This article was downloaded by: [Carnegie Mellon University]

On: 20 January 2015, At: 19:46

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Regional Studies
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cres20

Regional accessibility and economic potential in the

European community
a b a
David Keeble , Peter L. Owens & Chris Thompson
a
Department of Geography , University of Cambridge , Downing Place, Cambridge, CB2
3EN, UK
b
Department of Geography , University of Sheffield , S10 2TN, UK
Published online: 04 Feb 2007.

To cite this article: David Keeble , Peter L. Owens & Chris Thompson (1982) Regional accessibility and economic potential
in the European community, Regional Studies, 16:6, 419-432, DOI: 10.1080/09595238200185421

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09595238200185421

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Regional Studies, Vol. 16.6 pp. 41%432.

Regional Accessibility and Economic Potential

in the European Community
DAVID KEEBLE*, PETER L. OWENSJ- AND CHRIS T H O M P S O N *
*Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Downing Place, Cambridge, CB2 3EN,
~fDepartment of Geography, University of Sheffield, SI0 2TN, UK.

(Received August 1981)

KEEBLE D., OWENS P. L. and THOMPSON C. (1982) Regional accessibility and economic potential in the European
community, Reg. Studies16, 41%432. This paper investigates changes in regional accessibility to economic activity within the
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015

European Community between 1965 and 1977 as measured by the 'economic potential' index. Potential measures proximity by
road to regional economic activity as that is geographically distributed throughout the Community, allowing for tariff barriers
and sea-ferry crossings, as well as successive enlargements to Nine in 1973 and, prospectively, to Twelve. While 1973
enlargement benefited accessibility levels in the 'new' periphery quite considerably, already severe centre-periphery disparities
in regional accessibility in general widened still further during the period, largely because of continuing concentration of
economic activity in core EC regions.

European Community Regional disparities Accessibility Economic potential

KEEBLE D., OWENS P. L. and THOMVSON C. (1982)
L'accessibilit6 r6gionale et les potentialit6s 4conomiques au
sein de la Communaut6 Europ6enne, Reg. Studies 16,
41%432. Cet article examine ~ partir de l'indice des
potentialit6s &onomiques les changements dans l'accessibi-
lit4 r4gionale ~ l'activit4 4conomique au sein de la Com-
munaut6 Europ6enne de 1965 h 1977. L'indice des poten-
tialit6s &onomiques a pour but de mesurer la proximit6
routi~re ~ l'activit4 6conomique en fonction de la r6partition
de celle-l?~ sur l'espace g6ographique, en tenant compte et
des barri~res douani~res et des travers6es en ferry, aussi bien
que des 61argissements successifs; h savoir les 'Neuf' en 1973
et, ce qui est pr4vu, les 'Douze'. Tandis que l'41argissement
qui s'est effectu6 en 1973 4tait dans l'int4r& non-n6gligeable
des niveaux d'accessibilit4 de la nouvelle p6riph4rie, il 4tait
d6j~ ~ noter que de lourdes in6galit4s du centre et de la
p4riph6rie ~ propos de leur accessibilit6 r4gionale s'agrandis-
saient en g6n4ral au cours de cette p6riode-l~. C'&ait dfi
notamment a la concentration soutenue de l'activit4 4cono-
mique dans les r4gions centrales de la Communaut6
Europ4enne.
Communaut6 Europ6enne Accessibilit4
In6galit6s r6gionales Potentialit6s &onomiques
KEEBLE D., OWENS P. L. and THOMPSON C. (1982)
Zug~inglichkeit von Regionen und wirtschaftliches Poten-
tial in der europ~iischen Gemeinschaft, Reg. Studies 16,
419-432. Diese Abhandlung untersucht Wandlungen in der
unterschiedlichen regionalen Zug~inglichkeit innerhalb der
EG in der Periode 1965-1977, wie sie in der Bewertung des
Index ffir 'Wirtschaftspotential' erscheinen. Potential heisst
Entfernung aufdem Strassenweg von regionaler wirtschaft-
licher Aktivit~it, da diese geographisch fiber das Gesamt-
gebiet der Gemeinschaft hinweg verteilt ist, wobei sowohl
Tarifbarrieren und Kosten der Schiffsfiihren als auch
sukzessive Erweiterungen auferst Neun imJahre 1973, dann
Zw61f Mitgliedstaaten in Anschlag gebracht werden. Die
Erweiterung des Jahres 1973 begfinstigte den Zug~inglich-
keitsgrad der neuen Peripherie ganz betr/ichlich, doch
ohnehin schwerwiegende Ungleichheiten vom Zentrum
zur Peripherie in der regionalen Zug~inglichkeit im
allgemeinen versch~irften sich w/ihrend dieser Periode
zunehmend weiter, haupts/ichlich wegen fortgesetzter Kon-
zentration wirtschaftlicher Aktivit~it in den Kerngebeiten
der EG.
Europ~ische Gemeinschaft Regionale Ungleichheiten
Zug~inglichkeit Wirtschaftspotential

INTRODUCTION poorer regions remains as intractable as ever' ( C o M -

Article 2 o f the 1956 Treaty o f R o m e sets the
European C o m m u n i t y (EC) the task o f p r o m o t i n g
' . . . a continuous and balanced e x p a n s i o n . . . ' o f
economic activity, ' t h r o u g h o u t ' the C o m m u n i t y .
Almost two decades later however, the Regional
D e v e l o p m e n t Fund's inaugural Report admitted that
' . . . the underlying gap between the richer and
MISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (CEC),
1975, p. 5).
While regional inequalities within the C o m m u n i t y
have received attention f r o m academics, national
governments, E C agencies, and the media t h r o u g h -
out this period, significant concern has only de-
veloped in recent years, for several reasons. First,
there has been an increasing introspection o f the

