- Email: [email protected]
Large cities: Growth dynamics and emerging problems
HABITATlh’TL.
Vol
7. No.
i:6.
pp. 17-M.
OlY7-3Y751X3
lYX3
Printed in &cat Britain.
0
lYX3
$3 OCI + O.ol)
Pcrg’L”‘“n Press Ltd.
Large Cities: Growth Dynamics and Emerging Problems R. P. MISRA and NGUYEN TRI DUNG UN Centre for Regional Development, Nagoya, Japan
INTRODUCTION As the rapid growth of urban populations in developing countries reaches serious proportions, the study of urbanisation and its relation to development is attracting greater and more critical attention of the researchers, planners, and governments concerned. The problem, however, is enormously complex and of a multi-faceted nature - economic, sociological, political and cultural. It is not amenable to ethnocentric unidisciplinary analysis. As a consequence, the theories pertaining to urbanisation and development are still in their infancy. Urbanisation in Third World countries is characterised by an overwhelming functional dominance of the large metropolitan cities over national space. Overconcentration of population in large cities and the attendant problems of housing, infrastructure, and social services, has led many scholars to claim that ” in these countries when seen in there is an increasing ‘trend of overurbanisation relation to their level of economic development. The weakness of this concept, however, lies in two basic assumptions: (1) that ‘urbanisation is a by-product of industrialisation’ as has been experienced in Western countries; and, (2) that the urbanisation process as seen in Western countries in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries must also repeat itself in Third World countries. Industrialisation does play a very important role in the process of urbanisation almost everywhere, but the development of cities - especially metropolitan cities - in developing countries has not been due primarily to industrial expansion. Many non-industrial factors have played very prominent roles, and these factors continue to trigger off urban growth even today. The forces which have led to a particular type of urbanisation process in the developing countries are distinctly different and more complex than those in the Western countries, and the only way to analyse the pattern of urbanisation is to understand these forces properly. The purpose of this paper is to trace the changing spatial pattern of growth of large cities in the world, to analyse their causes and consequences, and to discuss the role of large cities in national development in countries passing through various stages of development.
’ This concept ix originally introduced in Da&. of Prc-industrial Arcns”. Eco~towtic fkvrloprnr~r
K. and Golden. H.H.. .1Urhanizatton and the Development u/x/ C‘ulr~ul Chongr Vol. 3. pp. h-26. 1954.
47
GROWTH
OF LARGE CITIES: A GLIMPSE
INTO HISTORY
The history of human settlements has witnessed four great changes in the pattern of growth and spatial organisation. The first was the revolutionary transition in the Neolithic Age from hunting and fishing to sedentary agriculture. from which rural settlements emerged. The second was the transition from the ‘village’ to the ‘city’ pattern of many human settlements which can be said to have occurred first in the river valleys ot West Asia soon after 3500 RC and later in many other parts of the world - chieflv in Egypt. Pakistan, India. China, Mexico, Peru, etc. The advent of the Indust&al Revolution, and accompanying colonisation of Latin America. Asia and Africa, heralded the third revolutionary transition characterised by a high level of science, technology and philosophy. and by structural transformation of many aspects of the economy - i.e. employment, production. organisation, etc.’ in Western Europe. The development of modern science and technology was the most critical factor accelerating the growth of ‘modern cities’. and helped to shift the largest city of the world from Asia (Peking) to Western Europe (London. with a population of 2.363,OOO in 1850). and then. after the First World War. to America (New York, with a population of 6.710.000 in 1920). The Second World War and the decolonisation of the present-day Third World countries brought about the fourth major change. There is a very strong tendency for the largest agglomerations of the world to shift by I990 from Western Europe to the developing countries - which are still undergoing a stage of demographic transition (see Table I). Mexico (in Latin America) with an estimated population of 3 I million in the year 2000 (see Table 2) will be the largest metropolis in the world. It would be difficult to comprehend each of these stages and the forces which brought them about without a review of some of the most critical historical events. The historical pattern of city expansion in the world can bc divided into four phases (Fig. I ). Plzrrsc I (4.30 rsc-1000 AD). The highest share in the proportion of 25 (or 30) ot the largest cities in the world (hereafter referred to as ‘HSLC’) was in South Asia. and the next highest was in East Asia. In Asian history, this is the splendid era of the Asokan Empire (269-232 BC) in India where the largest city in the world (in 200 BC), named Pataliputra (Patna), was located; and also of the Han Dynasty (2061 ~-221 AD) in China which had the largest city in the world (in IO0 ,a). named Loyang with an estimated population of around 650.000. The advanced agricultural societies in ;I favourable tropical climate with stable feudal systems which charactcrised Asian civilisations at that time could be seen as an explanatory factor for this phase. In 300 BC. the estimated population in Asia was about SO million. mainly in peasant villages; 1,3 million in West Asia; 30 million in (‘hina; 30 million III India; and about 20 million in Europe. mainly concentrated in Southern Europe.’ that is. Greece, Rome, Spain etc. Close to the beg,inning of the Christian Era. the Roman Empire (27 ~-476 AD) emerged to dominate the West and established Rome as a city, competing with Loyang in China. Many of the maqnificent autocracy. and exploitation the Sumerian, Indo-Gangetic,
few survived
the ravages
cities in ancient times - landmarks of luxury. of the people - fell into ruins after the downfall of Egyptian, Greek, and Roman civilisations. Only ;I
of history.
In
the medieval
period.
the cities
grew
Date
(I)
World
Africa
Europe”’
total
HC
130
7s ( 100)
200
25
(100)
2s 2s 2s 7s 75 2s
(loo) ( 100) (100) ( 100) ( 100)
II (44) 13 (S2)
x (37)
-I (16)
7 (2X)
2 (8)
15 13 17 I2 7 7 7 8 5 5 1
((10) (52) (6X) (38) (‘8) (7X) (2X) (32) (20) (20) (Ih)
4 (16)
3 (12) 4 (If)) 1 (1)
-l 1 2 7
(16) (IO) (X) (S)
2 (X) 3 (17)
0 (0) 0 (0)
3 3 I 2
0 (0)
AD
100 361 627 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 I700 I x00 1x50 I x75 IYOO lY2.5
( 100) 15 ( 100) 3 ( 100) 25 (100) 25 ( 100) ‘5 (100) 7s ( 100) 25 ( 100) 2.5(100)
1950 197.5 I990 3000
30 30 30 30
I500
(2)
( 100)
2.5
(loo) (100) (loo) ( 100)
2 ( 6.0 ) 7 (23.0) II (36.7) I? (40 0)
-I (16) 5 (201 9 (36j IO (40) IO (40) x (32) Y (36) IO (10) IO (40) II (4)
x (3’) 3 (I?) 4 (16) 3 (12) h 6 5 5
(70.0) (20.0) (16.7) (16.7)
2 (8) 4 (IO) 3 (16) x (31) 6 (24)
8 (32) x (32) 0 (36) II (44) 13 (52) I? (4X) I.? (5’) IO 6 5 4
(12) (12)
I (4)
(4)
1 (-I)
(X)
0 0 0 (I 0 0 0 0
J (16) -l (16) 2 (8) 2 (8) 2 (8) 7 (X)
1 (4) 0 (0)
1 (4) 0 (0) 0 (0)
(33.3) (20.0)
I (3.3) 1 (3.3)
(16.7) (13.3)
I (3.3) I (3.3)
(0) (0)
(0)
(0) ((I) (0) (0) (0) 2 (S)
4 (IO) 5 (20) 7 (2s) II IO x x
(ih.7) (3.3.3) (X.6) (2h.h)
Source:
(I) (From 430-1925 1s~): Tertius Chandler and Gerald Fox. .WO Yews o~‘UrAm~ Grow.fh. Ac;t&mic Press, New York. 1071. (2) (From IYSO-2000): XC Table 2. Notes: Numhcra in parenthew\ :ire in percentages against World total. In the period lY%-2000. the 31 largest agglomerations WC‘I-c t:lken into xcount In\tcad 01 the largest 7-5 cities. (‘I’ Asia other th;m China; Dcmocr;ltlc People’s Republic of Korea: Japan: Republic 01 Korea: ;m~i ‘I urhcv. ‘I” Chin:,: Democratic People‘s Republic of Korea; Japan: ;rncl Republic of Korea. (‘I Including Turhcv :ind the Union 01‘ Sovwt Sociall\t Rcpuhlich. ‘I” Northern America and LItin America comhinetl.
mostly as capital and commercial centres. However, the Western cities could not expand further due to the political fragmentation of Europe and, hence. limited support from the hinterland during this period. Phase II (ZOOO-IS00 AD). In this pre-industrial period, East Asia assumed the leading role in HSLC. Europe with the cultural renaissance showed a rapid growth and took second place in HSLC, while South Asia exhibited a sharp decline and became the third in the last half of this period. This period might be called a ‘gestation period’ of Western civilisation. During this period the Western cities were characterised by highly diversified activities and functions (mainly commercial and financial rather than industrial); and by internationalised growth factors triggered off by the new navigation technology and worldwide trade. In all regions, however, the primary sector (largely agriculture) was of paramount importance. Phase III (18170 AD-SCWM~ World War). This is the ‘flourishing era’ of modern European civilisation marked by the colonisation of non-Western countries and trade expansion: by the Industrial Revolution from a technology and production viewpoint; and philosophically by the French Revolution (17X9). This led to an amazing and rapid urbanisation in Western countries, both in Europe and America. by ‘push-pull’ socio-economic factors, leading to huge migration from rural to urban settlements. While in Asia - both East and
ITS 17.7
I I.6 1II.S III.7 IO.4
s I 7,s 7.-l 7.0 6.S (3.4 (1. I 5.7 -IS 4.S 4.5 4.4 4.4 .I.3 1.7 4.1 -1.0
_
South - there was. in sharp contrast, a declining trend which could be explained by stagnant agriculture, along with high absolute growth of population. The process of industrial capitalism in Europe was characterised by the following essential elements: a high agricultural surplus; a class of fret status and dynamic entrepreneurs; a process of capital accumulation by them to finance large-scale investments: the development of a practical science; and development of the ‘market expansion and machine production’ structure of the economy. At this time in history, these essential elements made the Western cities very different from Asian cities, which primarily prospered on the basis of agriculture. And the overseas market expansionism by Western countries due to their military superiority led to the colonisation of non-Western societies. It is this colonisation and exploitation which were indeed the foundation of Western capitalism. In this regard, Harrison wrote: “Indeed without that exploitation. one may doubt whether the West would ever have industrialized in the first place.“’
The European colonisation of Africa. Asia. America and Australia greatly transformed the world in terms of natural resources and labour. and laid the
Population
Population
1990
Rank
I
23.4 22.Y
Mexico Citv szo Paul0
31 .o 75.X
21.x
z-1.2
3
Tokvo/Yokohama Me&o City New York/north-eastern New Jeracy
4 5 6 7
sao Paul0 Shanghai Peking Rio de Janeiro
17.7 15.3 14.7
Tokyo/Yokohama New York/north-eastern New Jcrsq Shanghai Peking Rio de Janeiro
8 9 10 11 12 13
Los Angeles/Long Beach Greater Bombay Calcutta Seoul Greater Buenos Aires Jakarta
13.3 12.0 11.9 11.x 1 I.4 11.4
Greater Bombay Calcutta Jakarta Seoul Los Angeles/Long CairoiGizalImt~~Iba
14 15 lh 17 18 19
IO.9 10.7 10.0 10.0 9.3 x.9
Madras Manila Greater Buenos Aires Bangkok/Thonhuri Karachi Delhi
12.0 12.7 I’. I II.9 11.X Il.7
20 21 22 23 24 25 2h 27
Paris OsakaiKobe CairoiGizailmbaba London RhciniRuhr BogotB Chicago/north-western Indiana Madras Manila Moscow Teheran Istanbul Baghdad Delhi
II.7 11.3 1I.3 I I.’ II.1 II.1 ‘1 Y Y .7
2X 29 30
Karachi BangkokiThonburi Milan
Bogotli Paris Tehcrnn Iatanhul Bnphdad OsakaiKohe London Dacca Chica~o/north-wc~t~rll Indiana RheiniRuhr Moscow
2
I’).!,
x.9 x.x X.6 X.5 X.3 X.3
< ‘i?._ x. I 7.Y 7.5 7.4
Source: Reproduced from United Nations. Studies No. 68. Table 23. p. 58. lY80.
