Many studies have documented the existence of spatial socioeconomic inequalities in developing nations, as well as developed, Western nations with market economies. Such spatial inequalities generally have been ascribed to deficiencies in the political, social, and economic systems prevailing in these states. Some writers have implied that under Marxist forms of socialism such inequalities would not occur and that territorial or spatial justice would prevail instead. This paper reviews evidence in recent literature bearing on the question of spatial equality and inequality in the socialist countries of the USSR and northeastern Europe, all of which profess an ideological commitment to the goal of eliminating spatial inequality. Judged from various perspectives-regional contrasts, urban-rural and urban-urban comparisons, and intraurban distinctions- the socialist states studied exhibit marked spatial inequalities. The persistence of these inequalities can be explained in terms of the priority placed on efficiency or military security as opposed to equity in industrial location decisions, the favoring of investment in “productive sectors” rather than social infrastructure, a desire to defer urbanization costs as reflected in constraints on urban growth, the growing scale requirements of service and human welfare facilities, and the continuation of substantial differences in income for various occupation groups. What is “equitable distribution”?… Have not also the socialist sectarians the most varied notions about” equitable” distribution? Karl Marx. We must keep in mind the difference between a socialist social structure in its” pure form”, so to speak, and the actual social structure of a concrete socialist organism. O. I. Shkaratan. If it's bad in Moscow, it's worse in the provinces. N. S. Khrushchev. © 1979, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