419
 420 David Keeble, Peter L. Owens and Chris Thompson
Community's progress towards its 'goals', prompted
by recession and a faltering in the early enthusiasm for
European integration. Second, progressive enlarge-
ment of the Community has entailed membership for
relatively poorer nations, often with marked regional
problems, and in some cases already possessing a
background of regional policy experience and exper-
tise with which to evaluate the EC's own fledgling
policy instruments and approaches, such as the
post-1975 European Regional Development Fund.
Third, the 1979 transformation of the European
Assembly into a directly-elected Parliament, with
members representing regional constituencies, is
allowing greater expressions of regional concern,
with Members of the European Parliament from
different countries and political groupings sharing a
common interest.
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015
Some writers have addressed regional issues while
investigating the theory of integration, development,
and centre-periphery relations (GOTTMAN, 1980;
SEERS and VAITSOS, 1980). Others have treated
regional topics more generally in their own right
(CLouT, 1981; ROMUS, 1978, 1979)or examined
systematic topics in a regional manner (MORGAN,
1973; MARQUAND, 1980). Some have addressed
specific aspects of the regional problem, for example,
the impacts of enlargement (SCHLAIMand YANNA-
POULOS, 1976; BIEHL, 1978; DENTON, 1981), or the
problems of the poorest areas (SEERS, SCHAFrER, and
KILJUNEN, 1979). Increasingly, EC regional policy
mechanisms and their effects have become a research
fOCUS (SANT, 1974; MACLENNAN, 1979; YUILL,
ALLEN, and HULL, 1980). Much material for
academic evaluation has been generated by the
EC itself (CEC, 1971, 1975, 1981; STRASSER, 1981;
STATISTICAL OFFICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUN-
ITY (SOEC), 1978, 1979), whose general openness to
outside enquiry and policy of disseminating informa-
tion is a model some member-country governments
could perhaps follow.
This article reports research into one important
theme in this growing debate over regional problems,
namely the role of relative regional accessibility in
influencing investment decisions, and hence the rate
and nature of economic development in different
regions. This was the main focus of the 'EC
Centrality-Peripherality Project' in the Department of
Geography at the University of Cambridge (KEEBLE,
OWENS and THOMPSON, 1981). The extent of, and
trends in, regional differences in relative accessibility
within the Community in recent years, were mea-
sured using the technique of 'economic potential
analysis'. This generated summary indices of each
region's relative potential for interaction with econo-
mic activity, as that is actually geographically distri-
buted across the whole EC trading-unit. Comparison
of results for different years reveals how regional
accessibility has been changing, allowing for both the
actual changes in the distribution of economic activity
and the removal of constraints on interaction, like
tariff barriers.
ECONOMIC POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
The concept of regional potential is analogous to that
of electrical potential in physics, and was first
proposed by STEWART, 1947, in his study of
population distribution. It has been subsequently
developed and used in industrial location analysis, in
the form of market or economic potential, by such
workers as HARRIS, 1954; CLARK, 1966; and RICH,
1975; 1980. The first attempt to apply economic
potential to locational issues in a European context
was by CLARK, WILSON and BRADLEY, 1969, who
used it to measure the attractiveness--in terms of
accessibility--of different regions to manufacturers,
and the likely effect on this accessibility of an enlarged
Customs Union. Their study has now been updated,
enlarged and improved upon, by the present research.
As defined by previous workers, economic poten-
tial is a measure of accessibility to economic activity
which can be calculated by the following formula
(RICH, 1980):
n
P= D--~j
where: Pi = the potential of region 'i',
Mj = a measure of the volume of economic
activity in region )",
D o = a measure of the distance, or cost of
transport, between i and j.
When summed for all 'n' regions in a trading
community, this yields a potential value for each in
units of economic activity per unit of distance, or
transport cost. Economic potential values can thus be
interpreted as representing the volume of economic
activity a region has access to after the cost of covering
the distance to that activity has been accounted for.
Regions with higher potential values thus have access
to more economic activity within a given distance
than those with lower ones, and could in this respect
be considered to have a comparative advantage for
economic development over them. Certainly much
previous research and theoretical literature has argued
that high relative accessibility within a trading
community confers a comparative advantage on firms
in the region concerned, by reducing various distance
costs incurred by them (on for example, products,
inputs and information). Conversely, firms in more
inaccessibleregions suffer a comparative disadvantagein
the form of higher distance costs. If such differences in
accessibility and distance costs are large, and if they
are significant in the creation, competitive perfor-
 Regional Accessibility and Economic Potential in the European Community 421

mance, and hence growth of firms, then over a

medium or longer time scale there may emerge
differences between the nature and rate of economic
growth taking place in more accessible, as opposed to
less accessible, regions.
The pioneering study of CLARK, WILSON and
BRADLEY, 1969, used potential analysis to seek the
answers to certain specific questions. Working some
years before the UK's entry to the Community, they
were naturally enough primarily concerned with
whether ' . . . any part of Britain would be included
within the region of greatest p o t e n t i a l . . . ' in an
enlarged EC. They thus compared patterns of
potential values for three main situations (pre-Treaty,
Community of the Six, and a hypothetical Commun-
ity of the Ten) and two subsidiary conditions (cheaper
shipping costs and a Channel Tunnel). While stimu-
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015