Putrern~ of (irhun
untl
Rurtrl
Popdrrnorr
22,s --. ” 7 I9 0
IO.11 17.1 IO.7
I h.0 11.2 14.7 12.1
Beach
0.4 0.2 ‘).I Growrl~.
Population
basis of the present division of the world: the advanced industrial (North) vs the less developed (South). Africans were uprooted and traded, mainly as slaves to colonies in the New Hemisphere. Asians were shipped over to East and South Africa and the Caribbean. A huge flow of natural resources available almost free from non-Western colonies, to European countries, played the most important role in the process of capital accumulation to finance larger manufacturing enterprises. Colonial powers wiped out indigenous industries. and the colonies were forced to buy their manufactured goods. In general, many cities in the colonies were transformed from the political centres into vital port functions as the ‘head link” of the global colonial economical network. This characteriscs the ‘primate city’ phenomenon in colonial urbanisation which was considered contrastive to a ‘regular urban hierarchy or system of cities’ in highly advanced industrial economies; and was the source of conflicting arguments that the ‘primate cities’ of the Third World are ‘parasitic’ rather than ‘generative’. This is not the case of North American cities, which differ from European and Oriental cities in many aspects, even though they were developed entirely as an outlying province of immigrants from England and Europe in the periods of modern ’ Spate. O.H.K.. 622-631. lY42.
“Factors
in the Development
of Capital
C‘itics”.
G‘co,g:rty/~rc~ollic~i~lc, Vol.
.32. pp.
IUKI (UK)
London London
(Japdni
MeXlCO iLat,n Amer,cal
Tokyo
IUSAi New York (USA) New Yet k (USAl
New York
(UK)
London
ITurkey) (China)
Peking
Istanbul
(Ch\nal
Pekmg
(ChIna) (Chma)
Peking
NankIng
(ChIna)
(Spain)
Cordoba Hangchow
(ChIna)
Changan
Constantinople (Turkey) ,*
Rome (Italy) Loyang (China)
Patlla (India)
Babylon IIraqI
m
was one of the main factors which hampered the growth of cities.
kept
the growth
of population
low, and
Phase IV (since the Secorzci World’ War). Among other factors, the uncontrolled conflicts resulting from economic expansion between industrialised European countries led to the Second World War. After the war we note a continuous sharp decline in HSLC in the industrialised countries. The USA reached its peak in 1050 and started to decline moderately, while South Asia will take the top position in 1990 as projected by the United Nations.” This period is charactcriscd by moderate population growth rates in the developed countries, and high rates in developing countries. Modern cities have grown in many parts of the world with more dependence on energy. which is the most crucial component in support of their growth. The size and shape of modern cities are very much associated with the amount of energy consumption in their societies. This period may be referred to as the ‘oil civilisation’ period. The present patterns and characteristics of urbanisation in the world are not simply determined by industrial factors as in previous phases but rather by multiintegrated factors: on the ‘vertical dimension’ are the regional, national. international forces: and on ‘horizontal dimension’ are the economic, political, and social forces. The post-colonial urbanisation of the Third World, especially in Asia, entered a new phase of rapid urbanisation with further growth of the colonial ‘primate cities’, which was mainly due to the persistent high rates of natural increase and large-scale ‘rural-urban’ migration. It was characterised by the dual structure of the economy between modern and traditional, Western and non-Western, urban and rural. -formal and informal sectors; by an increasing intensification of economic activities, both from national government, and multi-national enterprises: and finally by the continuing dependence in many respects on the Western advanced industrial countries, leading to further accentuation of primacy. All of these characteristics resulted in the present ‘abnormal’ growth of many metropolitan cities in the developing countries, creating a chronic and severe shortage of employment, housing, or many other public services, which brought about the existence of a great number of extensive squatter camps, and vast areas of slums in the periphery of metropolitan cities. How else can we explain why, in developing countries, economic activities tend to concentrate in a limited number of cities, and why these ‘so-called parasitic’ cities often grow to very great sizes regardless of the increasing problems they face and create’? From the very brief historical events summarised in Fig. 1, there are hardly any clear-cut conclusions that can be drawn for our better understanding of the changing patterns of the largest cities in the world in the future. However. we can easily see that the expansion of cities in size and number throughout history is obviously not an accidental phenomenon; rather, it is a product of multiple factors, organically integrated. And urbanisation in developed and developing countries has followed different patterns and courses in response to this mix of factors. This is in line with what Davis has written: ./ . . . cities are functional, not accidental developments, for they appear only where they perform useful services and they grow only in response to demands of their tributary areas”.7 Thus, urbanisation, no matter how one defines it, is only one of the products of the process of development seen at a particular point in time. It is a sub” United Nations, Pur~ua of C’rhtrrzcrnd Rurrrl Populution Growth. Population IWO. ’ Davis. P.H.. Thr Earrh crrzd Mtrrz. p. 558, Macmillan. New York. 1’957.
Studies
No. 6X. New York.
process of the general process of dcvclopment. Its path may not be so defined and may change in response to the content, speed. and direction of the overall development and modernisation process, nevertheless, the direction in which the movement occurs or might occur can be identified and perceived.
CONTRASTING
VIEWS ON LARGE CITIES
We wish to consider three contrasting views on the role of metropolitan regions in national development. albeit very briefly. Their significance is developed below.
“advantage of a large and concentrated labour and consumer market; it is the focus of transportation routes; it has the economies of scale and juxtaposition of industries and specialists; it is a fertile ground for social and cultural change necessary for development; it is a centre from which these innovations or new adaptations, artifacts and technologies . diffuse into the countryside. and it is an area that receives migrants from the countryside thus relieving the farming areas of the burden of excess population”.s
Metropolitan primate cities obstruct socio-economic development “by retarding the development of other cities in the nation. by contributing littlc to the development of their own hinterland by being oriented primarily toward the contribution of services to the colonial or indigenous elite in the great city itself”.” “There is no incentive for growth to decentralize. Modern enterprise remains concentrated in the major cities. Modernizing influences reach the migrants, but in the hinterlands traditional ways of life remain in the small towns and villages.“‘”
“Poverty.
unemployment. violent class and race conflicts, ‘alienation’ and arc certainly problems in the city, but they are not problems of the city. They are problems produced by the social, economic and political structure of our society. They would exist, whatever our pattern of settlement - even if we. instead of congregating in metropolitan areas, all disperse into small towns and hamlets They are [however] more visible where they arc concentrated: [but] this is all to the good. because recognition of a problem is the first step toward dealing with it.“’ ’ These contrasting and wonlie
metropolis is good or bad depends much on who sees it and from what perspective. Metropolitan authorities in many developed countries arc concerned about the gradual decay of the city core, about the flight of people to the periphery and about dwindling revenues. Their counterparts in the developing countries are concerned about too many people coming to the city and overburdening the urban infrastructure and social capital; increasing crime and social decay in general; and, of course, the lack of resources to manage the metropolis. Irrespective of the problems world metropolises face today, they continue to dominate the international and national development scene. They control the commanding heights of national economies and are indispensable ‘nerve ccntres’ for the smooth functioning of modern national states. They cannot be washed away; they are there to stay. So long as technology, production processes, and social values remain what they are, and so long as the style of development prevalent in this century remains what it is, metropolises will continue to play a leading role in national and international development. The question really is not how to do away with them but, rather, how to make them play their most constructive role in socio-economic transformation in both pre- and postindustrial societies.
CAUSES Growth
AND CONSEQUENCES
OF GROWTH
trends
By the year 2000, about half of the population of the world is likely to be classified as urban (in 1900 only the United Kingdom had more than 50% of its population living in urban areas). Africa will be 40% urbanised, Latin America 75%, and Asia 39%. All other continents will have 75% or more of their population in urban areas. One of the major concerns connected with the problem of urbanisation relates to metropolitan regions with a population of a million or more. More of the new urban population will live in metropolitan regions. Table 3 indicates the basic trends as projected by the United Nations and shows that metropolitan cities will contain over 60% of the total urban population of the world by the year 2000. One interesting trend which can be observed from Fig. 2 is that, by the year 2000, while the more developed countries (MDCs) have a higher share of the population (against the world total) in cities of less than 1 million, the less developed countries (LDCs) show a contrasting trend with a higher share of the population (against the world total) in cities of 1 million or more. This trend is a ‘switching phenomenon’ between MDCs and LDCs, and the turning point is some time in the 1980s. This phenomenon can also be observed when the number of cities criterion is taken into account (see Fig. 3). Table 4 shows that the number of cities in the world with a population of 1 million or more was 71 in 1950 (23 in LDCs + 48 in MDCs = 0.48). It is likely to increase to 414 by the year 2000 (264 in LDCs + 1.50 in MDCs = 1.76). Thus. during this period, the number of cities of this size group in the LDCs is likely to increase 3.7 times faster than that in MDCs. During 1950-1980, this rate was 2.2 for the city-size class of 1 million or more, and was approximately 1.7 for the other two city-size classes of less than 1 million. In terms of population, the prospects reveal an even greater contrast. In 1975, there were 262 million people living in cities of 1 million or more in MDCs, and 244 million in LDCs. By the year 2000, these cities will contain 914 million in LDCs and 444 million in MDCs. Many reasons have been attributed to the rapid growth of urban population in the developing countries.
