English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The definition and delimitation of metropolitan areas has been the focus of many geographers and other specialists for quite a few decades. The complexity and diversity of the methods and techniques used, and the differing attitudes of those working in this area have brought considerably different, and often controversial, results. The EU has introduced a tool, Integrated Territorial Investments (ITI), to support study in this area by motivating EU member states to define their metropolitan areas. This article will introduce the methodological approaches related to the functional integration of regional units and to inter-regional relations, used with ITI to delimit the metropolitan areas in two large cities, Brno (monocentric system) and Ostrava (polycentric system), and will compare the results with those achieved using our own method. Through a comparison of the results this article will examine the efficacy of the methods previously used and their possible transferability to studies of metropolitan areas with completely different settlement systems. Finally, this article will consider whether a unification of previously fragmented approaches is possible.

Different approaches to defining metropolitan areas (Case study: cities of Brno and Ostrava, Czech Republic)