Explain the core-periphery model in political geography and how it shapes political power.

• A. Core regions are economically developed and politically influential; peripheries are less developed; power and wealth concentrate in cores, shaping inequality.
• B. Core regions are rural and culturally defined but economically weak; peripheries are urban centers with influence.
• C. Core regions are politically weaker; peripheries control most wealth.
• D. Core regions have no resources; peripheries hold all wealth.

Answer: (A)

The idea being tested is how political power is organized spatially: a core that concentrates wealth and decision-making, and peripheries that depend on it. In this model, core regions are economically developed and politically influential. They host key institutions, infrastructure, and capital that drive national policies and growth. Peripheries are less developed and often subordinate, supplying natural resources or labor but receiving less investment and having weaker political voice. Because wealth and power cluster in the core, policies, investment, and governance tend to favor the core, creating and reinforcing inequality between core and periphery.

That description fits best because it captures both the concentration of power in the core and the dependent, weaker status of the periphery, and it explains how these spatial dynamics shape political power and inequality.

The other options misstate the relationships: they flip roles or imply the core has little or no resources or power, which contradicts the standard understanding of the core-periphery dynamic.