x17.4;7 (%.-1S) sl.os: I l-4.55) I72.32’ (.X).07) i.i7.IW
I I00.00)
I
,v.s.w <
(-LS..36) 55.h2 I (11.74)
I.:s.x12 (ih.S(I) .377..32
( l0(l.00)
37’). I’dI 71) SO.15(1 ( 1.7.50) I’~4.007 (X7’)) hf17.74.~ (57
( 1011.11(1~
i7h.;7S (hl.lI) I I S.‘)J7 ( I’ 61) 2-17.(172 (31 77) O42.U’)7 (IO0 l)(l)
414.7’J’ (5S.SI) 10.3.7SJ (13.72) 207.771 (77.-!7) 75f1.33 I ( 101).1l0)
‘Jl1.7i-1 ((14X2) Ih’J.Si7 ( I’.011 72~l.(lOS (1.2 I-1) I .-I I I I ‘)O ( 100.0(1)
As noted earlier. the metropolitan regions in the developed and developing countries alike are expanding both in terms of population and area. but the rate of expansion is far more rapid in the developing countries. Moreover, the nature of the expansion is so different that it produces not only dissimilar but often contrasting results. The developed countries are undergoing post-industrial urbanisation - at times referred to as ‘mature urbanisation’. It is charactcriscd by the transfer of population from one urban region to another. with ;I growing tendency towards suburbanisation. These shifts result from differences in the quality of life among urban centres and between the core and periphery of the same city. The migrants are urbanised: they are not looking for a lob. Most of them are trying to relocate themselves in order to lead ;I socially and culturally fuller life. under this p~mcess of change. the core urban regions are losing the native population and opportunities in the face of competition from more attractive locations and places. This tends to create several problems. First. the cores of the maior metropolitan regions like London. Paris, and New York arc unable to maintain themselves without external assistance. and tend to degenerate. Secondly. the ethnic character of the core regions changes rather dramatically as indigenous population losses arc largely filled by foreign immigrants who arc less skilled and have a lower income and a lesser stake in the metropolis. The changing ethnic character of Paris. London. New York, and Stockholm can be cited as an example. Thirdly. with this change in ethnic character and with low income.
57
> 1 million
0.5-l million
25 LDC 2015
1950
, 1960
1970
1975
1980
1990
2000
Fig. 2. Percentage share of populution by city size: more developed cowltries (MDC’.s); Ictr developed cowltries (LDG); world total (WT). Source: See Table 3.
alienation and deteriorating urban amenities (including housing), the core region becomes a den of crime and corruptive social mores and values. All this leads to a vicious circle of deterioration leading to more deterioration. Against this, in the less developed countries, metropolitan growth is the direct During the decade 1950-1960. such consequence of rural-urban migration. migration constituted 60% of urban growth. This figure is likely to come down to 42% during the decade 1980-1990, indicating a continuing high rate of natural increase of urban population. This again is in contrast to the situation in the more developed countries, where the overall population growth is low (~2%). These projected figures may not be completely dependable, but they do indicate trends. The metropolitan regions of the developing countries contain much of the modern sector of the national economies and hence they attract the largest number of migrants. The impact of large-scale migration to large cities is many sided. First, the density of population in relation to available facilities increases. Demand for HAB 7:5/h-E
LDC WT MDC
L
I
1950
I
1960
I
1970
I
I
1975
I
I
1980
1990
2000
I 1980
I 1990
I 2000
Year
98
I 1950
1 1960
I 1970
1 1975
I
Year 82-
< 0.5
LDC
mlllion
81 80 -
(%)
MDC
79 78 77 76 75
MDC I 1950
I 1960
I 1970
, 1975
I 1980
1 1990
LDC
I 2000
I
Year
housing of a particular type increases and people start doubling up, renting out rooms to families, and piecing together shelters in places that were uninhabitable to begin with. The density of the central business district or the city core increases fastest, for it is here that the migrants can get casual work both in the formal and informal sectors of the urban economy. This lcads to a sharp rise in land values, making it more difficult for the poor to acquire or build a house. In due course, squatter settlements extend beyond the metropolis. creating new problems of urban management. This uncontrolled growth makes it almost impossible for the metropolitan regions of the developing countries to expand and up-date urban amenities. Most of them are unable to provide water, sewerage, and drainage to a large portion of the urban population. The problems acquire more serious proportions. as
Tuble 4. Size disrribution
City size (thousands) World
I 950
of cities in developed and developing
1960
lY70
total (7.7x:) 101 (11.15) 734 (81 .Ol) 006 ( 100.00)
O.S- 1 million 0. l-0.5
million
Total
More developed
110 (X.56) 136 (10.52) 1.03’) (80.X6) 1.285 (100.00)
157 (9 47) 17’) (10.34) 1.395 (XO.SY) 1.731 (100.00)
million
Total
0.1-0.5
322 (11.05) 303 (11.25) 2.06’) (76.X(I) 2.6YJ l100.00)
414 (12.44) 3% (11.00) 3 -.- 51’) (75.66) i 320 (;t;o.tIo,
10’) (10.25) 11x (11.10) 8.16 (78.65) 1.Oh3 (100.00)
133 (11.24) 131 (11.07) 919 (77.6’)) 1.1X3 ( l00.00)
150 (ll.S2) 152 (Il.YX) Y67 (76.70) (lK::,,
116 (10.18) 131 ( 11.50) x92 (78.31) 1.13’) ( 100.00)
1x”, (12.51) 2 (1 l!& 1.150 (76.1 I) 1.511 (100.00)
264 (12.X2) 7-14 (11.X4) 1.552 (75.33) 7.OhO (100.00)
1x1 (9.20) 220 (11.19) 1.566 (79.61) 1.Yh7
85 (0.35)
(l& J-t8 (80.43) 557 (100.00)
( 100.00)
(10.:;) 72s (70.76) YOY (100.00)
(9.23; 110 (11.21) 7x0 (7Y.51) 9x1 (100.00)
(8. ;:; 54 (9.51) 468 (82.39) Sh8 (100.00)
(X.7762, 80 (9.73) 670 (81.51) x22 ( 100.00)
YO (9.13) 110 (11.16) 786 (79.72) 086 (100.00)
countries
31 million 0.5-l
(l00.00)
22s (10.22) 239 (11.31) 1.728 (78.47) 2,202 (100.00)
of cities
(8.:) 0.5- 1 million
Less developed
2000
1YXO
countries
31 million
0. l-0.5
195&2OM
1990
lY75 Number
21 Million
countrk,
million million
Total
23 (6.50) 40 (11.46) 286 (81.Y5) 349 (100.00)
Source: United Nations. Population Division. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Trmd.t wd Prospects in the population of Urban Aggiomera~ion. IYSO-2000, ESAIPIWPSO, New York, November 1075. Note: Numbers in parcnthcses are percentages against total.
“many migrants burden the city’s economy through increased underemployment and unemployment levels, lower levels of productivity, greater demand for costly municipal facilities and services, lower per capita tax revenues, and higher city budget deficits”.” Even where a migrant has full-time employment, the income so generated does not remain in the city - it spreads to his immediate and extended family living in the city or back home in the village. The social fabric of the metropolitan region also undergoes change due to large-scale migration. At times, migrants establish homogeneous ethnic communities and function as pressure groups to legalise squatter settlements or to acquire access to urban amenities and services. Participation in civic elections is noted to be low. Once this happens, it becomes difficult to integrate the community into the social fabric of the city.
The problems Because of the external pressures and internal convulsions mentioned above, metropolitan regions have now evolved a society which for all practical purposes is dualistic in nature. There is the good part of the city, and then there is the bad part. Those who live in the good part are good citizens and those in the other part are characterised as bad citizens. Poor localities are branded as dens of crime, antisocial activities, and environmental degradation. Not many recognise ” Sally Findley.
op. cif..
p. 7Y
that thcsc are only symptoms of something more deep-seated. i.e. the inability 01 the urban community to cope with the new situation. We fail to rcalise that “the modern metropolis reflects in the sharpest form the basic contradiction between our success in applying science to the relation of man to nature and our failure to apply science to the relation of man to man”. Ii However. apart from this contradiction within the metropolitan region. there is a still more serious contradiction that separates the metropolis from its rural hinterland. The living conditions in rural settlements of developing countries are deplorable by any standards and call for immediate, imaginative and sustained attention and action programmes. While it is true that living conditions in all human settlements of developing countries are bad, they arc much worse in the rural settlements. These settlements are so dispersed and isolated that they fail to attract the attention of those who matter at the national and international levels. So much has been written about the slums and squatter settlements of cities that it is not realised that most of the rural settlements of the dcvcloping countries are much worse than the urban slums in many respects. They fail to get attention mainly because they are spatially so dispersed and small that they are unable to make a joint effort to make their presence felt.
