{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018760195758564437, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.324742268041237, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
How cities internalize their former urban fringes: a cross-cultural comparison

Studies of urban fringe belts have multiplied in recent years, demonstrating the validity of this morphological concept in a variety of regions around the world. Yet there have been few direct attempts at a comparative assessment of the concept’s performance in the different cultural settings in which it has been applied. This paper seeks to contribute to this goal, by examining the fringe-belt structure of several cities drawn from contrasting urban cultural traditions in Europe and the New World. Not surprisingly, certain commonalities emerge, but there are also large differences in the number, scale, complexity, and even basic geometry of fringe belts apparent in this eclectic examination. These differences go well beyond simple explanations of site circumstances, size, and function of the city within the urban hierarchy, and result from essential contrasts in urban social values, property rules, and planning traditions. The analysis leads to speculations about the efficacy and limits of the fringe-belt concept to identify and account for variations in the texture of urban form across urban areas in diverse cultural contexts.