Presentation by Roger Stough, George Mason University Advanced Brainstorm Carrefour (ABC): ‘Smart People in Smart Cities’ Matej Bel University, Banská Bystrica, Slovakia (August, 2016)

1. Julian Wolpert
Roger Stough
University Professor
George Mason University
Arlington, VA, USA
Presentation at the International Workshop and Advanced Brainstorm
Carrefour (ABC) on Smart People in Smart Cities with cooperation
from the Faculty of Economics, Metej Bel University] the Regional
Science Academy; the City of Banska Bystrica; and, with support from
the Slovak Republic and the Slovakia Presidency of the EU Council
August 29, 2016

2. Julian Wolpert
• Born 1932
• BA - Columbia U.
• MA and Ph.D. - U. of Wisconsin (Geography)
• Professor Regional Science Department –
University of Pennsylvania (1963-1973)
• Bryant Professor of Public Affairs, & Urban
Planning , Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton U.
(1973-2005)
• Bryant Professor Emeritus of Geography, Public
Affairs and Urban Planning (2005-present)
2

3. Julian Wolpert
• Natl. Academy of Sciences 1972 – 11 publications!
• Elected to Amer. Asso. for the Advancement of Sci.
• Fellow, Russel Sage Foundation, Guggenheim, Center
for Advanced Study in the Behav. Sci., Wilson Center
• Offices: Natl. Res. Council, Asso. Amer. Geog., Amer.
Geog. Soc., Amer. Schs. of Plan., & Reg. Sci. Asso.
• Advisor to Natl. Sci. Foundation, U.S. State Dept.,
NIMH, various Depts. of the State of N.J.
• Wolpert and NIMH – a story
3

4. Quantitative & Behavioral Analysis
• Wolpert & Herbert Simon – Models of Man
– Economic man Assumptions: Rational decision
maker; complete knowledge; self interest: utility
maximizer
– Critique
– Wolpert’s work reflects bounded rationality &
adaptive rationality in a spatial context
– Wolpert - influenced by the quantitative
revolution & social-behavioral movement
4

5. Behavior in Spatial Context (1)
• Modeling agricultural decision making
• Data - Sweden
• Used LP to estimate maximum returns
• LP a new quantitative tool for spatial analysts
• Computed theoretical vs. actual gap
• Demonstrating bounded or adaptive
rationality in a spatial context
5

6. Behavior in Spatial Context (2)
Information dissemination & Satisficing in Sweden
• Modeled dissemination & adoption of crop info.
• Multi-stage diffusion simulation- Monte Carlo
• Assumptions or Rules of dissemination
– Agricultural agencies disseminate best practice info
– Agents to farmers
– Big farmers to smaller farmers
• Soc. relations - who gets the information & when
• Conclude: outcomes influenced by soc. relations
6

7. Behavior in Spatial Context (3)
Migration – Field Theory
• Distance & directional bias - disaggregate to regional
• In & out migration & net migration patterns differ
– Distance decay – negative exponential
– Directional bias – role of relative location factors
• Movements greater in some directions than others
• Illustrated migration fields - direction/distance
parameters
• Aggregate U.S. patterns: Westward & southeastward
beyond pull of the NE or megalopolis clusters
7

8. Behavior in Spatial Context (4):
Locating Noxious Facilities
• Siting noxious facilities - sports stadium in
Philadelphia: example:
• Stakeholder threat → stress → adaptation
cycles
• Role of power
• Outcome
8

9. Behavior in a Spatial Context:
Summary (5)
• Contributor to the quantitative revolution
• Leader: behavioral approach in geography and
spatial analysis
• Wolpert’s general approach was theoretical
and evidence- based
• An advocate for behavioral & evidence-based
approach throughout his career.
9

10. Wolpert’s contributions (1)
• Decision process in a spatial context – (1964) &
Departure from the usual environment in location
analysis (1970) both papers in AAAG
• Argued that location of noxious facilities not well
explained by location theories of Von Thunen,
Christaller, Losch, Weber, etc. due to:
– Imperfect information, computational ability, etc.
– STAKEHOLDER CONFLICT: GOALS, MOTIVATIONS,
VALUE
• Location outcome may be far from “rational”
10

11. Wolpert’s Contributions (2)
• 1960 spatial quantitative revolution – hegemonic?
• Method & theory “foreign words”
• Location theory?
• Little or no recognition that human relations with
nature ultimately socially mediated! However,
• Location theory offered an approach for including
the social; but was normative & narrow
• Lacked a clear recognition of how social relations
are conditioned or influenced by power
• Wolpert challenged the hegemony of a world view
that excluded power relations – also David Harvey
11

12. Wolpert’ Contributions: Features of his
argument (3)
• Behavioral theory of the time focused on aspects of
decision environments; same in geography
• Wolpert’s view was social-psychological
• Emphasis on conflictual nature of location decisions
• Location decisions → products of interactions &
conflict outcomes
• Wolpert fascinated with dynamics of decisions and
how bargaining evolved through threat, counter-threat,
stress in context of unequal power.
• Difficult to study human spatial behavior without
reference to power relations
12

13. Wolpert’s Contributions (4)
• Bias in siting public and noxious facilities
– Siting based on pure economic assumptions can
and often does create inequities
– Noxious facilities: highly important but unwanted!
– Examples: trash dumps, stadiums, neighborhood
mental health facilities, urban expressways,
bridges, sewage disposal plants,
– Cycle thesis
13

14. Wolpert’s Contributions (5)
• Because these facilities are needed but not
wanted, power pushes the siting decision
around to a “least power” location
– Evidence based research – siting noxious facilities;
mental health decentralization, urban
transportation, bridges, sewers and sewage
disposal systems
– Public policy and other behavioral outcomes and
policies important to Wolpert
14

15. Not for Profits (NFPs) & Philanthropy
• NFPs - no regional analysis: four region study
• Philanthropic voluntary sector: A significant
component of regional economies
• NFP activity varies by region
– Older, liberal, larger, (and smaller) better endowed/
asset rich regions - stronger NFP activity
– Caveat – patterns of giving in smaller towns more
generous than larger cities
– Industrial regions more generous than sun belt cities
15

16. Not for Profits (NFPs) & Philanthropy
• Individual & corporate giving varies with
economic conditions
• As NFPs mature public funding increases: But
become more vulnerable
• Complimentary (not competitive) relationship
between philanthropy & public sector support
• Regional lag and life cycle model
16

17. Not for Profits (NFPs) in Public Policy
• Entrepreneurship and NFP development
analogy
• NFP sector well represented in all (including
growing, stable and declining regions)
• NFP service functions similar but emphasis
varies
• Corporate giving – headquarters; & industry
mix important
• Foundation grants favor home regions!
17

18. Wolpert’s Contributions: Summary
• Theory & Method: quantification & behavioral;
field theory (migration), evidence based research
• Method: LP, Simulation – Monte Carlo; field
analytics in migration
• Substantive areas of contribution:
– Decision making in spatial context
– Diffusion of information (technology)
– Siting of noxious facilities
– Migration – field analytical methods
– Non-profits and philanthropy
– Others – benefit cost, mental health, group housing
18

19. Thank you
Roger R. Stough
[rstough@gmu.edu]
19