LARGE CITIES AND NATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
As noted earlier, a metropolitan region combines the functions of leadership and production, the formerly divided metropolitan region no longer shows any sharp division between densely-built town and open country. These points will bc elaborated further to show the implication of these changes in form and function for policy and planning. In order to be specific. it is important that metropolitan regions of the post- and pre-industrial societies be treated separately, although many an analyst would like to treat them as two points in a single urbanisation continuum. Metro-regions
Developed
in developed
societies
societies
are characterised
by the following
phenomena:
A very slow rate of population growth. (2) Almost no rural-urban migration. The trend is rather for population to move from congested city cores to the countryside. (3) The dispersal of manufacturing from metropolitan centres to small and intermediate-sized towns in the country. The high cost of land and labour and environmental pollution are the main causes for this shift. (4) The service-oriented tertiary and quaternary sectors of the economy are becoming more prominent in the metropolitan regions, replacing manufacturing and production-oriented tertiary activities. (5) Outlying rural areas have become urbanised. and the distinction between urban and rural is narrowing down rather rapidly. (6) Disparities in income and earning capacities have been reduced largely because the income of the poorest has risen well above the subsistence Icvcl. Poverty in the form seen in pre-industrial societies and industrialising societies does not exist in the post-industrial society. (7) With further advances in production technologies, the role of people in production is decreasing. Moreover, workers are becoming increasingly alienated from their work. (1)
(8) There is a growing interest in a lifestyle which, without doing away with economic gains, would give a more satisfying meaning to life and living. The tendency is towards humanism and a peaceful world, but the framework for the conceptuahsation of this world is confined to the narrow limits set by an individual’s own culture and experience. To remain a vital force in national development, the metropolitan regions of the developed countries (specially the post-industrial countries) must respond positively to the new trends identified above. It is these trends which are causing problems in metropolitan regions. As Rodwin has remarked “they are no longer seen largely as growth problems associated with economic and population expansion, but also as retrenchment problems associated with decrease in population, economic activities, and the tax base, (and) they are not simply problems the metropolis of functions land uses inner and areas), of services, transporhousing and facilities, but of people the metropolis of crime, welfare and conflict . . .“.I4 The problem is one of human obsolescence and how to deal with it. The manufacturing industries, based as they were on cheap industrial labour, can no longer remain in the metropolitan areas. Local labour has become costly, and cheap labour from outside the region is no longer attracted to these occupations. As a result, the secondary industry has moved out of existing big urban centres; as the industry moved out, the central managerial function was developed rapidly to cope with the need to control business operations which have increased drastically in scale and complexity.” But not ail metropolitan centres have been able to cope with the problems created by the movement of manufacturing industries. The tertiary functions have not replenished the economic strength that the metropolitan cores have lost as a result of the decrease in residential population density in the inner city. Only the primate metropolitan centres like Tokyo have been able to cope with this problem. The experience in North America and European countries is similar. According to Keith ‘*American experience corroborates that economic specialization and diversification increase with size, or scale of metropolitan area. In the United States, the nine largest metros, those with over 2 to 5 million population each, house only 22% of the nation’s population, and yet they account for 27% of office/service and 39% of headquarters employment. The 25 metros in the 2.5 million range comprise . . . 28% of headquarter office/service employment jobs. Below a half million, e uates with population and headquarters employment drops well below.“’ 9’ Irrespective of how the tertiary sector takes over from the manufacturing sector, the fact remains that the inner city soon turns into a ghetto requiring renewal and development, and since very few people with a taxable income arc ultimately left in these areas, any investment in renewal and development becomes a costly affair. Whether the ethnic concentration of blacks, browns, and other aliens in the city core is caused by economic or social reasons is of no major consequence. What is important is the social problem it creates and the implications it has for the future of the metropolis. ” Lloyd Rodwin, “Problem of the Metropolises in More Developed Countries - Regional and Inner Arca: lY5Y- IY7Y”. txper presented at the International Forum on Metropolis in the World of Tomorrow aponx~red by the Nab&l institute for Research Advancement. Tokyo;. Fchruary lY7Y. See also M.’ Honlo. “Metrouolitan Problems in Post-industrial Societies: the Cast of Jargon”. UNCRD. WP70-12. Octolxr lY7Y. and R.b. Misra. Millior~ (‘irk of‘/nt/irr,Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi. 1974. ” Honjo. M.. op. cir. I” John P. Keith. “Economic and Demographic Aspects of Metropolitan Development in North America”. Merropoli/cm Phrling crrd M~mrr~oncwr. Hidehiko Sazanami (Editor). pp. X7-56. Japan Society lor the Promotion of Science, Tokyo. 1982.
Metro-regions
in developing
societies
The characteristics of the metro-regions in the developing countries are different from those in the developed countries in more than one respect. The conditi~~ns under which the metro-regions in these countries grow and function arc as follows: (I) The natural increase in population is at times rather high, reaching to 34% per ~nmm in both urban and rural areas. (2) These countries are essentially rural; less than a quarter of their population is urban. The capital city and a few large centres often dominate the urban scene. (3) There is a high rate of migration of people from rural areas to a few urban centres, especially the metropolitan regions. (4) M~~lluf~~cturing industries still constitute a major activity in the mctropolitan regions, ~llthough a tendency for the tertiaries to grow is yuite visible in quite a few of them. (5) There is a vast difference in earning capacity and quality of lift between urban and rural areas and between the richer and poorer sections of the urban population. The mass of people is still below the poverty line in both urban and rural areas, although the problem is more accentuated in the latter. (6) The labour force in both urban and rural areas is largely unskilled or semiskilled, and hence earning capacity is low. (7) Since the majority of people are still below the poverty line, improving the quality of life basically means increasing income. This results in pcoplc moving to urban slums in the hope of earning more and creating opportunities for a new start. (8) All this leads to overcrowding and environInenta1 deterioration in urban areas. The impact is felt more severely in the metropolitan regions. which attract larger numbers of rural migrants. (9) The problem in the metro-regions does not therefore boil down to inner city vs outer city. It is a problem that affects the whole region. It is essentially a problem between the nletro-region and its hinterl~~n~i.
The challcngcs fxed by the metropolitan regions of the developing countries are thus quite different from those faced by their counterparts in the developed parts of the world. It is a problem of overcrowding, of underemployment and unemployment, of inadequate social services and urban amenities, of poor urban finances, of crct hoc* pl~~nning and development measures. of lack of ~lttenti~~n by the national government, of rural poverty and agricultural stagnation, and o? In effect, it is a problem of national poorly developed human resources. development with all its varied ramifications. The problem acquires more serious proportions when many of those who migrate to urban centres have really no stake in what happens to the city so long as they can earn a bit more than what they could back home in the village. Many of those who fail to make the grade in the competitive world of the city turn to urban vices, like shoplifting, burglary, pickpocketing, smuggling, and - worst of all - prostitution, in order to make ends meet. Another effect of low or no income is the poor housing which dominates the metropolitan scene in all developing countries. It is estimated that more than half of the urban population of developing countries lives in poor and inadequ~~te housing conditions. There are about I million slum dwellers each in greater Bombay and Calcutta (City corporation area), “constituting about 25 and 31% of the total population, respectively, of the two areas. In the year 1961, four la/& persons [One lakh is equal to one hundred thousand]. or 24%’ of the total population of Madras City. were
slum dwellers. In 1950, there then, 180 areas have been
were about 300 slum areas in the city. Since
politicos, seeking the confianca of the people, assure the Alagados dwellers that the garbage will continue to come. The boa gentu of the city profess revulsion at the practice, and an occasional journalist raises an occasional clamour against the city departments of hygiene and health, but the mountains of garbage and the swarms of rodents and vermin within them pile up steadily.“’
CONCLUSION
The foregoing discussion points to the conclusion that metropolitan cities both in developed and developing countries are now facing problems of an unprecedented nature. External pressures are threatening their continued growth. The problem in the Third World countries is, however, not the product of urbanisation, or rural-urban migration, or even ‘urban bias’20 in policy. It is a problem basically emerging from rapid human multiplication, poverty, ‘North biased’ world economic order and national development styles. As long as population keeps growing at a high rate, cities will expand too, regardless of city size and the speed of urbanisation. Poverty and inequality in developing countries, both in urban and rural areas, are not a natural phenomenon of an inevitable, temporary process of development as described by ‘Kuznets curve’ theory. In these countries, poverty will be perpetuated given the present ‘North bias’ in the international economic order, through which “the western countries exploit the weakness of the poor and the pro-growth national development countries to weaken them further”, policies which tend to bypass the poor. According to Harrison “Development policies have been biased against the poor, the backward, the rural, and skewed in favour of the rich, the westernized and the urban, for a very simple reason. It is politics that determines the direction of development, and the privileged groups have indefinitely more access to political power than the poor.“” ” l‘own and Country Planning Organization, Towurd~ u Setkwwn~ Policy in fndia-2001, Mimeo.. p. 37, New Delhi. Fchruary 1975. ” Dwycr. D.J.. Peopleutd Housing irl Third World (‘it&. Longman. London. 1975. I” Nan Pendrcll. “Squatttng in Salvador: an Explanatory Study”. unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Columbia University. p. 146. l%X. cited in D.J. Dwyer. lot. cit. “’ Michael Llpton and Manrice Temple Smith. Whx Poor People SINK Poor: Urban Bius in World Developmm, 1977. ” Paul Harrison. 0,~. Cl.
Thus. ‘urban bias’ in development policies is not a product of metropolitan lobby, but rather a by;product of the ‘Rich biased’ politico-economic order in both the national and tntcrnational spheres. To explain poverty in the LDC’s in terms of national conflict between the rural and urban classes is a necessary but not a sufficient condition. As a matter of fact. in most cases the political structure in LDCs is alien to its own
social
issues of the national
economic,
social. and political development on the one hand: and ot international economic structure on the other hand. In the developing countries, the political commitments at the highest level, and the appropriate adjustments of the governmental structure and mocks of operation in response to the ne\\ and severe problems, in both national and international contexts. arc required as the most crucial prerequisites for handling the emergent and emerging problems. Despite the ‘North biased’ international economic structure. the industrialiscd countries, which were doing well after the Second World War until the ‘oil shock’ in 107.1 and the first few years of the post-Vietnam War, are now facing ;I nutnbcr of serious economic problems. According to T1zc World Brrtlk Kcporf lOo’2: “Continuing recession and heavy unemployment in the industrialized countries arc accotnpaniccl by real interest rates at unprecedcntly high Icvels. most commodity prices are at their lowest levels in three decades; the vol~~mc of intcrnattonal trade has ceased to grow. Many dcvcloping countries. already struggling with large debt payments. have thus seen their problems exacerbated by the rise in interest payments, L&a-se trends in the terms of trade. and depressed export volumc.~” Thus the development prospects for the international economy ha\:e \vorscncd over the past few years. One of the main GIUSL’S for this is the continuing recession in the industrialist4 countries which are highly urbanised. This recession is. however, closely linked to the declining purchasing power of the LDCs where the majority of the poor of the world live. Whatever manufacturing potentials thcsc countries have is limited to the metropolitan areas. While it is true that the tn;tjor front to fight poverty lies in the rural parts of the Third World countries. the metropolitan cities offer the best and immediate cnvirontnent for channelling the investment resources for socio-economic tramdot-tnation. The issue is not whether metropolitan centres are good or bad; the issue is how to make them good and strong so that they can better serve the national development objecti\,cs. One of the recent t‘earures of ‘post-industrial’ or advanced industrial countries is that the scr\,ice sector of the economy has expanded faster than the manufacturing sector. This phenomenon is now visible in many ‘pre-inclustt-i~tl‘ less developed countries as well. But with a difference. Iiere the service sector is expanding before manufacturing has grown to a level that it needed a sophisticated and expanding service sector. This is thus not a very hcalthv trend and neck early corrective measures. Tertiarisation without industrialisatton can and some of these consequences arc alread) have dangerous consequences, ‘subsistence urbanisation’, visible in terms of social chaos. underemployment. C’fC’.
What wc need in the developing large tnctropolis latye number of
countries
at the apex supported small and intermediate
by towns
a balanced urban system with :I and in turn which supports ;I and cities. Such ;I system must be
is
organically and generatively linked to the hundreds of thousands of rural settlements, both vertically and horizontally. Thus, the question that needs to be posed is: is the urban system of a country balanced, and whether the large cities play a generative role in this balanced system ? Instead. however, the question that is often raised is to brand the large cities as parasitic without giving due consideration to the fact that they are the products of a given socio-economic situation. and given the constraints within which they operate, they play an important role of social and economic transformation.
