increase in proportion of country’s population that lives in towns and cities. caused
by high natural increase of population in cities but mainly rural-urban migration.
linked to economic development and industrialization. causes severe economic and
social problems. happened earlier in rich Europe/north America countries. 90% of
the population lives in towns and cities in these countries. started 200 years ago
when countries went through industrial revolution. people left agriculture jobs and
migrated to growing cities to work in factories. urbanisation is now slow or stopped.
LICs and MICs in Africa and SE Asia have lower urbanisation levels as happened
later, still important factor in development. LICs and MICs in south America have
higher urbanisation levels, urban population of over 75%. urbanisation in HICs,
1850-1950. Dhaka, Karachi, Delhi, Bangkok all doubled their pop between 1985-
2000. fastest growing cities are in the tropics.
1900; only 2 cities with a pop over 1 million, Paris and London (millionaire cities).
now over 400. 1975, largest city pop was 16.5m, now 35m (Tokyo). megacity =
pop over 10 million, including extremely large conurbations. urbanisation is
particularly rapid in china
Causes of urbanization
Natural population growth: urban areas have low age profile. young adults move
into city for work, people who have children. good healthcare and sanitation in LIC
and MIC cities means infant mortality rates are lower. cities have higher pop
increase rates than surrounding rural areas.
Rural urban migration push factors: rural pop growth puts pressure on land causes
over-farming, low yields, and soil erosion. inheritance laws mean plots of land
divided up until each plot is very small and can’t produce enough to feed their
family. floods, droughts and desertification add to the problems faced by
subsistence farmers. improve farms, get into debt, hard to pay back so sell and
leave. commercial farming, farms combined, and more machinery used. farm
workers unemployed and small sell land to bigger farmers. landlord organises land
into bigger farms and tenants forced off the land. clean water lack and proper
sewage so disease is common. rural medical facilities are non-existent. lack of job
life is low. washing done in a river. houses are wooden shacks. war and civil strife
force people to move to safe cities. countryside life uneventful and basic
education.
Rural urban migration pull factors: jobs or perception in factories/service industries
are better paid. opportunity to earn money from informal sector. begging and
crime better than working on a farm in the countryside. overall perception, fed by
the media, that life is better in the city.
Consequences of urbanisation
hard for cities to cope with rapid pop growth from high urban BR and influx of poor
people from the countryside coming to city for work. extra workers boost the
economy but pressure the city social provision. effort to provide themselves leads
to decline in the urban environment. even with a job, new arrivals can’t afford to
rent.
Following happens… move in with friends so overcrowding. Live rough. Abandoned
children roam the streets. Squatters on bad land use leads to shanty towns, land
owners can displace anytime. Labour influx exceeds industry demands,
unemployment. Unskilled labours depress wage rates. unethical factory owners
employ women/children in dangerous conditions. Councils can’t raise taxes and
public amenities can’t keep up with pop growth. Pollution from rapid urban and
industrial growth.
economic development needs cities. provide the critical mass of people and capital
that drives economic development. People have bad conditions as they believe it’ll
get better in the future. expect the wealth created by economic development to
filter down to their children.
problems produced by rapid urbanisation are the result of unplanned growth. rural
people can only move to city when given permission, not given until there’s a job
for them, a place to live and sufficient urban amenities. allows economic growth
without too many social problems.
Improvement strategies: oil rich countries build high rise apartments. Site and
service schemes, land near work. Rent land plot and build own house. Self-help
schemes, ownership of land not theirs so improve with given materials. Brown
agenda focuses on environmental conditions and sustainability development
Suburbanisation and urban sprawl
movement of people from homes in the central areas of a city to the outer edges.
major feature of European cities during 1st half of C20th. led to urban sprawl in the
USA and the growth of the megapolis. occurs everywhere but noticeable in USA,
Canada and Australia where urban areas tend to have low density suburbs.
resulted in the outward growth of urban development which has engulfed
surrounding villages and rural areas. C20th this was facilitated first by
development of public transport and then by increased private car use. railways
and arterial roads enabled wealthier commuters to live a distance away from work.
