Monofunkcinių miestų sampratos problema

LTReikšminiai žodžiai: Lietuvos miestai; Miesto funkcijos; Miestų funkcijos; Monofunkciniai miestai; City functions; Lithuania; Lithuanian towns; Monofunctional cities.

ENThis work was aimed at determining the validity of typological definition of the so-called "monofunctional" city. It should be recognized that the type of "monofunctional" cities has been distinguished in the functional typologies of different schools yet it has not anywhere been defined as a type of cities performing only one function. Solution of current tasks of research led to the following generalizations (it should be born in mind that the present article is designed to evolve a discussion): • to evaluate the integrity of the functional conception of "monofunctional" city. The premise of different schools and authors that the so-called "monofunctional" cities perform more than one function irrespective of any level of specialization can be regarded integral. The relations between the notions of city "functions", "specialization" and "special purpose" are not clearly defined. • based on the different approaches of social geographical schools to find out the diversity of identification premises of monofunctional cities. The diversity of identification of "monofunctional" cities includes qualitative and quantitative premises. High diversity of the conception of city function is inherent to the Soviet, Western and Lithuanian schools. The difference is that the Soviet school of social geography placed emphasis on quantitative definition criteria of city functions. Determining the relation between the coverage of basic (creating a city) and service functions according to the number of participants is the most widespread basis of functional typology of cities. It is unsuitable for typifying the functions of post-industrial cities. • to ground a possibility of identifying (or not) monofunctional cities in the Lithuanian system of urban settlements.The former quantitative criteria applied for regional planning purposes are not applicable to modern functional typology of Lithuanian cities under the conditions of actual knowledge of city structure and functions. The traditional quantitative characteristics of city functions (specializations) is out-of-date due to the changed structure of economy, different territorial relations between subjects and objects of economy (essential changes of the structure of economy and mobility of population) and due to elementary statistical system. Qualitative parameters should be applied to functional typology of Lithuanian cities. This would mean its radical revision. There are no quantitative prerequisites for typifying modern Lithuanian cities on the functional basis. Health resorts and Visaginas can be provisory classified as "monofunctional" cities of constricted specialization. The functional designation of both is expanding. For example, conversion of Druskininkai from a health resort to the centre of rather large municipality has undoubtedly extended its administrative functions (the residents of other settlements account for almost 40% of municipality population). After restructuring of subsidiary services of the nuclear power plant (NPP) of Visaginas most of the city residents have become employees of independent service centres. [From the publication]