Vol
7. No.
i:6.
pp. 17-M.
OlY7-3Y751X3
lYX3
Printed in &cat Britain.
0
lYX3
$3 OCI + O.ol)
Pcrg’L”‘“n Press Ltd.
Large Cities: Growth Dynamics and Emerging Problems R. P. MISRA and NGUYEN TRI DUNG UN Centre for Regional Development, Nagoya, Japan
INTRODUCTION As the rapid growth of urban populations in developing countries reaches serious proportions, the study of urbanisation and its relation to development is attracting greater and more critical attention of the researchers, planners, and governments concerned. The problem, however, is enormously complex and of a multi-faceted nature - economic, sociological, political and cultural. It is not amenable to ethnocentric unidisciplinary analysis. As a consequence, the theories pertaining to urbanisation and development are still in their infancy. Urbanisation in Third World countries is characterised by an overwhelming functional dominance of the large metropolitan cities over national space. Overconcentration of population in large cities and the attendant problems of housing, infrastructure, and social services, has led many scholars to claim that ” in these countries when seen in there is an increasing ‘trend of overurbanisation relation to their level of economic development. The weakness of this concept, however, lies in two basic assumptions: (1) that ‘urbanisation is a by-product of industrialisation’ as has been experienced in Western countries; and, (2) that the urbanisation process as seen in Western countries in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries must also repeat itself in Third World countries. Industrialisation does play a very important role in the process of urbanisation almost everywhere, but the development of cities - especially metropolitan cities - in developing countries has not been due primarily to industrial expansion. Many non-industrial factors have played very prominent roles, and these factors continue to trigger off urban growth even today. The forces which have led to a particular type of urbanisation process in the developing countries are distinctly different and more complex than those in the Western countries, and the only way to analyse the pattern of urbanisation is to understand these forces properly. The purpose of this paper is to trace the changing spatial pattern of growth of large cities in the world, to analyse their causes and consequences, and to discuss the role of large cities in national development in countries passing through various stages of development.
’ This concept ix originally introduced in Da&. of Prc-industrial Arcns”. Eco~towtic fkvrloprnr~r
K. and Golden. H.H.. .1Urhanizatton and the Development u/x/ C‘ulr~ul Chongr Vol. 3. pp. h-26. 1954.
47
GROWTH
OF LARGE CITIES: A GLIMPSE
INTO HISTORY
The history of human settlements has witnessed four great changes in the pattern of growth and spatial organisation. The first was the revolutionary transition in the Neolithic Age from hunting and fishing to sedentary agriculture. from which rural settlements emerged. The second was the transition from the ‘village’ to the ‘city’ pattern of many human settlements which can be said to have occurred first in the river valleys ot West Asia soon after 3500 RC and later in many other parts of the world - chieflv in Egypt. Pakistan, India. China, Mexico, Peru, etc. The advent of the Indust&al Revolution, and accompanying colonisation of Latin America. Asia and Africa, heralded the third revolutionary transition characterised by a high level of science, technology and philosophy. and by structural transformation of many aspects of the economy - i.e. employment, production. organisation, etc.’ in Western Europe. The development of modern science and technology was the most critical factor accelerating the growth of ‘modern cities’. and helped to shift the largest city of the world from Asia (Peking) to Western Europe (London. with a population of 2.363,OOO in 1850). and then. after the First World War. to America (New York, with a population of 6.710.000 in 1920). The Second World War and the decolonisation of the present-day Third World countries brought about the fourth major change. There is a very strong tendency for the largest agglomerations of the world to shift by I990 from Western Europe to the developing countries - which are still undergoing a stage of demographic transition (see Table I). Mexico (in Latin America) with an estimated population of 3 I million in the year 2000 (see Table 2) will be the largest metropolis in the world. It would be difficult to comprehend each of these stages and the forces which brought them about without a review of some of the most critical historical events. The historical pattern of city expansion in the world can bc divided into four phases (Fig. I ). Plzrrsc I (4.30 rsc-1000 AD). The highest share in the proportion of 25 (or 30) ot the largest cities in the world (hereafter referred to as ‘HSLC’) was in South Asia. and the next highest was in East Asia. In Asian history, this is the splendid era of the Asokan Empire (269-232 BC) in India where the largest city in the world (in 200 BC), named Pataliputra (Patna), was located; and also of the Han Dynasty (2061 ~-221 AD) in China which had the largest city in the world (in IO0 ,a). named Loyang with an estimated population of around 650.000. The advanced agricultural societies in ;I favourable tropical climate with stable feudal systems which charactcrised Asian civilisations at that time could be seen as an explanatory factor for this phase. In 300 BC. the estimated population in Asia was about SO million. mainly in peasant villages; 1,3 million in West Asia; 30 million in (‘hina; 30 million III India; and about 20 million in Europe. mainly concentrated in Southern Europe.’ that is. Greece, Rome, Spain etc. Close to the beg,inning of the Christian Era. the Roman Empire (27 ~-476 AD) emerged to dominate the West and established Rome as a city, competing with Loyang in China. Many of the maqnificent autocracy. and exploitation the Sumerian, Indo-Gangetic,
few survived
the ravages
cities in ancient times - landmarks of luxury. of the people - fell into ruins after the downfall of Egyptian, Greek, and Roman civilisations. Only ;I
of history.
In
the medieval
period.
the cities
grew
Date
(I)
World
Africa
Europe”’
total
HC
130
7s ( 100)
200
25
(100)
2s 2s 2s 7s 75 2s
(loo) ( 100) (100) ( 100) ( 100)
II (44) 13 (S2)
x (37)
-I (16)
7 (2X)
2 (8)
15 13 17 I2 7 7 7 8 5 5 1
((10) (52) (6X) (38) (‘8) (7X) (2X) (32) (20) (20) (Ih)
4 (16)
3 (12) 4 (If)) 1 (1)
-l 1 2 7
(16) (IO) (X) (S)
2 (X) 3 (17)
0 (0) 0 (0)
3 3 I 2
0 (0)
AD
100 361 627 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 I700 I x00 1x50 I x75 IYOO lY2.5
( 100) 15 ( 100) 3 ( 100) 25 (100) 25 ( 100) ‘5 (100) 7s ( 100) 25 ( 100) 2.5(100)
1950 197.5 I990 3000
30 30 30 30
I500
(2)
( 100)
2.5
(loo) (100) (loo) ( 100)
2 ( 6.0 ) 7 (23.0) II (36.7) I? (40 0)
-I (16) 5 (201 9 (36j IO (40) IO (40) x (32) Y (36) IO (10) IO (40) II (4)
x (3’) 3 (I?) 4 (16) 3 (12) h 6 5 5
(70.0) (20.0) (16.7) (16.7)
2 (8) 4 (IO) 3 (16) x (31) 6 (24)
8 (32) x (32) 0 (36) II (44) 13 (52) I? (4X) I.? (5’) IO 6 5 4
(12) (12)
I (4)
(4)
1 (-I)
(X)
0 0 0 (I 0 0 0 0
J (16) -l (16) 2 (8) 2 (8) 2 (8) 7 (X)
1 (4) 0 (0)
1 (4) 0 (0) 0 (0)
(33.3) (20.0)
I (3.3) 1 (3.3)
(16.7) (13.3)
I (3.3) I (3.3)
(0) (0)
(0)
(0) ((I) (0) (0) (0) 2 (S)
4 (IO) 5 (20) 7 (2s) II IO x x
(ih.7) (3.3.3) (X.6) (2h.h)
Source:
(I) (From 430-1925 1s~): Tertius Chandler and Gerald Fox. .WO Yews o~‘UrAm~ Grow.fh. Ac;t&mic Press, New York. 1071. (2) (From IYSO-2000): XC Table 2. Notes: Numhcra in parenthew\ :ire in percentages against World total. In the period lY%-2000. the 31 largest agglomerations WC‘I-c t:lken into xcount In\tcad 01 the largest 7-5 cities. (‘I’ Asia other th;m China; Dcmocr;ltlc People’s Republic of Korea: Japan: Republic 01 Korea: ;m~i ‘I urhcv. ‘I” Chin:,: Democratic People‘s Republic of Korea; Japan: ;rncl Republic of Korea. (‘I Including Turhcv :ind the Union 01‘ Sovwt Sociall\t Rcpuhlich. ‘I” Northern America and LItin America comhinetl.
mostly as capital and commercial centres. However, the Western cities could not expand further due to the political fragmentation of Europe and, hence. limited support from the hinterland during this period. Phase II (ZOOO-IS00 AD). In this pre-industrial period, East Asia assumed the leading role in HSLC. Europe with the cultural renaissance showed a rapid growth and took second place in HSLC, while South Asia exhibited a sharp decline and became the third in the last half of this period. This period might be called a ‘gestation period’ of Western civilisation. During this period the Western cities were characterised by highly diversified activities and functions (mainly commercial and financial rather than industrial); and by internationalised growth factors triggered off by the new navigation technology and worldwide trade. In all regions, however, the primary sector (largely agriculture) was of paramount importance. Phase III (18170 AD-SCWM~ World War). This is the ‘flourishing era’ of modern European civilisation marked by the colonisation of non-Western countries and trade expansion: by the Industrial Revolution from a technology and production viewpoint; and philosophically by the French Revolution (17X9). This led to an amazing and rapid urbanisation in Western countries, both in Europe and America. by ‘push-pull’ socio-economic factors, leading to huge migration from rural to urban settlements. While in Asia - both East and
ITS 17.7
I I.6 1II.S III.7 IO.4
s I 7,s 7.-l 7.0 6.S (3.4 (1. I 5.7 -IS 4.S 4.5 4.4 4.4 .I.3 1.7 4.1 -1.0
_
South - there was. in sharp contrast, a declining trend which could be explained by stagnant agriculture, along with high absolute growth of population. The process of industrial capitalism in Europe was characterised by the following essential elements: a high agricultural surplus; a class of fret status and dynamic entrepreneurs; a process of capital accumulation by them to finance large-scale investments: the development of a practical science; and development of the ‘market expansion and machine production’ structure of the economy. At this time in history, these essential elements made the Western cities very different from Asian cities, which primarily prospered on the basis of agriculture. And the overseas market expansionism by Western countries due to their military superiority led to the colonisation of non-Western societies. It is this colonisation and exploitation which were indeed the foundation of Western capitalism. In this regard, Harrison wrote: “Indeed without that exploitation. one may doubt whether the West would ever have industrialized in the first place.“’
The European colonisation of Africa. Asia. America and Australia greatly transformed the world in terms of natural resources and labour. and laid the
Population
Population
1990
Rank
I
23.4 22.Y
Mexico Citv szo Paul0
31 .o 75.X
21.x
z-1.2
3
Tokvo/Yokohama Me&o City New York/north-eastern New Jeracy
4 5 6 7
sao Paul0 Shanghai Peking Rio de Janeiro
17.7 15.3 14.7
Tokyo/Yokohama New York/north-eastern New Jcrsq Shanghai Peking Rio de Janeiro
8 9 10 11 12 13
Los Angeles/Long Beach Greater Bombay Calcutta Seoul Greater Buenos Aires Jakarta
13.3 12.0 11.9 11.x 1 I.4 11.4
Greater Bombay Calcutta Jakarta Seoul Los Angeles/Long CairoiGizalImt~~Iba
14 15 lh 17 18 19
IO.9 10.7 10.0 10.0 9.3 x.9
Madras Manila Greater Buenos Aires Bangkok/Thonhuri Karachi Delhi
12.0 12.7 I’. I II.9 11.X Il.7
20 21 22 23 24 25 2h 27
Paris OsakaiKobe CairoiGizailmbaba London RhciniRuhr BogotB Chicago/north-western Indiana Madras Manila Moscow Teheran Istanbul Baghdad Delhi
II.7 11.3 1I.3 I I.’ II.1 II.1 ‘1 Y Y .7
2X 29 30
Karachi BangkokiThonburi Milan
Bogotli Paris Tehcrnn Iatanhul Bnphdad OsakaiKohe London Dacca Chica~o/north-wc~t~rll Indiana RheiniRuhr Moscow
2
I’).!,
x.9 x.x X.6 X.5 X.3 X.3
< ‘i?._ x. I 7.Y 7.5 7.4
Source: Reproduced from United Nations. Studies No. 68. Table 23. p. 58. lY80.
