless, still much evidence supporting center-periphery concept.
Many related studies over these matters during the past century or so (my second degree is in geography (human / cultural / political, economic, and biological concentrations.).
Central Place Theory Image (animated)
Generally, per
location theory, etc., etc., etc.: centers have tended to have net imports of raw materials, brains (artistic, scientific, technical, legal, etc.), and brawn; and peripheries have tended to have net imports of higher-tech goods, raw materials not locally available, and cultural products (artwork, literature, language, etc.).
Centers (by necessity and/or force, and by function) are publicly granted and/or have taken more authority, influence and control over laws, zoning, land uses, businesses, money, taxes, public works and service, public safety, militia, etc. in and around the center (sphere of influence, market area, etc.).
Right or wrong, in parts and degrees, for better or worse (enough caveats? :wink: ), some of the many researchers and their related studies include:
Johann Heinrich von Thünen's 1826+ economic land use model,
Halford Mckinder's 1909+ heartland concept,
Alfred Weber's 1909+ industrial location works,
Walter Christaller's 1933+
central place work,
Torsten Hägerstrand's 1942+ migration, cultural diffusion, and time geography works. Of course, there were many others, before and after, greater and lesser, who have worked and published directly and indirectly on center-periphery related concepts in parts or whole.
Hope this helps. Pax vobiscvm, +
r