Integrative potential of Central European metropolises with a special focus on the Visegrad countries

    Martin Šauer Affiliation
    ; Vilém Pařil Affiliation
    ; Milan Viturka Affiliation


One of the characteristic phenomena associated with the current development of civilization is undoubtedly metropolisation. This article focuses on the strategically important problems of the metropolisation of the Central European area with an emphasis on the Visegrad countries. The introductory part is dedicated to the identification of Central European metropolises based on three components: population size, economic profile and investment attractiveness. Designated metropolises are then assessed from the point of view of integrative potential level, including economic interactivity, tourist attractiveness and transport connectivity. Based on the synthesis of these components, the most important axes of supranational importance were identified. It can be said that within the established network of metropolitan axes connecting eastern with western parts of the Central European region the Czech Republic is the best placed, followed by Poland. From a wider geopolitical outlook this network creates favourable conditions for the integration of the Visegrad countries, mainly driven by international trade.

Keyword : metropolis, metropolitan axes, interactivity, attractiveness, connectivity

How to Cite
Šauer, M., Pařil, V., & Viturka, M. (2019). Integrative potential of Central European metropolises with a special focus on the Visegrad countries. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 25(2), 219-238.
Published in Issue
Feb 14, 2019
Abstract Views
PDF Downloads
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


Arvis, J. F., & Shepherd, B. (2016). Measuring connectivity in a globally networked industry: the case of air transport. World Economy, 39(3), 369-385.

Bieger, T. (2008). Managament von destinationen. München: Oldenburg.

Brender, N., & Golden, A. (2007). Mission impossible: successful Canadian cities. Paper presented at The Conference Board of Canada III. Ottawa, Canada (pp. 222).

Brezzi, M., Piacentini, M., Rosina, K, & Sanchez-Serra, D. (2012). Redefining urban areas in OECD countries Redefining Urban: a new way to measure Metropolitan areas (pp. 19-58). Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Brockhaus Enzyklopädie Jahrbuch 2009. (2010). Leipzig-Mannheim: F.A. Brockhaus.

Calatayud, A., Palacin, R., Mangan, J., Jackson, E., & Ruiz-Rua, A. (2016). Understanding connectivity to international markets: a systematic review. Transport Reviews, 36(6), 713-736.

Central Intelligence Agency. (2014). The World Factbook. Washington, DC. Retrieved from

Cushman & Wakefield. (2011). European cities monitor. New York: Cushman & Wakefield.

Duval, D. T. (2013). Critical issues in air transport and tourism. Tourism Geographies, 15(3), 494-510.

Encyclopædia Britannica. (2011). Britannica Group, Inc., Chicago. Retrieved from

European Council of Spatial Planners. (2013). The Charter of European Planning. General assembly of ECTP-CEU, Barcelona.

European Union [EU]. (2013). Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of The European Parliament and of The Council of 11 december 2013 on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-european transport network and repealing decision no 661/2010/eu. Retrieved from:

Eurostat. (2017). Eurostat air transport statistics. Retrieved from

Flightradar24. (2017). Interactive air transport data provider. Retrieved from,16.39/5

Globalization and World Cities [GaWC]. (2014). Loughborough: Loughborough University, Study Group and Network. Retrieved from

Google. (2017). Google maps planning module. Retrieved from

Growe, A. (2012). Emerging polycentric city-regions in Germany. Regionalisation of economic activities in metropolitan regions. Erdkunde, 66(4), 295-311.

Hanssens, H., Derudder, B., & Witlox, F. (2012). Managing organizational and geographical complexity: the positionality of advanced producer services in the globalizing economies of metropolitan regions. Erdkunde, 66(1), 45-55.

Hospers, G. (2002). Beyond the Blue banana? Structural changes in Europe’s geo-economy. In 42nd European Congress of the Regional Science Associaton, Dortmund (pp. 76-85). European Regional Science Association.

Klug, H. (2012). An integrated holistic transdisciplinary landscape planning concept after the Leitbild approach in. Ecological Indicators, 23, 616-626.

Kraft, S. (2016). Anytime? Anywhere? The seasonality of flight offers in Central Europe. Moravian Geographical Reports, 24(4), 26-37.

Krätke, S. (2006). The metropolization of the European urban and regional system. Globalization and World Cities Research Bulletin, 193.

Krätke, S. (2014). Cities in contemporary capitalism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38(5), 1660-1667.

Liu, X. J., Dai, L., & Derudder, B. (2017). Spatial Inequality in the Southeast Asian intercity transport network. Geographical Review, 107(2), 317-335. (2017). Czech travel map portal. Retrieved from

Matsumoto, H., Domae, K., & O’Connor, K. (2016). Business connectivity, air transport and the urban hierarchy: A case study in East Asia. Journal of Transport Geography, 54, 132-139.

McCann, P. (2010). Urban and regional economics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Neumann, U. (2013). City ranking – a useful instrument for regional analysis and policy? Paper presented at the Acatech CAE Workshop A ranking scheme for intelligent cities. Munich, Deutsche akademie der technikwissenschaften.

Nováček, A. (2012). Dualita Evropy: historickogeografická analýza [Europe’s Duality: Historical Geographic Analysis]. Prague: Česká geografická společnost.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. 2012. Redefining “urban”: a new way to measure metropolitan areas. Paris.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. 2013. Definition of functional urban areas for the OECD metropolitan database. Paris.

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. 2018. Metropolitan areas. Paris.

Park, Y., & O’Kelly, M. E. (2017). Exploring accessibility from spatial interaction data: An evaluation of the Essential Air Service (EAS) program in the contiguous US air transport system, Environment and Planning, 49(4), 930-951.

Parr, J. B. (2014). The regional economy, spatial structure and regional urban systems. Regional Studies, 48(12), 1926-1938.

Potschin, M. B., Klug, H., & Haines-Young, R. H. (2010). From vision to action: Framing the Leitbild concept in the context of landscape planning. Futures, 42(7), 656-667.

Suau-Sanchez, P.; Voltes-Dorta, A., & Rodriguez-Deniz, H. (2016). Measuring the potential for selfconnectivity in global air transport markets: Implications for airports and airlines. Journal of Transport Geography, 57, 70-82.

Statistics Poland. (2017). Local Data Bank. Retrieved from

Statistisches Bundesamt. (2016). Vorläufige Ergebnisse. Wiesbaden: Das Statistische Bundesamt. (Date 15 June 2016).

Statistisches Bundesamt. (2017). Regionaldatenbank Deutschland. Retrieved 30 June 2017 from

Stimson, J., Stough, R., & Roberts, B. (2006). Regional economic development. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer.

TourMIS database. (2017). Marketing-Information-System for tourism managers. Wien: MODUL University Vienna. Retrieved 30 June 2017 from

Viturka, M. (2014). Integrative model for evaluation of development potentials of regions and its application on an example of the Czech Republic. Economics and Management, 17(4), 4-19.

Viturka, M., Pařil, V., Tonev, P., Šašinka, P., & Kunc, J. (2017). The Metropolisation Processes – A case of Central Europe and the Czech Republic. Prague Economic Paper, 26(5), 505-522.

Wöber, K. W. (2003). Information supply in tourism management by marketing decision support systems. Tourism Management, 24(3), 241-255.

Wydział Ekonomiczno-Handlowy – Ambasada RP w Berlinie. (2005). Rynek Niemiecki (Poradnik dla exsporterów i inwestorów). Berlin.

Žítek, V., Klímová, V., & Králová, M. (2016). Assessment of regional innovation systems as an assumption for innovation policy adjustment. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 49, 169-186.