Putrern~ of (irhun
untl
Rurtrl
Popdrrnorr
22,s --. ” 7 I9 0
IO.11 17.1 IO.7
I h.0 11.2 14.7 12.1
Beach
0.4 0.2 ‘).I Growrl~.
Population
basis of the present division of the world: the advanced industrial (North) vs the less developed (South). Africans were uprooted and traded, mainly as slaves to colonies in the New Hemisphere. Asians were shipped over to East and South Africa and the Caribbean. A huge flow of natural resources available almost free from non-Western colonies, to European countries, played the most important role in the process of capital accumulation to finance larger manufacturing enterprises. Colonial powers wiped out indigenous industries. and the colonies were forced to buy their manufactured goods. In general, many cities in the colonies were transformed from the political centres into vital port functions as the ‘head link” of the global colonial economical network. This characteriscs the ‘primate city’ phenomenon in colonial urbanisation which was considered contrastive to a ‘regular urban hierarchy or system of cities’ in highly advanced industrial economies; and was the source of conflicting arguments that the ‘primate cities’ of the Third World are ‘parasitic’ rather than ‘generative’. This is not the case of North American cities, which differ from European and Oriental cities in many aspects, even though they were developed entirely as an outlying province of immigrants from England and Europe in the periods of modern ’ Spate. O.H.K.. 622-631. lY42.
“Factors
in the Development
of Capital
C‘itics”.
G‘co,g:rty/~rc~ollic~i~lc, Vol.
.32. pp.
IUKI (UK)
London London
(Japdni
MeXlCO iLat,n Amer,cal
Tokyo
IUSAi New York (USA) New Yet k (USAl
New York
(UK)
London
ITurkey) (China)
Peking
Istanbul
(Ch\nal
Pekmg
(ChIna) (Chma)
Peking
NankIng
(ChIna)
(Spain)
Cordoba Hangchow
(ChIna)
Changan
Constantinople (Turkey) ,*
Rome (Italy) Loyang (China)
Patlla (India)
Babylon IIraqI
m
was one of the main factors which hampered the growth of cities.
kept
the growth
of population
low, and
Phase IV (since the Secorzci World’ War). Among other factors, the uncontrolled conflicts resulting from economic expansion between industrialised European countries led to the Second World War. After the war we note a continuous sharp decline in HSLC in the industrialised countries. The USA reached its peak in 1050 and started to decline moderately, while South Asia will take the top position in 1990 as projected by the United Nations.” This period is charactcriscd by moderate population growth rates in the developed countries, and high rates in developing countries. Modern cities have grown in many parts of the world with more dependence on energy. which is the most crucial component in support of their growth. The size and shape of modern cities are very much associated with the amount of energy consumption in their societies. This period may be referred to as the ‘oil civilisation’ period. The present patterns and characteristics of urbanisation in the world are not simply determined by industrial factors as in previous phases but rather by multiintegrated factors: on the ‘vertical dimension’ are the regional, national. international forces: and on ‘horizontal dimension’ are the economic, political, and social forces. The post-colonial urbanisation of the Third World, especially in Asia, entered a new phase of rapid urbanisation with further growth of the colonial ‘primate cities’, which was mainly due to the persistent high rates of natural increase and large-scale ‘rural-urban’ migration. It was characterised by the dual structure of the economy between modern and traditional, Western and non-Western, urban and rural. -formal and informal sectors; by an increasing intensification of economic activities, both from national government, and multi-national enterprises: and finally by the continuing dependence in many respects on the Western advanced industrial countries, leading to further accentuation of primacy. All of these characteristics resulted in the present ‘abnormal’ growth of many metropolitan cities in the developing countries, creating a chronic and severe shortage of employment, housing, or many other public services, which brought about the existence of a great number of extensive squatter camps, and vast areas of slums in the periphery of metropolitan cities. How else can we explain why, in developing countries, economic activities tend to concentrate in a limited number of cities, and why these ‘so-called parasitic’ cities often grow to very great sizes regardless of the increasing problems they face and create’? From the very brief historical events summarised in Fig. 1, there are hardly any clear-cut conclusions that can be drawn for our better understanding of the changing patterns of the largest cities in the world in the future. However. we can easily see that the expansion of cities in size and number throughout history is obviously not an accidental phenomenon; rather, it is a product of multiple factors, organically integrated. And urbanisation in developed and developing countries has followed different patterns and courses in response to this mix of factors. This is in line with what Davis has written: ./ . . . cities are functional, not accidental developments, for they appear only where they perform useful services and they grow only in response to demands of their tributary areas”.7 Thus, urbanisation, no matter how one defines it, is only one of the products of the process of development seen at a particular point in time. It is a sub” United Nations, Pur~ua of C’rhtrrzcrnd Rurrrl Populution Growth. Population IWO. ’ Davis. P.H.. Thr Earrh crrzd Mtrrz. p. 558, Macmillan. New York. 1’957.
Studies
No. 6X. New York.
process of the general process of dcvclopment. Its path may not be so defined and may change in response to the content, speed. and direction of the overall development and modernisation process, nevertheless, the direction in which the movement occurs or might occur can be identified and perceived.
CONTRASTING
VIEWS ON LARGE CITIES
We wish to consider three contrasting views on the role of metropolitan regions in national development. albeit very briefly. Their significance is developed below.
“advantage of a large and concentrated labour and consumer market; it is the focus of transportation routes; it has the economies of scale and juxtaposition of industries and specialists; it is a fertile ground for social and cultural change necessary for development; it is a centre from which these innovations or new adaptations, artifacts and technologies . diffuse into the countryside. and it is an area that receives migrants from the countryside thus relieving the farming areas of the burden of excess population”.s
Metropolitan primate cities obstruct socio-economic development “by retarding the development of other cities in the nation. by contributing littlc to the development of their own hinterland by being oriented primarily toward the contribution of services to the colonial or indigenous elite in the great city itself”.” “There is no incentive for growth to decentralize. Modern enterprise remains concentrated in the major cities. Modernizing influences reach the migrants, but in the hinterlands traditional ways of life remain in the small towns and villages.“‘”
“Poverty.
unemployment. violent class and race conflicts, ‘alienation’ and arc certainly problems in the city, but they are not problems of the city. They are problems produced by the social, economic and political structure of our society. They would exist, whatever our pattern of settlement - even if we. instead of congregating in metropolitan areas, all disperse into small towns and hamlets They are [however] more visible where they arc concentrated: [but] this is all to the good. because recognition of a problem is the first step toward dealing with it.“’ ’ These contrasting and wonlie
metropolis is good or bad depends much on who sees it and from what perspective. Metropolitan authorities in many developed countries arc concerned about the gradual decay of the city core, about the flight of people to the periphery and about dwindling revenues. Their counterparts in the developing countries are concerned about too many people coming to the city and overburdening the urban infrastructure and social capital; increasing crime and social decay in general; and, of course, the lack of resources to manage the metropolis. Irrespective of the problems world metropolises face today, they continue to dominate the international and national development scene. They control the commanding heights of national economies and are indispensable ‘nerve ccntres’ for the smooth functioning of modern national states. They cannot be washed away; they are there to stay. So long as technology, production processes, and social values remain what they are, and so long as the style of development prevalent in this century remains what it is, metropolises will continue to play a leading role in national and international development. The question really is not how to do away with them but, rather, how to make them play their most constructive role in socio-economic transformation in both pre- and postindustrial societies.
CAUSES Growth
AND CONSEQUENCES
OF GROWTH
trends
By the year 2000, about half of the population of the world is likely to be classified as urban (in 1900 only the United Kingdom had more than 50% of its population living in urban areas). Africa will be 40% urbanised, Latin America 75%, and Asia 39%. All other continents will have 75% or more of their population in urban areas. One of the major concerns connected with the problem of urbanisation relates to metropolitan regions with a population of a million or more. More of the new urban population will live in metropolitan regions. Table 3 indicates the basic trends as projected by the United Nations and shows that metropolitan cities will contain over 60% of the total urban population of the world by the year 2000. One interesting trend which can be observed from Fig. 2 is that, by the year 2000, while the more developed countries (MDCs) have a higher share of the population (against the world total) in cities of less than 1 million, the less developed countries (LDCs) show a contrasting trend with a higher share of the population (against the world total) in cities of 1 million or more. This trend is a ‘switching phenomenon’ between MDCs and LDCs, and the turning point is some time in the 1980s. This phenomenon can also be observed when the number of cities criterion is taken into account (see Fig. 3). Table 4 shows that the number of cities in the world with a population of 1 million or more was 71 in 1950 (23 in LDCs + 48 in MDCs = 0.48). It is likely to increase to 414 by the year 2000 (264 in LDCs + 1.50 in MDCs = 1.76). Thus. during this period, the number of cities of this size group in the LDCs is likely to increase 3.7 times faster than that in MDCs. During 1950-1980, this rate was 2.2 for the city-size class of 1 million or more, and was approximately 1.7 for the other two city-size classes of less than 1 million. In terms of population, the prospects reveal an even greater contrast. In 1975, there were 262 million people living in cities of 1 million or more in MDCs, and 244 million in LDCs. By the year 2000, these cities will contain 914 million in LDCs and 444 million in MDCs. Many reasons have been attributed to the rapid growth of urban population in the developing countries.
