ABSTRACT
Geography has often been accused of barrenness in terms of the meaningful generalizations and models it has produced. Much of this infertility may be attributed to the crude and subjective measuring instruments which have been generally employed by geographers. Urban social geography is dependent on the delimitation of meaningful social areas, regions characterized by a stated combination of social conditions. The concept of region as an abstract or as a partial model of reality has been widely explored by geographical theorists, but much less attention has been given to the definition of methods by which the requirements of a formally-valid regional system may be satisfied. Mapped distributions can only provide the raw material for analysis and the success of the operation depends on the use of more concise and specific measures of distribution, which are capable of quantitative statement and allow precise comparison.