lating and valuable, their work was perforce based on

disparate and inadequate regional income data for the
early 1960s only, and involved arbitrary assumptions
about levels of tariff barriers and sea-ferry costs. The
present study has been able to use improved data for
the years 1965-77, within a more logical methodolo-
gy, as outlined in the following sections.
METHODOLOGY
The chief methodological issues raised by Commun-
ity-wide economic potential analysis concern the
regional framework and system to be used, the
definition and measurement of economic activity,
distance considerations including the extra barrier
effect of sea-ferry crossings, the problem of tariff
barriers, and the estimation of regional self-potential.
Each of these will be considered in turn.
Regions and Nodes
The framework of 108 regions adopted for the study
was based on the official level-II system~ of the
nine-member Community. 2 In each region a 'node'
(the major town or city) was designated, and the
volume of economic activity in the region was
allocated to that location. Neighbouring nodes (in-
cluding, where appropriate, those from regions which
were not contiguous) were connected by 'links', of
which there are 357 in the final E U R 9 model (Fig. 1).
The official level-II E C regional classification is
relatively coarse and uneven, because SOEC had to
accept regions defined by the different national
statistical systems. Continental regions are therefore
generally smaller, and perhaps more representative of
functional economic areas, than the UK's 'Standard
Regions'. Thus Scotland and Ireland are single
regions, but so too are West Berlin and Hamburg,
while the Netherlands, covering a smaller physical
area than either of the first two, is divided into eleven
regions. However, this system does have the advan-
Fig. 1. Primary road network nodes and links
tage of being an official base, for which various
socio-economic data series, including GDP estimates,
are published (SOEC, 1979). Moreover, the above-
average regional size in the U K almost certainly
results only in a less detailed potential surface for this
country, rather than in any overall distortion of
average potential values relative to the rest of the
Community.
The total number of regions used in the present
study (108) is similar to that in CLARK, WILSON and
BRADLEY'S, 1969, research (102), except that this
study has finer detail for West Germany (30 regions
now as compared to 22 before) and Denmark (3
compared to 1 earlier), and of course, Norway's
regions are excluded. However the earlier work
adopted a different approach to the selection of nodes,
choosing towns according to a variety of criteria,
including geometric centrality to the region. By
contrast, the present study consistently defined nodes
as the economically most important city. Thus for
example, London was selected as the node for the
'South East', rather than Reading for 'Southern
England' as in the CLARK, WILSON and BRADLEY,
I969, formulation.
In addition to this basic EC regional framework,
the model included values for neighbouring countries
possessing significant trading links with the Com-
munity. These were: Norway, Sweden, East Ger-
many, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Switzerland, Yugos-
lavia, Spain, Greece and Portugal. National mass
values were assigned to the country's largest city in
each case. However, for the E U R 12 analysis, a
special regional classification was devised for Greece,
Spain, and Portugal, given that at the time of
 422 David Keeble, Peter L. Owens and Chris Thompson
working, Eurostat had not published its official
breakdown for these countries. This classification
defined 9 regions in Greece, 13 in Spain, and 4 in
Portugal, each with its own regionally most impor-
tant city as a node. The potential model thus
recognised 108 EC regions and 10 neighbouring
countries for the E U R 6 and E U R 9 analyses, and 134
EC regions with 7 neighbours, for the EUR 12
analysis.
Economic activity
Specifying the mass or Mj term, poses the problem of
selecting and measuring the most appropriate
variable. Most economic potential analyses have
measured the volume of economic activity in different
regions by values of regional gross domestic product
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015
(GDP), as the best available summary index of
economic activity in all its forms.
The present research used official Eurostat esti-
mates of 1965, 1970, 1973, and 1977 regional GDP,
expressed in European Units of Account (EUAs), at
current prices and exchange rates, on the basis of the
European System of Accounts. Eurostat claim that
with the exception of the regierungsbezirke of Nord-
rhein-Westfalen and certain UK regions, these series
are comparable over time. The nature of potential
calculation means that the small boundary changes
which affected these during the 1970s are unlikely to
have any measurable effect on actual potential values.
For the E U R 12 analysis, regional GDP data obtained
from national sources for Spain, Portugal and Greece,
were used to allocate Eurostat's national GDP totals
to the regions defined in the previous section.
The decision to express GDPs in EUAs--based on
weighted exchange rates for a basket of European
currencies--rather than in Purchasing Power Stan-
dards (PPS), conversion factors for which are also
available (SOEC, 1978), reflects the judgement that
EUAs provide the more appropriate measure of
economic activity with regard to the possibilities for
trading goods (VAN DER KNAAP, 1980). PPS values
reflect national variations in the cost of living,
including the indirect costs of non-traded goods and
services such as housing, and are therefore more a
measure of welfare and income relative to living
standards in different areas. This judgement is
supported by a similar choice in the Commission's
'First Periodic Report' on the regions of Europe
(CEC, 1981, pp. 40-2) and by the argument that from
the point of view of inter-regional trade and invest-
ment decisions, ' . . . exporters would be more
interested in the money incomes of their markets, and
not in their purchasing power over local goods'
(CLARKE, WILSON and BRADLEY, 1969, p. 199).
Regional GDP was expressed in current, rather
than constant, prices and exchange rates, on the
grounds that the former reflect the real evolution of
regional and national economies within the Com-
munity over time much more accurately than would
an arbitrary choice of any one year's prices and
exchange rates as a base. Moreover, it is also true that
different national rates of price inflation are to some
degree compensated for by exchange rate move-
ments.
Distance measurement
The chief empirical work in calculating potential
values centres on the estimation of the distance, or
transport cost, component, D o. This involves choos-
ing appropriate cost or distance measures, and, if
necessary, modes o f transport and distance exponents.
Given the explicit concern of CLARK, WILSON and
BRADLEY'S, 1969, study with the location of manufac-
turing activity, they argued that the most appropriate
measure was an estimate of the average transport cost
of manufactured goods shipped from the node of
region i to that ofregionj. They assumed a 200 mile
limit to road movement, with journeys over this
distance being handled by rail, and also adopted an
arbitrary Value for ferry shipments as an allowance for
sea crossings. However, the present research used
shortest road distances between the regional and
national nodes defined earlier. This choice reflected
the study's wider concern with regional economic
development generally, and the judgement that the
considerable extra time and difficulty involved in
obtaining meaningful transport cost data was unlikely
to be justified in terms of appreciable differences in the
final potential surface.
The choice of road rather than rail distance was
made after examination of the evolving pattern of
goods movement in the Community. This showed
that by 1972, road transport was responsible for
handling a larger share of intra-national goods
movement (measured in tonne-kilometres) than any
other form of transport, in all Community countries
except The Netherlands and Luxembourg. In each of
the four most peripheral countries (Denmark, Ireland,
Italy and the UK) the road transport share was over
two-thirds (ROBINSON and BAMrO~D, 1978, p. 137).
While rail movements are still important for bulky
commodities, goods movement between and within
EC countries is increasingly being handled by lorry
container units, given both the difficulties of transfer-
ring consignments between different national rail
organisations, and the progressive harmonisation of
lorry transport regulations.
Measurements of shortest road distances between
neighbouring nodes were based on information from