x17.4;7 (%.-1S) sl.os: I l-4.55) I72.32’ (.X).07) i.i7.IW
I I00.00)
I
,v.s.w <
(-LS..36) 55.h2 I (11.74)
I.:s.x12 (ih.S(I) .377..32
( l0(l.00)
37’). I’dI 71) SO.15(1 ( 1.7.50) I’~4.007 (X7’)) hf17.74.~ (57
( 1011.11(1~
i7h.;7S (hl.lI) I I S.‘)J7 ( I’ 61) 2-17.(172 (31 77) O42.U’)7 (IO0 l)(l)
414.7’J’ (5S.SI) 10.3.7SJ (13.72) 207.771 (77.-!7) 75f1.33 I ( 101).1l0)
‘Jl1.7i-1 ((14X2) Ih’J.Si7 ( I’.011 72~l.(lOS (1.2 I-1) I .-I I I I ‘)O ( 100.0(1)
As noted earlier. the metropolitan regions in the developed and developing countries alike are expanding both in terms of population and area. but the rate of expansion is far more rapid in the developing countries. Moreover, the nature of the expansion is so different that it produces not only dissimilar but often contrasting results. The developed countries are undergoing post-industrial urbanisation - at times referred to as ‘mature urbanisation’. It is charactcriscd by the transfer of population from one urban region to another. with ;I growing tendency towards suburbanisation. These shifts result from differences in the quality of life among urban centres and between the core and periphery of the same city. The migrants are urbanised: they are not looking for a lob. Most of them are trying to relocate themselves in order to lead ;I socially and culturally fuller life. under this p~mcess of change. the core urban regions are losing the native population and opportunities in the face of competition from more attractive locations and places. This tends to create several problems. First. the cores of the maior metropolitan regions like London. Paris, and New York arc unable to maintain themselves without external assistance. and tend to degenerate. Secondly. the ethnic character of the core regions changes rather dramatically as indigenous population losses arc largely filled by foreign immigrants who arc less skilled and have a lower income and a lesser stake in the metropolis. The changing ethnic character of Paris. London. New York, and Stockholm can be cited as an example. Thirdly. with this change in ethnic character and with low income.
57
> 1 million
0.5-l million
25 LDC 2015
1950
, 1960
1970
1975
1980
1990
2000
Fig. 2. Percentage share of populution by city size: more developed cowltries (MDC’.s); Ictr developed cowltries (LDG); world total (WT). Source: See Table 3.
alienation and deteriorating urban amenities (including housing), the core region becomes a den of crime and corruptive social mores and values. All this leads to a vicious circle of deterioration leading to more deterioration. Against this, in the less developed countries, metropolitan growth is the direct During the decade 1950-1960. such consequence of rural-urban migration. migration constituted 60% of urban growth. This figure is likely to come down to 42% during the decade 1980-1990, indicating a continuing high rate of natural increase of urban population. This again is in contrast to the situation in the more developed countries, where the overall population growth is low (~2%). These projected figures may not be completely dependable, but they do indicate trends. The metropolitan regions of the developing countries contain much of the modern sector of the national economies and hence they attract the largest number of migrants. The impact of large-scale migration to large cities is many sided. First, the density of population in relation to available facilities increases. Demand for HAB 7:5/h-E
LDC WT MDC
L
I
1950
I
1960
I
1970
I
I
1975
I
I
1980
1990
2000
I 1980
I 1990
I 2000
Year
98
I 1950
1 1960
I 1970
1 1975
I
Year 82-
< 0.5
LDC
mlllion
81 80 -
(%)
MDC
79 78 77 76 75
MDC I 1950
I 1960
I 1970
, 1975
I 1980
1 1990
LDC
I 2000
I
Year
housing of a particular type increases and people start doubling up, renting out rooms to families, and piecing together shelters in places that were uninhabitable to begin with. The density of the central business district or the city core increases fastest, for it is here that the migrants can get casual work both in the formal and informal sectors of the urban economy. This lcads to a sharp rise in land values, making it more difficult for the poor to acquire or build a house. In due course, squatter settlements extend beyond the metropolis. creating new problems of urban management. This uncontrolled growth makes it almost impossible for the metropolitan regions of the developing countries to expand and up-date urban amenities. Most of them are unable to provide water, sewerage, and drainage to a large portion of the urban population. The problems acquire more serious proportions. as
Tuble 4. Size disrribution
City size (thousands) World
I 950
of cities in developed and developing
1960
lY70
total (7.7x:) 101 (11.15) 734 (81 .Ol) 006 ( 100.00)
O.S- 1 million 0. l-0.5
million
Total
More developed
110 (X.56) 136 (10.52) 1.03’) (80.X6) 1.285 (100.00)
157 (9 47) 17’) (10.34) 1.395 (XO.SY) 1.731 (100.00)
million
Total
0.1-0.5
322 (11.05) 303 (11.25) 2.06’) (76.X(I) 2.6YJ l100.00)
414 (12.44) 3% (11.00) 3 -.- 51’) (75.66) i 320 (;t;o.tIo,
10’) (10.25) 11x (11.10) 8.16 (78.65) 1.Oh3 (100.00)
133 (11.24) 131 (11.07) 919 (77.6’)) 1.1X3 ( l00.00)
150 (ll.S2) 152 (Il.YX) Y67 (76.70) (lK::,,
116 (10.18) 131 ( 11.50) x92 (78.31) 1.13’) ( 100.00)
1x”, (12.51) 2 (1 l!& 1.150 (76.1 I) 1.511 (100.00)
264 (12.X2) 7-14 (11.X4) 1.552 (75.33) 7.OhO (100.00)
1x1 (9.20) 220 (11.19) 1.566 (79.61) 1.Yh7
85 (0.35)
(l& J-t8 (80.43) 557 (100.00)
( 100.00)
(10.:;) 72s (70.76) YOY (100.00)
(9.23; 110 (11.21) 7x0 (7Y.51) 9x1 (100.00)
(8. ;:; 54 (9.51) 468 (82.39) Sh8 (100.00)
(X.7762, 80 (9.73) 670 (81.51) x22 ( 100.00)
YO (9.13) 110 (11.16) 786 (79.72) 086 (100.00)
countries
31 million 0.5-l
(l00.00)
22s (10.22) 239 (11.31) 1.728 (78.47) 2,202 (100.00)
of cities
(8.:) 0.5- 1 million
Less developed
2000
1YXO
countries
31 million
0. l-0.5
195&2OM
1990
lY75 Number
21 Million
countrk,
million million
Total
23 (6.50) 40 (11.46) 286 (81.Y5) 349 (100.00)
Source: United Nations. Population Division. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Trmd.t wd Prospects in the population of Urban Aggiomera~ion. IYSO-2000, ESAIPIWPSO, New York, November 1075. Note: Numbers in parcnthcses are percentages against total.
“many migrants burden the city’s economy through increased underemployment and unemployment levels, lower levels of productivity, greater demand for costly municipal facilities and services, lower per capita tax revenues, and higher city budget deficits”.” Even where a migrant has full-time employment, the income so generated does not remain in the city - it spreads to his immediate and extended family living in the city or back home in the village. The social fabric of the metropolitan region also undergoes change due to large-scale migration. At times, migrants establish homogeneous ethnic communities and function as pressure groups to legalise squatter settlements or to acquire access to urban amenities and services. Participation in civic elections is noted to be low. Once this happens, it becomes difficult to integrate the community into the social fabric of the city.
The problems Because of the external pressures and internal convulsions mentioned above, metropolitan regions have now evolved a society which for all practical purposes is dualistic in nature. There is the good part of the city, and then there is the bad part. Those who live in the good part are good citizens and those in the other part are characterised as bad citizens. Poor localities are branded as dens of crime, antisocial activities, and environmental degradation. Not many recognise ” Sally Findley.
op. cif..
p. 7Y
that thcsc are only symptoms of something more deep-seated. i.e. the inability 01 the urban community to cope with the new situation. We fail to rcalise that “the modern metropolis reflects in the sharpest form the basic contradiction between our success in applying science to the relation of man to nature and our failure to apply science to the relation of man to man”. Ii However. apart from this contradiction within the metropolitan region. there is a still more serious contradiction that separates the metropolis from its rural hinterland. The living conditions in rural settlements of developing countries are deplorable by any standards and call for immediate, imaginative and sustained attention and action programmes. While it is true that living conditions in all human settlements of developing countries are bad, they arc much worse in the rural settlements. These settlements are so dispersed and isolated that they fail to attract the attention of those who matter at the national and international levels. So much has been written about the slums and squatter settlements of cities that it is not realised that most of the rural settlements of the dcvcloping countries are much worse than the urban slums in many respects. They fail to get attention mainly because they are spatially so dispersed and small that they are unable to make a joint effort to make their presence felt.