few planning controls between the world wars and urban growth took place
alongside main roads; known as ribbon development. late 40’s growth between
ribbons became a cause for concern; known as urban sprawl. led to creation of
green belts, areas of rural open space and low-density land use around some cities
where further development was banned.
since 1950, suburban expansion continued but better planned. 50’s-60’s in UK,
large scale construction of municipal housing by local government took place on
only land available, the sub-urban fringe. 70’s saw increase in home ownership, led
to private housing estates built on the urban fringe. rural urban fringe is the
transition zone where real and urban land uses are mixed. rural urban fringe will be
characterised by agricultural land, but other land use linked to urban area. building
in cheap land areas allowed bigger gardens and more open spaces. houses and
bungalows, schools and shopping centres built in suburban areas. car ownership
grew, edge of town more favoured location for new offices factories and retail
outlets due to more land for car parks and expansion
strict control of green belts was relaxed. suburbanised areas demonstrate other
key elements of the rural-urban fringe. many are now well-established housing
areas, highly sought after.
Factors affecting location of large urban settlements…
Nodal points (route centres): where natural routes meet. means these points
became the most accessible ones in the area and were the best places to provide
services. E.g. New York
Industrial centres: provide mass employment and draw in investment causing an
upward spiral of development. E.g. Manchester in industrial revolution.
Ports: large area linked to the port from which goods are exported and to which
goods are imported. E.g. shanghai
Capitals: cities with government and civil service provide jobs but also good for
HQ’s as close to political power and decision making. located centrally often. E.g.
Madrid
social factors play a part. in HICs, increase in adult population, accounts for 3/4 of
the growth in demand for houses. due to change in age structure of the pop, fall in
no. of young dependents and rise in other ages. elderly live longer than past so
houses aren’t on market often and large houses have one old person living in it.
suburbanisation was an urban process that dominated European cities from 1910
to 1970. many suburbs now declining. housing stock getting old and needs
repair/renewal. private owners maintain and repair homes as and when needed.
large areas of decline don’t develop, individual houses and gardens fall into
disrepair for short time. high cost of private housing in UK ensures developers will
move in and renovate a declining property as profits are more considerable.
new trend fuelled by high house prices is infilling. large old house with large
garden is brought by a developer. old house is modernised and sold on with a
much-reduced garden. rest of garden used to build several up-market properties.
profits are considerable.
municipal houses built on greenfield sites on rural urban fringe mainly between
30’s-70’s. mainly semi-detached houses for rent, all same design. Europe,
apartment blocks were the rule. moved here from slum clearance schemes of the
inner cities and helped to house the rapidly rising population in the baby boom.
people liked them in the beginning as had gardens and open spaces. designed for
poor so led to social segregation and often remote from CBD jobs and services.
abandoned and isolated. better off moved out to private estates, social cohesion
broke down and cheaply built houses need expensive maintenance. many
municipal estates have high levels of crime drug use and unemployment.
most houses well-built but renovated when sold. council estates were rough, and
no one wanted to buy properties on them. council couldn’t maintain, and area fell
into downward spiral of decline. envelope scheme is successful: house stripped
down to shell, new roof built, rooms renovated with modern windows and doors,
new plumbing/heating/rewiring. result is attractive and popular properties.
Examples of problems of suburbanization…
high levels of racial and socio-economic segregation. middle classes suburbanised,
and lower socio-economic groups become concentrated in inner city or run-down
suburbs.
inadequate facilities within the spreading suburbs
providing social facilities has a high cost
public transport costs are high
dependence on cars has associated environmental problems
commuting brings problems of lost time and productivity
character of countryside is changed, and rural way of life is lost
Solutions to urban sprawl…
number of people living in homes that exist could be increased by renovating and
reusing empty or abandoned private and municipal houses
tax incentives offered to encouraged people to take in lodgers to share homes.
new high-density housing built on brownfield sites. includes developers buying up
large houses and gardens in established suburban areas demolishing them and
building new houses.