national and European road atlases and national
motoring organisations. Computer programs then
calculated the shortest paths between all possible pairs
of nodes, placing over 7,000 resulting distances in a
matrix for later use in the potential formula.
 Regional Accessibility and Economic Potential in the European Community
One important limitation to the above approach to
distance measurement is that no allowance was made
for changes in the quality of particular road links
during the study period, for example through the
construction of motorways. Incorporating such
changes was not feasible, given the time and resources
available. However, it could be argued that road
improvements during the 1960s and early 1970s in
most Community countries tended to focus on major
cities and metropolitan regions, such as Paris and
Dusseldorf. Such improvements are thus likely to
have increased the relative accessibility of central
regions to Community-wide economic activity to a
greater extent than the peripheral regions, whose
motorway links are often less well-devel0ped
(KEEBtE, 1976, pp. 54--9). This qualification should
be borne in mind when evaluating subsequent results.
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015
Ferry crossings
Sea-ferry crossings play a strategic role at several
points in the European transport network. For each
potential analysis, the model included as a link, ferry
routes which in that year provided at least one
roll-on/roll-off car-ferry service per day. In 1973 for
example, twenty such routes were identified (includ-
ing eight between the U K and the Continent, three to
Ireland, and two each to Corsica and Sardinia). For the
EUR 12 analysis, ferry routes linking Greece, Spain,
and Portugal to various parts of the Nine as well as
ferry services established in the rest of the Commun-
ity between 1977 and 1980, were included.
Ferry crossings represent an additional barrier in
cost and time to the free flow of goods, services and
people within the Community. However the CLARK,
WILSON and BUADLEV, 1969, study found it 'ex-
tremely difficult to reach an estimate of a representa-
tive cost for shipping.' Their eventual, arbitrary,
solution used the costs of sending 10 tons of cheap
glassware by container between various European
ports. By contrast, the form of the modification used
in the present model was originally devised by RICH,
1975, after much empirical testing in Scotland. This
was in turn recalibrated for this study, using indepen-
dent data given by BELL, 1979, on the actual 1978
land, terminal and ro-ro sea-costs, of shipping goods
by 32-ton articulated container lorries on ferries
between various origins and destinations in Britain,
Germany and France. Conversion of these costs into
distance equivalents, on the basis of a typical 500km
journey, yielded these parameters for the formula:
F
R = 150 + 1"5
where F = the ferry crossing in kilometres
R = the road distance to which it is to be
converted.
423
The close correspondence between these parameters
and the ones estimated by Ric~ for the Scottish case
(160 and 2"0) is general confirmation of his argument
that this kind of formula, ' . . . represents reasonably
well the high break of bulk and terminal costs
involved in sea crossings, and their relatively low
movement cost per unit of distance, as well as the
psychological barrier and inconvenience inherent in
such crossings.' (Rich, 1975, p. 67).
Distance exponents
Various empirical research has argued that when
simple distance is used in potential calculations,
exponents greater than unity yield better statistical fits
with other variables, such as GDP per head. Thus
CHISHOLM and O'SULLIVAN, 1973, p.8, argued from
1962 road transport data that for gravity and potential
modelling 'the appropriate empirical" distance expo-
nent for road freight in Britain is -2.5'. They
nonetheless chose to use an exponent of -1.0 for
technical reasons associated with their self-potential
calculation. RICH, 1978, found that testing for best-fit
relationships in the Scottish case, with 1960s data,
yielded a typically sharp-peaked calibration curve,
centred on exponent values between -1"5 and -2.5.
Since the 1960s, however, increasing speed and ease
ofmotorway movement, coupled with increased scale
economies through the use of larger lorries, has
resulted in a considerable fall in the real cost of
transport, and hence friction of distance, within
the EC. Simply in terms of best-fit relationships
therefore, distance exponents as great as -2"5 would
be too large. In addition, sensitivity testing using
distance exponents o f - 1"5 and 2"0, revealed that these
generate more sharply-peaked potential surfaces,
which in turn give much poorer statistical relation-
ships with other variables. Thus, for example, r2values
for regressions of potential against 1977 GI)P per
capita in 108 regions, were 0-453 for an exponent of
1"0, 0.322 for 1-5, and 0"280 for 2.0. Interestingly,
potential values based on an exponent of 0.5 also
yielded a poor r2 relationship with GDP per capita
(0.381). Sensitivity testing thus supports the main
reason for choosing an exponent of unity, namely the
absence of clear theoretical justification for other
values.
The use of more complex expressions in the
denominator of the potential equation was also
considered. Recent German work (HusSMAN, 1976;
ADLUNg et al., 1979) has investigated two alternatives
to the standard distance term, D~=. These are:
(1 + v)-a', (2)
 424 David Keeble, Peter L. Owens and Chris Thompson
In these formulae, the parameters (5 and y represent
empirically-derived constants selected to give as good
a fit as possible between potential values and a
'control' variable such as G D P per capita. In both the
standard form and (1), the larger the constant ~ or
the smaller the influence o f distant G D P values on a
region's potential; the converse is true for y in (2). The
three terms yield different distance-decay curves for
the influence of a given mass-value, and different
levels of correlation with the control variable. HUss-
MAN'S research (HusSMAN, 1976) found that the third
expression gave the best fit between market potential
and G D P per capita across 178 labour market areas in
West Germany. In a similar analysis, Adlung's team
used a y parameter of 0'056, and obtained a correlation
coefficient of 0"81, with data for the 37 official
planning regions of the Federal Republic. However,
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015
since again there is no particular theoreticaljustification
for using either of these more complex distance
expressions, the present research adopted the standard
and simplest one, D o.
Tariff barriers
That tariffbarriers do significantly inhibit trade across
international boundaries is both a classic theoretical
expectation and an observed fact. As DALY, 1978, p.
45 points out for the U K case, ' . . . the effect of tariff
reductions on U K imports has in the past been
significant, accounting for more than 33% of the total
increase in imports of semi-manufactures and over
25% of the increase in finished goods for the period
1959 to 1972.' In a similar fashion, the phased removal
over the period 1973-7 of the previous E C - U K t a r i f
barrier was accompanied and followed by a shift in the
balance and volume of U K trade towards its com-
munity partners, especially in manufactured goods.
As a proportion of total external trade by value, U K
exports to the other eight countries rose from 30"2 to
37'9% over the six year period 1972-8, while imports
rose from 3•.6 to 40.5% (FETHERSTON,MOORE and
RHODES, 1980).
As with the CLARK, WILSON and BUADLEY, 1969,
study, the present research thus incorporated a
measure of the barrier effect of the EC's common ex-
ternal tariff. However, unlike the earlier study which
adopted a totally arbitrary tariff value of an additional
US $210 on transport costs, the current research fol-
lowed a logical methodology similar to that of the
ferry crossing adjustment. This involved four steps.
First, statistics were obtained from the U K Cus-
toms and Excise, and from U K National Ports
Council publications, on the average value (for
customs purposes) of a unit container-load of goods
passing through the ports of Dover and Felixstowe in
1978. These are the two leading ro-ro container ports
for trade between the U K and the rest of the
community, handling imports and exports valued at
over U K £12,000 million in that year. This average
value was U K £17,335, indicating that most container
loads were of high-value manufactured or semi-
manufactured goods.
Second, an average ad vatorem tariffrate o f 7% was
used to calculate the actual tariff U K £1,213---which
would have been levied on an average load from these
ports to a continental E C country, had the preq973
