Themetropolitan-hinterland thesis (orcentre-periphery thesis) theory of social and economic development, developed by the Canadian historianHarold Innis examines how economically advanced societies, through trade and colonialism, distort and impede economic development of less developed societies and regions.
Ametropolis is identified as the centre of political and economic power. It possesses a more advanced labor market, more skilled and educated workers, an abundance of value-added production, higher standard of living, etc. Ahinterland does not have the resources to withstand the political and economic interference of the metropolis. It features an abundance of resource extraction industries, fewer skilled and educated workers and a lower standard of living, and in many ways, it emulates the culture of the metropolis.
The metropolis-hinterlandparadigm has generally been applied to the relationship between Great Britain and its New World colonies. But it has also been applied to the relationship between industrial and rural regions withinCanada. Under the theory, the western Canadian provinces (BC, Alberta,Saskatchewan) are a hinterland to the political and economic forces of central Canada (Ontario and Quebec).[1]
The metropolitan thesis[2] is one of the dominant schools inCanadian historiography. The basic argument of the school states that the driving force in Canadian history has been the nation'smetropolitan areas. These originally included the imperial capitals ofParis (before 1763) andLondon (after 1763); and finally the Canadian centres ofMontreal andToronto in the modern era.
The roots of the metropolitan thesis are found in the writing ofHarold Innis, one of Canada's most respected historians. Innis'The Fur Trade in Canada,[3] as well as his work on theCanadian Pacific Railway,[4] put forward the idea that geography, commerce, andresource exploitation were the driving forces of Canadian history. The urban centres ofMontreal andToronto provided the impetus for the growth and formation of the Canadian nation. This is the Staple Thesis.[5]
After Innis,Donald Creighton in hisThe Empire of the St. Lawrence[6] argued that the massive waterway of theSt. Lawrence River and its connections across the continent "became the basis of an extensive communication system around which Canada itself took shape."[7] This is the Laurentian thesis.[8] The common trend in the historical roots of the metropolitan thesis is its opposition to theFrontier Thesis put forward byFrederick Jackson Turner to explain the forces behindAmerican history.
The first articulation of the metropolitan thesis occurred in 1954, with an article in theCanadian Historical Review by historianJ. M. S. Careless entitledFrontierism, Metropolitanism, and Canadian History. Careless argues that the developing eastern centres of commerce and industry controlled and oversaw the development of the Canadian nation. The metropolitan school studied "the effects of the East on the West, and largely regarded businessmen and conservative urban political elements as agents of national expansion who might well be more far-sighted in their outlook than were their agrarian opponents."[9]
