The Concentric Zone Model, developed by sociologist Ernest Burgess in the 1920s, explains the internal structure of cities as a series of rings expanding outward from the central business district, with land use shifting from commercial to industrial to progressively wealthier residential zones.
The Concentric Zone Model is Ernest Burgess's 1920s explanation of how a city organizes itself, based on his study of Chicago. Picture a dartboard. The bullseye is the central business district (CBD), where land is most expensive and commerce dominates. Moving outward, you hit the zone of transition (industry plus aging, low-cost housing), then working-class housing, then middle-class residential areas, and finally a commuter zone at the edge. Each ring grows by invading the next one out as the city expands.
The logic underneath the rings is land value. Land costs the most at the center, so only businesses can afford it, and residents who want more space for less money move farther out. That makes the Concentric Zone Model essentially bid-rent theory drawn as a map. In the CED, it's listed by name in EK PSO-6.D.1 as one of the models you need for explaining the internal structure of cities, alongside the Hoyt sector model, the Harris and Ullman multiple-nuclei model, the galactic city model, and regional models from Latin America, Southeast Asia, and Africa.
This term lives in Topic 6.5, The Internal Structure of Cities (Unit 6), and directly supports learning objective 6.5.A, which asks you to explain the internal structure of cities using various models and theories. The Burgess concentric-zone model is named explicitly in the essential knowledge (EK PSO-6.D.1), so it's fair game on any exam question about urban land use. It also matters because it's the baseline model. The sector model, multiple-nuclei model, and galactic city model all exist as responses to what the concentric rings get wrong, so you can't evaluate those models without knowing this one. It even echoes Unit 1 skills, since the model is a classic example of how geographers use spatial concepts like pattern and distance (Topic 1.4) to simplify a messy real-world city.
Keep studying AP Human Geography Unit 6
Bid-Rent Theory (Unit 6)
Bid-rent theory says land value drops as you move away from the CBD, so different users outbid each other for different distances. The Concentric Zone Model is what that price curve looks like when you draw it as a city map. If you understand one, you basically understand both.
Zone of Transition (Unit 6)
The second ring of Burgess's model has its own name and shows up on its own in exam questions. It's the belt of industry and deteriorating low-income housing right outside the CBD, and it's where invasion and succession (one land use pushing out another) is most visible.
Suburbanization and Sprawl (Unit 6, Topic 6.2)
Burgess's outermost commuter ring predicted suburban growth, but he couldn't foresee cars and highways scattering edge cities, exurbs, and boomburbs across the landscape (EK PSO-6.A.4). The galactic city model exists precisely because decentralization broke the neat ring pattern.
Spatial Concepts: Distance Decay and Pattern (Unit 1, Topic 1.4)
The model is a working example of Unit 1 ideas. Land value, density, and accessibility all decay with distance from the center, producing a predictable spatial pattern. When an FRQ asks you to apply geographic concepts, this model is a ready-made illustration.
Multiple-choice questions usually describe a city layout and ask you to name the matching model. The classic stem looks like this: "a central business district surrounded by concentric rings of residential and industrial land uses that decrease in density with distance from the center." If the description mentions rings expanding outward from one center, it's Burgess. If it mentions wedges along transportation corridors, it's Hoyt's sector model instead, and exam writers love putting both in the same answer set. On FRQs about Topic 6.5, you may be asked to explain or compare urban models, identify a model from a diagram, or describe a limitation. A strong limitation answer notes that the model is based on 1920s Chicago, assumes one center, and doesn't account for cars, highways, or multiple business nodes.
Both models start with a CBD, but the shape of growth is different. Burgess's concentric zones grow outward in full rings, so distance from the center determines land use. Hoyt's sector model (1939) grows in wedges or pie slices radiating out along transportation corridors, so high-income housing can stretch from the center all the way to the edge along a rail line or highway. Quick test for MCQs: rings means Burgess, wedges along transit routes means Hoyt.
The Concentric Zone Model, created by Ernest Burgess in the 1920s based on Chicago, describes a city as rings expanding outward from the central business district.
The ring order moves from the CBD to the zone of transition, then working-class housing, then middle-class residential areas, and finally the commuter zone.
The model is bid-rent theory in map form, because expensive central land goes to commerce while residents trade longer commutes for cheaper land farther out.
It is named in EK PSO-6.D.1 under Topic 6.5, which means you can be asked to identify, apply, or critique it on the exam.
Its biggest limitations are that it assumes a single center, ignores transportation corridors, and reflects a 1920s American industrial city rather than modern decentralized or non-Western cities.
Later models like Hoyt's sectors, Harris and Ullman's multiple nuclei, and the galactic city model were created to fix what the concentric rings couldn't explain.
It's Ernest Burgess's 1920s model showing a city as a series of rings around the central business district, moving from the CBD to the zone of transition, working-class housing, middle-class housing, and a commuter zone. It appears in Topic 6.5 as one of the required models for explaining the internal structure of cities.
Mostly no. It was built on 1920s Chicago, before cars and highways scattered growth into edge cities, exurbs, and boomburbs. It's still tested on the AP exam as a foundational model, and knowing its flaws is exactly what comparison questions reward.
Burgess's model grows in complete rings, so land use depends on distance from the center. Hoyt's sector model grows in wedges along transportation corridors, so a high-income sector can run from the CBD to the city's edge. MCQs that mention corridors or wedges are pointing at Hoyt, not Burgess.
It's the second ring, just outside the CBD, mixing industry with aging, low-cost, often deteriorating housing. It's called a transition zone because the expanding CBD constantly invades it, making it the most unstable ring in the model.
Yes. It's listed by name in the CED (EK PSO-6.D.1) under Topic 6.5, and multiple-choice questions regularly describe a city with concentric rings of decreasing density and ask you to identify the model. FRQs can also ask you to compare it with other urban models or explain its limitations.