tariffs still been in force. In reality, tariffs vary widely
in rate between different classes of commodities, but
other workers have calculated that ' . . . the average ad
valorem, tariffagainst the U K vis-a-vis the old EC was
of the order of 7%' (BALL, 1974, p. 55). Both the
current and pre-1973 list of C o m m u n i t y external
tariffs suggests this figure is fairly typical for a variety
of manufactured products, such as steel, engineering
and electrical goods, and footwear.
Third, the estimated E C tariffwas translated into a
road-distance equivalent, using the actual 1978 road
transport cost value for a 500 kin journey by container
lorry within the EC, as used in the sea-ferry
adjustment (i.e. U K £0.54 per km). This converts to a
distance-equivalent barrier of 2250 km (rounded from
2247).
Fourth, this logically-derived constant was added
to any shortest path in the distance matrix which
joined two regional or national nodes, across
whichever C o m m u n i t y boundary was in force for the
year under consideration. This boundary application
was selective, since after 1973, all adjacent European
countries were granted 'special' preferential tarifrates
vis-a-vis the enlarged E C (with the exceptions of
Czechoslovakia, East Germany and Yugoslavia).
Inspection o f the official list for such rates reveals that
for virtually all commodities, the 'special' post-1973
rate was zero for Greece, Portugal, Austria, Switzer-
land, N o r w a y and Sweden, while for Spain it was
generally two-fifths of the external rate. In the
post-enlargement analyses (1973 and 1977, E U R 9
and E U R 12) therefore, no tariffdistance barrier was
added for journeys involving the six zero-rated
countries, while the Spain-EUR 9 barrier was set at
900 km, and that for the three East European countries
mentioned above at the full 2250 km.
Several comments may be made concerning the
tariff barrier calculation. First, although derived from
1978 transport figures, it can be argued that there is no
obvious basis for adjusting the precise distance
identified with respect to earlier years, given the lack
of change in the average tariff level before and after
1973. Second, a sensitivity analysis with 1970 data,
using a lower tariff barrier distance of 1250 km and
1970 G D P data, showed the relative ranking and
distribution of regional potential values to be very
similar to that obtained with the derived figure.
Third, the tariff barrier adjustment is concerned only
with quantifiable economic barriers to trade, whose
extent may be estimated in a logical non-arbitrary
 Regional Accessibility and Economic Potential in the European Community
way. Clearly, actual trading patterns between coun-
tries may also be influenced by certain secondary
non-economic considerations, such as cultural dif-
ferences in taste and consumer preference, language
and historic ties (e.g. within the Scandinavian coun-
tries, or between the U K and Portugal). However,
any attempt to incorporate such factors would
necessarily be arbitrary, and in any case, increasing
economic integration within Western Europe is
diminishing their relative importance over time.
Fourth, it is worth noting that the tariff barrier
identified by the logical procedure here is in fact
smaller than that chosen in the CLARK, WILSON and
BRADLEY, 1969, study (their US $210 translates into a
2900 km distance-equivalent, using their long-
distance rail transport cost rate of 7.2 cents per km).
The present estimate is thus not only based on a logical
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015
procedure incorporating empirical data on the actual
movement of goods in the Community, but exerts a
less extreme effect upon computed potential values
than that adopted arbitrarily in the earlier study.
Self-potential
A final consideration in operationalising the potential
model is that of'self-potential', or the contribution to
the potential of region i of its own mass value. This
reduces to the problem of adopting a non-zero
internal distance for region i (that is, for the special
case of Dii in the array D~).
Various approaches have been tried in the past.
RAY, 1965, adopted an arbitrary five mile distance for
each areal unit, while CLARK, WILSONand BRADLEY,
1969, defined a fixed minimum transport cost of US
$28 per 10 ton load, for each region. More recently,
RICH, 1975, used the following formula:
1 / area of region
Dii = 2 /~/ zr
which gives a distance value one-half the radius of a
circle the same area as region i.
The present study tested the sensitivity of results
obtained using RICH'S, 1975, formula to variations in
the constant, using 0.333 instead of 0"5. This revealed
that two small, highly-urbanised regions (West Berlin
and Bremen) record significant falls in rank if the
larger internal distance is used. Fourteen other regions
also recorded lower potential values, but few of these
exhibited changes in their rank order with respect to
other regions (e.g. Hamburg, down from 5th to 6th;
Ile de France, 4th to 5th; Dusseldorf, no change).
Theoretically too, as RICH, 1980, p. 26, has more
recently argued, the clustering of economic activity in
and around the chief metropolitan centre of most
officially-defined regions (e.g. London and the South
East, Paris and Ile de France) strongly supports use of
425
the smaller radius value as the better approximation to
reality. Thus the research adopted a constant of 0-333
with RIclt's formula, in the self-potential calcula-
tions.
RESULTING PATTERNS OF
ECONOMIC POTENTIAL
Regional economic potential values were .computed
with the above methodology, for 1965, 1970, and
1973 with the Community of the Six, for 1973 and
1977 with the Community of the Nine, and for a
hypothetical year with the Community of the
Twelve. The resulting potentials, expressed in mil-
lions of EUAs per kilometre, are mapped as potential
contours in Figs. 2-7. Each region's value is expressed
as a percentage of the highest value found in the
Community that year. Contours are interpolated at
successive 10% intervals up to the maximum, which
in each case was for Rheinhessen-Pfalz. Comparison
of these potential results throws light on changes in
regional accessibility over this period, and the effect
on this of enlargement and tariff barrier removal.
The 1977pattern
Fig. 6 is based on the most recently available regional
GDP data, and relates to the Community of the
Nine's first year of full economic integration, in the
sense of complete dismantling of formal tariff bar-
riers.
The most striking feature of the pattern is the wide
disparity in regional accessibility. The most inacces-
sible region of the Community, as defined by
potential, is Calabria, which records a value (1,134.3
mio EUAs per km) equal to only 11.7% of that for
Rheinhessen-Pfalz (9,664'1). A further ten regions--
seven of them in Italy, (Campania, Abruzzi, Molise,
Puglia, Basilicata, Sicilia and Sardegna), plus I.reland,
Northern Ireland and Corsica--have values below
20% of the maximum. At the other extreme, twelve
regions in addition to Rheinhessen-Pfalz (Hamburg,
Dusseldorf, Koln, Arnsberg, Karlsruhe, West Berlin,
Zuid-Holland, Noord-Brabant, Antwerpen, Bra-
bant, Hainaut, and Ile de France) achieve potential
values more than 60% of the maximum. These
high-potential regions may thus be thought of as
being more than three times as accessible to Com-
munity-wide economic activity in 1977 as the listed
low-potential regions. This disparity in accessibility,
as measured by the potential index, indicates that if
accessibility is important for the location and growth
of economic activity, these low-potential regions are
at a considerable relative disadvantage within the
Community.
A second aspect deserving comment is the geo-
graphical pattern. The map's dominant feature, as
measured by the 50% potential contour, is a roughly
 426 David Keeble, Peter L. Owens and Chris Thompson
triangular 'plateau' of high accessibility located in the
north-east of the Community, with corners on
Stuttgart, Hamburg and Lille. Peaks of exceptional
accessibility (over 70% of the maximum) rise from
this plateau at three points (Hamburg, Dusseldorf and
Rheinhessen-Pfalz/Karlsruhe). Three other neigh-
bouring but separate regions (South East, lie de
France, and West Berlin) form outlying peaks of
lesser, but still relatively high, accessibility. This map
therefore seems to support the popular notion of an
EC 'Golden Triangle' covering parts of West Ger-
many, Belgium and The Netherlands, at least in terms
of exceptional accessibility.
Together, the high-accessibility regions defined by
the 50% contour occupy only 10% of the total land
area but contain 30% of the population of the Nine
and no less than 40% of all Community economic
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015