LARGE CITIES AND NATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
As noted earlier, a metropolitan region combines the functions of leadership and production, the formerly divided metropolitan region no longer shows any sharp division between densely-built town and open country. These points will bc elaborated further to show the implication of these changes in form and function for policy and planning. In order to be specific. it is important that metropolitan regions of the post- and pre-industrial societies be treated separately, although many an analyst would like to treat them as two points in a single urbanisation continuum. Metro-regions
Developed
in developed
societies
societies
are characterised
by the following
phenomena:
A very slow rate of population growth. (2) Almost no rural-urban migration. The trend is rather for population to move from congested city cores to the countryside. (3) The dispersal of manufacturing from metropolitan centres to small and intermediate-sized towns in the country. The high cost of land and labour and environmental pollution are the main causes for this shift. (4) The service-oriented tertiary and quaternary sectors of the economy are becoming more prominent in the metropolitan regions, replacing manufacturing and production-oriented tertiary activities. (5) Outlying rural areas have become urbanised. and the distinction between urban and rural is narrowing down rather rapidly. (6) Disparities in income and earning capacities have been reduced largely because the income of the poorest has risen well above the subsistence Icvcl. Poverty in the form seen in pre-industrial societies and industrialising societies does not exist in the post-industrial society. (7) With further advances in production technologies, the role of people in production is decreasing. Moreover, workers are becoming increasingly alienated from their work. (1)
(8) There is a growing interest in a lifestyle which, without doing away with economic gains, would give a more satisfying meaning to life and living. The tendency is towards humanism and a peaceful world, but the framework for the conceptuahsation of this world is confined to the narrow limits set by an individual’s own culture and experience. To remain a vital force in national development, the metropolitan regions of the developed countries (specially the post-industrial countries) must respond positively to the new trends identified above. It is these trends which are causing problems in metropolitan regions. As Rodwin has remarked “they are no longer seen largely as growth problems associated with economic and population expansion, but also as retrenchment problems associated with decrease in population, economic activities, and the tax base, (and) they are not simply problems the metropolis of functions land uses inner and areas), of services, transporhousing and facilities, but of people the metropolis of crime, welfare and conflict . . .“.I4 The problem is one of human obsolescence and how to deal with it. The manufacturing industries, based as they were on cheap industrial labour, can no longer remain in the metropolitan areas. Local labour has become costly, and cheap labour from outside the region is no longer attracted to these occupations. As a result, the secondary industry has moved out of existing big urban centres; as the industry moved out, the central managerial function was developed rapidly to cope with the need to control business operations which have increased drastically in scale and complexity.” But not ail metropolitan centres have been able to cope with the problems created by the movement of manufacturing industries. The tertiary functions have not replenished the economic strength that the metropolitan cores have lost as a result of the decrease in residential population density in the inner city. Only the primate metropolitan centres like Tokyo have been able to cope with this problem. The experience in North America and European countries is similar. According to Keith ‘*American experience corroborates that economic specialization and diversification increase with size, or scale of metropolitan area. In the United States, the nine largest metros, those with over 2 to 5 million population each, house only 22% of the nation’s population, and yet they account for 27% of office/service and 39% of headquarters employment. The 25 metros in the 2.5 million range comprise . . . 28% of headquarter office/service employment jobs. Below a half million, e uates with population and headquarters employment drops well below.“’ 9’ Irrespective of how the tertiary sector takes over from the manufacturing sector, the fact remains that the inner city soon turns into a ghetto requiring renewal and development, and since very few people with a taxable income arc ultimately left in these areas, any investment in renewal and development becomes a costly affair. Whether the ethnic concentration of blacks, browns, and other aliens in the city core is caused by economic or social reasons is of no major consequence. What is important is the social problem it creates and the implications it has for the future of the metropolis. ” Lloyd Rodwin, “Problem of the Metropolises in More Developed Countries - Regional and Inner Arca: lY5Y- IY7Y”. txper presented at the International Forum on Metropolis in the World of Tomorrow aponx~red by the Nab&l institute for Research Advancement. Tokyo;. Fchruary lY7Y. See also M.’ Honlo. “Metrouolitan Problems in Post-industrial Societies: the Cast of Jargon”. UNCRD. WP70-12. Octolxr lY7Y. and R.b. Misra. Millior~ (‘irk of‘/nt/irr,Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi. 1974. ” Honjo. M.. op. cir. I” John P. Keith. “Economic and Demographic Aspects of Metropolitan Development in North America”. Merropoli/cm Phrling crrd M~mrr~oncwr. Hidehiko Sazanami (Editor). pp. X7-56. Japan Society lor the Promotion of Science, Tokyo. 1982.
Metro-regions
in developing
societies
The characteristics of the metro-regions in the developing countries are different from those in the developed countries in more than one respect. The conditi~~ns under which the metro-regions in these countries grow and function arc as follows: (I) The natural increase in population is at times rather high, reaching to 34% per ~nmm in both urban and rural areas. (2) These countries are essentially rural; less than a quarter of their population is urban. The capital city and a few large centres often dominate the urban scene. (3) There is a high rate of migration of people from rural areas to a few urban centres, especially the metropolitan regions. (4) M~~lluf~~cturing industries still constitute a major activity in the mctropolitan regions, ~llthough a tendency for the tertiaries to grow is yuite visible in quite a few of them. (5) There is a vast difference in earning capacity and quality of lift between urban and rural areas and between the richer and poorer sections of the urban population. The mass of people is still below the poverty line in both urban and rural areas, although the problem is more accentuated in the latter. (6) The labour force in both urban and rural areas is largely unskilled or semiskilled, and hence earning capacity is low. (7) Since the majority of people are still below the poverty line, improving the quality of life basically means increasing income. This results in pcoplc moving to urban slums in the hope of earning more and creating opportunities for a new start. (8) All this leads to overcrowding and environInenta1 deterioration in urban areas. The impact is felt more severely in the metropolitan regions. which attract larger numbers of rural migrants. (9) The problem in the metro-regions does not therefore boil down to inner city vs outer city. It is a problem that affects the whole region. It is essentially a problem between the nletro-region and its hinterl~~n~i.
The challcngcs fxed by the metropolitan regions of the developing countries are thus quite different from those faced by their counterparts in the developed parts of the world. It is a problem of overcrowding, of underemployment and unemployment, of inadequate social services and urban amenities, of poor urban finances, of crct hoc* pl~~nning and development measures. of lack of ~lttenti~~n by the national government, of rural poverty and agricultural stagnation, and o? In effect, it is a problem of national poorly developed human resources. development with all its varied ramifications. The problem acquires more serious proportions when many of those who migrate to urban centres have really no stake in what happens to the city so long as they can earn a bit more than what they could back home in the village. Many of those who fail to make the grade in the competitive world of the city turn to urban vices, like shoplifting, burglary, pickpocketing, smuggling, and - worst of all - prostitution, in order to make ends meet. Another effect of low or no income is the poor housing which dominates the metropolitan scene in all developing countries. It is estimated that more than half of the urban population of developing countries lives in poor and inadequ~~te housing conditions. There are about I million slum dwellers each in greater Bombay and Calcutta (City corporation area), “constituting about 25 and 31% of the total population, respectively, of the two areas. In the year 1961, four la/& persons [One lakh is equal to one hundred thousand]. or 24%’ of the total population of Madras City. were
slum dwellers. In 1950, there then, 180 areas have been
were about 300 slum areas in the city. Since
politicos, seeking the confianca of the people, assure the Alagados dwellers that the garbage will continue to come. The boa gentu of the city profess revulsion at the practice, and an occasional journalist raises an occasional clamour against the city departments of hygiene and health, but the mountains of garbage and the swarms of rodents and vermin within them pile up steadily.“’
CONCLUSION
The foregoing discussion points to the conclusion that metropolitan cities both in developed and developing countries are now facing problems of an unprecedented nature. External pressures are threatening their continued growth. The problem in the Third World countries is, however, not the product of urbanisation, or rural-urban migration, or even ‘urban bias’20 in policy. It is a problem basically emerging from rapid human multiplication, poverty, ‘North biased’ world economic order and national development styles. As long as population keeps growing at a high rate, cities will expand too, regardless of city size and the speed of urbanisation. Poverty and inequality in developing countries, both in urban and rural areas, are not a natural phenomenon of an inevitable, temporary process of development as described by ‘Kuznets curve’ theory. In these countries, poverty will be perpetuated given the present ‘North bias’ in the international economic order, through which “the western countries exploit the weakness of the poor and the pro-growth national development countries to weaken them further”, policies which tend to bypass the poor. According to Harrison “Development policies have been biased against the poor, the backward, the rural, and skewed in favour of the rich, the westernized and the urban, for a very simple reason. It is politics that determines the direction of development, and the privileged groups have indefinitely more access to political power than the poor.“” ” l‘own and Country Planning Organization, Towurd~ u Setkwwn~ Policy in fndia-2001, Mimeo.. p. 37, New Delhi. Fchruary 1975. ” Dwycr. D.J.. Peopleutd Housing irl Third World (‘it&. Longman. London. 1975. I” Nan Pendrcll. “Squatttng in Salvador: an Explanatory Study”. unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Columbia University. p. 146. l%X. cited in D.J. Dwyer. lot. cit. “’ Michael Llpton and Manrice Temple Smith. Whx Poor People SINK Poor: Urban Bius in World Developmm, 1977. ” Paul Harrison. 0,~. Cl.
Thus. ‘urban bias’ in development policies is not a product of metropolitan lobby, but rather a by;product of the ‘Rich biased’ politico-economic order in both the national and tntcrnational spheres. To explain poverty in the LDC’s in terms of national conflict between the rural and urban classes is a necessary but not a sufficient condition. As a matter of fact. in most cases the political structure in LDCs is alien to its own
social
issues of the national
economic,
social. and political development on the one hand: and ot international economic structure on the other hand. In the developing countries, the political commitments at the highest level, and the appropriate adjustments of the governmental structure and mocks of operation in response to the ne\\ and severe problems, in both national and international contexts. arc required as the most crucial prerequisites for handling the emergent and emerging problems. Despite the ‘North biased’ international economic structure. the industrialiscd countries, which were doing well after the Second World War until the ‘oil shock’ in 107.1 and the first few years of the post-Vietnam War, are now facing ;I nutnbcr of serious economic problems. According to T1zc World Brrtlk Kcporf lOo’2: “Continuing recession and heavy unemployment in the industrialized countries arc accotnpaniccl by real interest rates at unprecedcntly high Icvels. most commodity prices are at their lowest levels in three decades; the vol~~mc of intcrnattonal trade has ceased to grow. Many dcvcloping countries. already struggling with large debt payments. have thus seen their problems exacerbated by the rise in interest payments, L&a-se trends in the terms of trade. and depressed export volumc.~” Thus the development prospects for the international economy ha\:e \vorscncd over the past few years. One of the main GIUSL’S for this is the continuing recession in the industrialist4 countries which are highly urbanised. This recession is. however, closely linked to the declining purchasing power of the LDCs where the majority of the poor of the world live. Whatever manufacturing potentials thcsc countries have is limited to the metropolitan areas. While it is true that the tn;tjor front to fight poverty lies in the rural parts of the Third World countries. the metropolitan cities offer the best and immediate cnvirontnent for channelling the investment resources for socio-economic tramdot-tnation. The issue is not whether metropolitan centres are good or bad; the issue is how to make them good and strong so that they can better serve the national development objecti\,cs. One of the recent t‘earures of ‘post-industrial’ or advanced industrial countries is that the scr\,ice sector of the economy has expanded faster than the manufacturing sector. This phenomenon is now visible in many ‘pre-inclustt-i~tl‘ less developed countries as well. But with a difference. Iiere the service sector is expanding before manufacturing has grown to a level that it needed a sophisticated and expanding service sector. This is thus not a very hcalthv trend and neck early corrective measures. Tertiarisation without industrialisatton can and some of these consequences arc alread) have dangerous consequences, ‘subsistence urbanisation’, visible in terms of social chaos. underemployment. C’fC’.
What wc need in the developing large tnctropolis latye number of
countries
at the apex supported small and intermediate
by towns
a balanced urban system with :I and in turn which supports ;I and cities. Such ;I system must be
is
organically and generatively linked to the hundreds of thousands of rural settlements, both vertically and horizontally. Thus, the question that needs to be posed is: is the urban system of a country balanced, and whether the large cities play a generative role in this balanced system ? Instead. however, the question that is often raised is to brand the large cities as parasitic without giving due consideration to the fact that they are the products of a given socio-economic situation. and given the constraints within which they operate, they play an important role of social and economic transformation.