building allowed in rural villages and small towns on land that hasn’t been
previously developed, would encourage counter urbanisation
planning regulations reduced urban sprawl
Counter-urbanisation
movement of people from homes in the large urban areas to homes in smaller
towns and villages in rural areas (leap frogging the rural urban fringe)
leads to longer distance commuting, mainly by private car and rail if available.
driven by an urge to improve life quality, exchanging the problems of life in the big
cities with the perceived advantages of life in market towns and villages
ICT allows home working and teleworking meaning the expenses of commuting is
reduced and rural advantages maximised.
in urban areas the counter-urbanisation effects have been same as
suburbanisation.
have added to the downward spiral of decline in the inner city
solutions aren’t simple and irreversible
Urban renewal
re-development of run-down urban areas which brings about improvements.
may be a product of natural market forces but often the input of local government
triggers the process.
can involve property led regeneration schemes (London docklands) and recent
move towards sustainable urban communities (Greenwich millennium village)
urban regeneration schemes are classified into 3 types…
property-led regeneration: initiative taken by national government and locals and
council have little input
partnership schemes: national government is the prime mover, but local councils
and private developers are also involved. more local accountability and input
private initiatives: private developers/individuals buy a house and renovate. areas
of low class and slum are transformed into fashionable residential areas. known as
gentrification.
re-urbanisation…
movement of people and economic activities back into central areas of cities
attempts to bring a balanced mix of housing of different costs and sizes and
employment opportunities.
recognises housing needs to be found for the urban poor and wealthy
rarely occurs without government intervention and capital
competition for land…
different people and land uses compete for land in the city and the more soughtafter land becomes more expensive.
competition is expressed in the city’s land prices, property prices and rental prices
not a static pattern
other factor is the planning law of different countries
effects of the competition: derelict sites, increased concentration of social classes
in ghettoes and poorer people forced out of parts of the inner city.
World cities
key part of globalisation.
world city = the way that cities have an economic, cultural and political
significance beyond the boundaries of their own countries
the concept of the world city focuses on the relationships between cities.
Causes of world city growth
key factors in the growth of world cities have been: development of TNC’s and the
communications revolution.
world cities form an interlocking network where cities are the meeting points.
development of modern electronic communications and computerisation from the
80’s and allowed companies providing services in the cities to have links with other
cities across the world.
contrasting effects of globalisation: production of goods became dispersed to
places with cheaper labour, often in LICs and MICs. management and business
service industries became more concentrated in world cities where there were
financial professional and creative services. from these world cities, global brands
were managed.
locations of firms offices is important, many communications flow between the
offices and face to face meetings are only needed occasionally. head offices and
other major sites can be located near political power, financial institutions and
related activities or near centres where employees with required skills are found.
Hierarchy of world cities
the GaWC network assessed the position of a city in the hierarchy of world cities by
asking about importance of a particular office in a particular city in a firm’s overall
office network.
called the service value of a city to a firm.
the higher the service value, the more important an office and the more exchanges
of info with offices it will generate.
2 important offices will generate much higher level of flow of info between cities
than 2 minor offices.
scores are added to get a total score and they’re used to develop the hierarchy.
cities are alpha beta or gamma.
Changes unto 2008…
London and New York maintain dominance
Hong Kong is always no. 3 and is gaining importance
alpha levels are over represented by western pacific rim cities as shown by the
development of Sydney, shanghai and Beijing
Miami and Atlanta drop out in 2004 and san Francisco isn’t on the 2008 list. use
only has 3 alpha world cities; NYC Chicago and LA
emerging cities rise from 2004 to 2008 is at the expense of leading western
European cities Amsterdam, Frankfurt and Zurich move down to alpha level. Milan
rises
ex-communist countries of east Europe in which economic privatisations in the 90’s
led to their services-led integration into the world economy, Warsaw is a leading
city by 2008
stable positions: Paris, Singapore, Toronto, Mexico City, Taipei, Jakarta, Stockholm,
Bangkok and Dublin
rapid rise of Dubai