activity measured by GDP.

Conversely, regions of low potential, as defined
broadly by the 30% contour, are located in the
southern, western, and northern (though not eastern)
margins of the Community. On this measure, the (2184 9rnio EUAs per kin)
Community's most relatively inaccessible regions are
all geographically peripheral, and comprise most of Fig. 2. E E C regional economic potentials 1965
southern, central and north-eastern Italy, southern
and western France, northern and western Britain and
Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, and
Denmark outside Storkobenhavn. While accounting
for 47% of the Community's land area and 32% of its
population, these peripheral, inaccessible, regions
contain only 22% of Community economic activity.

Regional accessibility trends, 1965-73

Comparison of results from the E U R 6 potential
analyses for the years 1965 (Fig. 2), 1970 (Fig. 3), and
1973 (Fig. 4), reveals a clear trend towards widening
regional disparities in relative accessibility. This trend
was most evident for regions of the UK, all of which
recorded quite dramatic declines in potential values
relative to the Rheinhessen-Pfalz maximum. Interes-
tingly, the relative declines in potential for Ireland and
Denmark, which were also at the time outside the
encircling tariff wall, were not as great as in the U K
case, though they were still considerable. Within the
Community of the Six itself, declines in relative
accessibility also characterised the peripheral regions 3641 7 m,oEOAsper~m,
of southern Italy and southern and western France.
Examples of the latter changes are given in Table 1. Fig. 3. E E C regional economic potentials 1970
These trends clearly reflect the relative concentra-
tion of economic growth during this period in the
Table 1. Selected peripheral region potentials, 1965-73 more central regions of the Community, which led to
1965 1970 1973 a rapid rise in central region GDP and hence relative
Calabria 12"7 12"3 10'9 economic potential This, together with the relative
Pugli a 17'4 16-7 14-8 isolation of the above peripheral regions from the EC
Midi-Pyrenees 21'8 20"6 19.1 core and the slower rates of G D P growth in them,
Bretagne 28"3 26'9 25"4 explains the trend of widening disparities in accessibil-
Note: Potentials expressed as a percent o f maximum E U R 6 value. ity levels. Table 1 also indicates that this trend
 Regional Accessibility and Economic Potential in the European Community 427
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015

Fig. 4. EEC regional economic potentials 1973: EU'R 6 Fig. 5. EEC regional economic potentials 1973: E U R 9
quickened appreciably between 1970 and 1973, com- Interestingly, enlargement and tariffremoval would
pared with the earlier 1965-70 period: the annual also have benefited the periphery of the original
decline in relative potential values for these regions Six proportionally more than its centre, with gains of
was between two and five times faster in the early t4-17% for the regions shown. However, this
1970s than during the second half of the 1960s. apparent differential in favour of the periphery of the
Six chiefly reflects the mathematics of percentage
The impact of the 1973 enlargement calculations in the context of very low base potentials.
In absolute terms, Table 2 shows that the gain to the
The 1973 E U R 9 map (Fig. 5) illustrates the effect of
central regions was much greater than that to the
the removal of the tariff barrier on trade following
periphery, as exemplified by the two extreme cases,
enlargement to the Nine, holding everything else--
Calabria (+93 mio E U A s per km) and Rheinhessen-
notably the regional distribution of economic activity
Pfalz (+365). This further widening of absolute
as measured by GDP--constant. In fact, the removal
disparity in accessibility to economic activity between
of the EC tariff barrier between the Six and the Three
the Six's centre and periphery, is probably due to the
was phased over a five-year transition period, with a
greater proximity of the central regions to the three
20% reduction each year. So were other measures of
new member countries. By contrast, the peripheral
Community integration. The 1973 E U R 9 map thus
records a purely hypothetical regional accessibility
Table 2. Selected regions' potentials at the 1973
surface, but nevertheless isolates the particular effect enlargement (mio EUAs per km)
of tariff barrier removal upon accessibility values.
EUR 6 EUR 9 Change
Comparison of the E U R 6 and E U R 9 situations
Abs. %
for that year (Figs. 4 and 5) reveals, as might be
Scotland 813 1233 +420 +40
expected, that complete tariff removal, ifeffected in a
Northern Ireland 1059 1583 +524 +49
single year, would have increased the relative accessi- Ireland 660 1050 +390 +59
bility to Community-wide economic activity of all Vest for Storebaelt 776 1378 +602 +76
regions--including peripheral ones--in the three new
members. However, what is perhaps surprising is the Calabria 618 711 +93 +15
scale of the increase, both absolutely and relative to Puglia 839 962 +123 +15
Midi-Pyrenees 1085 1236 + 151 +14
increases recorded by more central regions of the Six. Bretagne 1442 1685 +243 +17
As Table 2 indicates, potential values for the most
peripheral regions of the UK, Denmark and Ireland, Rheinhessen-Pfalz 5667 6032 +365 +6
would have risen by between 40-76%, compared Dusseldorf 4730 5045 +315 +7
with rates of growth in the central regions listed of lie de France 4270 4570 +300 +7
Brabant 3323 3693 +370 +11
only 6-11%.
 428 David Keeble, Peter L. Owens and Chris Thompson
regions of the Three did benefit both absolutely and Table 3. Changes in selectedregions'potentials
relatively, compared with the centre: the absolute gap (mio EUAs per kin) 1973-7
in potentials narrowed following enlargement, even Potential values Potentialchange
in the extreme comparison of Rheinhessen-Pfalz as a per cent of
(+365 mio E U A s per km) and Ireland (+390). 1973-77 EUR 9 maximum
Abs. % 1973 1977
Regional accessibility trends 1973-7 Scotland +722 +59 20"4 20.2
Ireland +636 +61 17.4 17.4
Comparison of the hypothetical 1973 and actual 1977 Calabria +423 +59 11-8 11.7
E U R 9 surfaces (Figs. 5 and 6) highlights the changes Puglia +566 +59 16"0 15-8
in regional accessibility which arose from trends in the Midi-Pyrenees +783 +63 20.5 20.9
regional distribution of economic activity during this Bretagne + 1050 +62 27.9 28.3
period, since both analyses incorporated the same Rheinhessen-Pfalz +3632 +60 100.0 100.0
external tariff barrier around the Nine. Dusseldorf +3037 +60 83-6 83.6
The maps indicate that the years 1973-7 again Ile de France +2777 +61 75"8 76.0
witnessed a tendency towards widening of C o m m u n - Brabant +2656 +72 61.2 65.7
ity centre-periphery accessibility disparities. H o w -
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015

