1. Regional Science owes especially much to developments in location theory. See: E.M. Hoover, “Location Theory,”Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, New York, Crowell-Collier (new edition, forthcoming); Walter Isard,Location and Space-Economy, Cambridge, Mass., and New York, Technology Press and Wilely, 1956, esp. ch. 2; and William Alonso, “Location Theory,” inRegional Development and Planning, John Friedmann and William Alonso, eds., Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 1964.
2. These relationships, summarized in section IV below, have been partially explored in a number of articles in the seriesPapers and Proceedings, Regional Science Association. See, e.g.: vols. 3, 4, 5, 1957, 1958, 1959.
3. See, for example, reports of ongoing research given to conferences of the Regional Science Association in Europe, South America, and the Far East:Papers, Regional Science Association, vol. 8, 10, 12, 14, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965;Cuadernos de la Sociedad Venezolana de Planificacion, special issue, September 1963; andPapers and Proceedings of the First Far East Conference of the Regional Science Association, Tokyo, vol. 1, 1963.
4. See, e.g., respectively: B. Harris, “Urbanization Policy in India,”Papers and Proceedings, Regional Science Association, vol. 5, 1959, and references cited therein; George G. Zipf,Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort, Cambridge, Mass., Addison-Wesley, 1949, esp. chs. 9, 10; and Isard,Location..., op. cit., esp. ch. 11.
5. For example, appropriate tasks for a regional planning agency are outlined in: W. Isard and T. A. Reiner, “Regional Science and Planning,”Papers and Proceedings Regional Science Association, vol. 8, 1961. A discussion of the spatial aspects of centralization and decentralization is given in: W. Isard and T. H. Tung, “Some Concepts for the Analysis of Spatial Organization,” parts I and II,Papers, Regional Science Association, vol. 11, 12, 1963, 1964.