| Abstract: | The concept of counterurbanisation has evoked criticisms. Some are technical, to do with terminology and analytical design. More serious criticisms stem from disquiet with the theoretical foundations. It is this issue that the present paper aims to address. We begin by discussing some problem areas related to techniques and concepts and lead on to an argument that the weakness in counterurban research arises from its preoccupation with population trends and with patterns rather than processes. The paper conclude that alternative approaches are needed which treat counterurbanisation as an element of regional restructuring rather than as an end in itself. |