ever this occurred at a much slower rate than during
either the late 1960s or the early 1970s. The
widening was most evident in the case of the Italian
and British peripheries. Visual comparison of the
positions of contours shows a shift inwards towards
the central EC core in both cases (see for example the
decline of Lombardia to a value below its earlier 40%
level). The same is indicated by data in Table 3 for
selected regions. Three of the more peripheral regions
chosen record a decline in potential (expressed as a
percentage of the maximum) between 1973-7 (see
columns 3 and 4), whereas all four central regions
listed maintain or increase their relative values; the
increase in Brabant's percentage potential is particu-
larly striking. Only in the case o f the two French
peripheral regions was there a narrowing of the
relative accessibility differential, and an increase in
Fig. 6. E E C regional economic potentials 1977
their percentage values. In absolute terms however, as
Table 3 indicates (see column 1), central region
accessibility gains were invariably still far greater than
those for any peripheral region, with, at the extremes,
Rheinhessen-Pfalz recording a gain nearly nine times
greater than that for Calabria. In absolute terms
therefore, the centre-periphery accessibility differen-
tial widened substantially during this period, as a
result of the faster growth of economic activity in
more accessible central regions.
The impact of enlargement in the 1980s
Fig. 7 maps potential values on the assumption of the
further enlargement of the European C o m m u n i t y
during the 1980s to include not only Greece, a
member since January 1981, but also Spain and
Portugal. The potential analysis uses the most recent
(1977) EC regional G D P data available for the Nine,
together with estimates for regions of Greece and the
two prospective entrants, as explained earlier. The
tariffbarrier which had been incorporated for the 1977
E U R 9 analysis between the Nine and Spain was, of
course, removed.
The chief, and inevitable, result of prospective
enlargement to Twelve is a further widening of
C o m m u n i t y regional accessibility disparities. In the
C o m m u n i t y of the Twelve (and also of the present
Ten), the lowest potential is recorded by the Aigaiou
(Aegean) region of Greece, whose value is only 7.0%
o f the E U R 12 maximum. Six other Greek regions
record potentials below 10"0%, while the highest
Greek value, for Athinai, is only 13"4% of the
maximum. Regional potentials in Spain are appre-
ciably higher than in Greece, with one region,
Cataluna, achieving a value of 22-0% o f the max-
imum, thereby placing it higher than sixteen other
regions (eleven Italian, two French, two U K , and
Ireland) in the Nine. The next highest potential within
Spain is also for a northern region bordering France
(Vascongadas Y Navarra, 19'1%), while the lowest
 Regional Accessibility and Economic Potential in the European Community 429

@
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015

Fig. 7. Regional economicpotentials: EUR 12

values are for regions in the far south-west (Extrama- countries after 1973, with in effect a zero tariffbarrier
dura, 11"1%)and north-west (Galicia, 11'5%)of the in the case of goods from Greece and Portugal, and a
country. Regional potentials in Portugal are lower substantially reduced barrier against Spanish manu-
than that for Athinai, ranging from 10.7 to 12.7% of factured goods. Final removal of this barrier conse-
the maximum; the highest value is recorded by the quent upon an enlargement to Twelve would thus
Norte Litoral region centred on Porto, and the lowest benefit, in the sense of accessibility, neighbouring
value by the Sud Interior region inland from Lisbon. French regions only slightly, and central Community
The impact of enlargement to Twelve on regions regions hardly at all.
already in the Nine is small, and largely confined to
French peripheral regions bordering Spain, as illus-
CONCLUSIONS
trated by Table 4. This lack of impact reflects the
preferential treatment accorded to manufactured This study has used the methodology of economic
goods entering the EC from the prospective member potential analysis to calculate a quantitative index of
regional accessibility to economic activity within the
Table 4. Future changes in selected regions' potentials European Community which, it is suggested, can be
Potential values E U R 9 to E U R 12 used in two main ways: first, as a summary measure
(mio E U A s per km) changes implying reduced distance costs for economic activ-
E U R 9 E U R 12 Abs. % ity, and hence a degree of regional comparative
advantage for economic growth, and second, as a
Midi-Pyrenees 2019 2076 +57 +2.8
Aquitaine 2207 2213 +6 +0.3 measure of how regional accessibility to economic
Languedoc-Roussillon 2263 2324 +61 +2.7 activity has changed over time, and with the removal
of tariff barriers to economic interaction.
Rheinhessen-Pfalz 9664 9672 +8 +0.1 When calculated for the official level-II regions of
Dusseldorf 8082 8085 +3 +0.0
the Community, the index highlighted wide---and
 430 David Keeble, Peter L. Owens and Chris Thompson

widening--disparities in accessibility, between high- bility within a trading C o m m u n i t y such as the E C is

potential central regions and low-potential peripheral
regions. This was found to be not only a statistical
artefact resulting from entry of successively poorer
nations, but also a trend affecting peripheral regions of
long-standing membership.
Currently, the pattern of regional potentials within
the C o m m u n i t y is characterised by a triangular
plateau of high accessibility in its north-east m
reminiscent of the popular 'Golden Triangle' notion---
with outlying secondary peaks o f relatively high
accessibility around Paris, London and West Berlin.
Extensive areas of low potential are located in the
south, west, and northern periphery.
This basic pattern reflects historic processes of
industrialisation, urbanisation and investment in fixed
capital, which have been operating for at least two
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015
important in reducing distance costs for economic
activity, and hence in influencing investment deci-
sions and the rate and nature of economic growth,
then the peripheral regions of the Nine are becoming
increasingly disadvantaged relative to central loca-
tions. To that extent, this study's analyses lend further
weight to the concern over widening regional econo-
mic disparities n o w being expressed in official and
academic circles, disparities which constitute one of
the most fundamental problems facing the European
C o m m u n i t y in the eighties.
Acknowledgements--The research on which this article is
based was jointly sponsored by the Directorate-General for
Regional Policy in the Commission of the European
Communities, and the UK Department of Industry. The

authors would like especially to thank: Bert van der Knaap,

centuries. It is not therefore surprising that the
contour maps presented here, covering only a short
period, exhibit no striking changes in the broad
pattern of regional accessibility. Nonetheless, what is
clear from them is the trend towards widening
regional disparity during the 1965-70 period, which
became more pronounced from 1970-3. Tariff
removal as the Six became the Nine then widened
further the disparity between the centre and periphery
of the Six, but to a lesser degree from 1973-7 than
earlier. In terms of accessibility, C o m m u n i t y enlarge-
ment in 1973 actually benefited the periphery of the
Three more than it did the centre. Future enlargement
to Twelve will inevitably widen disparities still
further because of the nature of the prospective
entrants' economies, but the impact for the regions of
the Nine will be small.
These findings thus suggest that if relative accessi-
Andrea Cendali-Pignatelli and David Rich, research consul-
tants to the project, together with Hugh Quigley, Judith
Marquand, and other members of the Commission of the
EC and the UK Department of Industry, for helpful
comments throughout the study; John Evelyn of the
Ipswich Port Authority, Mine Franchi of Eurostat, Roy
Bradshaw and Simoes Lopes, for access to unpublished data;
Graham Chapman for help with computer programming;
and Arthur Shelley and Pamela Morgan-Lucas for carto-
graphic assistance.
NOTES
1. See SOEC, 1980, for the full list. Data problems for
certain German regions necessitated reduction of the 112
EC level-lI regions to 108: Aurich, Stade, Osnabruck,
and Oldenburg were amalgamated to form Weser-Ems,
and Hildesheim was incorporated into Braunschweig.
2. Abbreviated in official publications to 'EUR 9'.

REFERENCES
ADLUNC R., GOTZINGERH., LAMMERSK., SCHATZK-W., SEITZJ. and THOROE C. (1979) Konzeption Und Instrumente
Einer Potentialorientierten Regionalpolitik, Institut fur Kommunalwissenschaften der Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung E. V., St.
Augustin.
BALLR. J. (1974) The prospects for the UK economy, in BEESLEYM. and HAGUED. C. (Eds.) Britain in the Common Market:
a New Business Opportunity pp. 51-68. Longman, London.
BELLJ. (1979) Market factors relevant in considering capital development of port RORO facilities, Unpublished Research
Report, London Business School.
BIEHL D. (1978) The impact of enlargement on regional development and regional policy in the European Community,in
WALLACE W. and HEVREMANN 1. (Eds.) A Community of Twelve? The Impact of Further Enlargement on the European
Communities. De Tempel, Bruges.
CHISHOLMM. and O'S tJLLIVANP. (1973) FreightFlows and Spatial Aspectsof the British Economy. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
CLARK C. (1966) Industrial location and economic potential, Lloyds Bank Review 82, 1-17.
CLARK C., WILSONF. and BRADLEYJ. (1969) Industrial location and economic potential in Western Europe, Reg. Studies 3,
197-212.
CLOUT H. (1981) Regional Development in Western Europe. Wiley, Chichester.
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES(1971) Regional Development in the European Community: Analytical Survey.
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg GD.
COMMISSIONOF THE EOROVEANCOMMUNITIES(1975) European regional development fund, first Annual Report, Bulletin of
the European Communities, Supplement 7/76, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
GD, (and annually thereafter).
 Regional Accessibility and Economic Potential in the European community 431
COMMISSIONOF THE EUROPEANCOMMUNITIES(1981) The Regions of Europe, First Periodic Report, Directorate-General for
Regional Policy, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.
DALY A. E. (1978) UK visible trade and the Common Market Nat. Inst. Econ. Rev. 86, 42-54.
DENTON G. (1981) Regional divergence and policy in the Community, with special reference to enlargement, in HODGES M.
and WALLACEW. (Eds.) EconomicDivergence in the European Community, pp. 135-50. Royal Institute of International Affairs,
Allen and Unwin, London.
FETHERSTON M., MOORE B. and RHODES J. (1980) Britain, in SEERS D. and VAITSOS C. (Eds.) Integration and Unequal
Development: the Experience of the EEC, pp. 136-54. Macmillan, London.
GOTTMANNJ. (1980) Centre and Periphery: Spatial Variation in Politics. Sage/Focus, Beverley Hills.
HALL P. and HAY D. (1980) Growth Centres in the European Urban System. Heinemann Educational, London.
HARRIS C. (1954) The Market as a factor in the localization of industry in the United States, Ann. Ass. Am. Geogr. 44, 31548.
HUSSMAN E. (1976) Das Lagepotential dee Arbeitsmarktregionen der Bundesrepublik, Die Weltwirtschaft H1, 66-80.
KEEBLE D. (1976) Industrial Location and Planning in the United Kingdom. Methuen, London.
KEEBLE D., OWENS P. L. and THOMPSON C. (1981) The influence of peripheral and central locations on the relative
development of Regions: final Report, Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, on behalf of the
Directorate-General for Regional Policy, Commission of the European Communities, and the U K Department of Industry.
VANDER KNAAP G. (1980) The Centre-Periphery Model and EconomicPotentialAnalysis. Economic Geography Institute, Erasmus
University, Rotterdam.
Downloaded by [Carnegie Mellon University] at 19:46 20 January 2015

MACLENNANM. (1979) Regional policy in a European framework, in MACLENNAND. and PARRJ. (Eds.) Regional Policy: Past
Experience and New Directions pp. 245-71, Martin Robertson, Oxford.
MARQUAND J. (1980) The role of the tertiary sector in regional policy, Regional Policy Series no. 19, Commission of the
European Communities Studies Collection, Brussels.
MORGAN E. (1973) Regional problems and common currencies, Lloyds Bank Review 110, 19-30.
RAY D. (1965) Market potential and economic shadow, Research Paper No. 101, Department of Geography, University of
Chicago.
RICH D. (1975) Accessibility and economic activity: a study oflocational disadvantage in Scotland, unpublished PhD Thesis,
University of Cambridge.
RICH D. (1978) Population potential, potential transportation cost and industrial location, Area 10, 222-6.
RICH D. (1980) Potential models in Human Geography, Geoabstracts 26, Norwich.
ROBINSON H. and BAMFORD C. G. (1978) The Geography of Transport. MacDonald and Evans, Plymouth.
ROMUS P. (t978) Economie Regionale Europ~enne, 3rd edition. Presses Universitaires de Bruxelles.
ROMUS P. (1979) L'Europe et les Regions. Editions Labor, Bruxelles.
SANT M. (1974) Regional Policy and Planningfor Europe. Saxon House, D. C. Heath, Farnborough Hants.
SCHLAIM A. and YANNOPOULOS G. (1976) The EEC and the Mediterranean Countries. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
SEERS D., SCHAEFER B. and KILJUNEN M. (1979) Underdeveloped Europe: Studies in Core-Periphery Relations. Institute of
Development Studies, Harvester Press, Sussex.
SEERS D. and VAITSOS C. (1980) Integration and Unequal Development: the Experience of the EEC. Macmillan Press, London.
SOEC (1978) National Accounts USA, Aggregates 1960-77 Office des Publications Officielles des Communaut~s Europ6enes,
Luxembourg GD.
SOEC (1979) Regional Statistics: Population, Employment, Living Standards, 1977 Office des Publications Officielles des
Communaut6s Europ~enes, Luxembourg GD.
SOEC (1980) Codification des Unites Territorials Statistiques: Etat au 1/6/80, Mimeo, Luxembourg GD.
STEWARTJ. Q. (1947) Empirical mathematical rules concerning the distribution and equilibrium of population. Geogr. Rev.
37, 461-85.
STRASSER D. (1981) The Finances of Europe, European Perspectives Series, Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities, Luxembourg GD, Commission of the European Communities.
YUILL D. and ALLEN K. (1980) European Regional Incentives: 1980. European Regional Policy Monitoring Unit, Centre for the
Study of Public Policy, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow.
YUILL D., ALLEN K. and HULL C. (1980) Regional Policy in the European Community. Croom Helm, London.