2 First we need to distinguish between rural and urban First we need to distinguish between rural and urban. Both UK statistics bodies and Canadian acknowledge that there as many ways to do this as there are statisticians drawing up the definition. [How many statisticians did they need to change a light-bulb? – answer by to LM] look at other definitions including one different from the Canadian one that I found! However, these 2 groups have come to a more or less consensus, which states if the settlement has more than 10,000 people in then it is urban – less and it is rural. So we will go with this. Watch this BBC video clip to give you an introduction (note MEDC = HIC and LEDC = LIC)
3 What do you notice about urban growth in the time shown? What is urbanisation?Urbanisation is the increase in the proportion of people who live in urban environments. Over time more and more people have moved into the larger communities, thus making them bigger still.What do you notice about urban growth in the time shown?
4 What is urbanisation?The number of people living in urban situations in HICs was greater than those in MIC/LICs but since 1970 this situation has reversed .The size of the big cities has changed. In 1900 there were only 2 – London and Paris – with more than 1 million – now there are more than 400.As the biggest ones have got even bigger the term mega city has been used to describe for with more than 10 million.In 1970 there were only 4. In 2000 there were 15 and the UN estimate that by 2015 there will be at least 26 – over half of them in Asia.
5 Either … Go to this link if you know you can and use the slider to go through the years from 1750 to 1975Or open the word doc I sent you.Either way you are looking for a pattern you have a graph to draw on – estimates – DON’T COUNT THEM – it will take forever!
6 What do you notice about their distribution? Are the mostly HICs or not?Which continent has the most?
7 So how did it all begin?Back in history, nomadic hunter-gathers did not settle any where.Once sedentary farming began to develop, people built houses and cultivated the land around them. But this left them open to attack – far better to put houses in small groups.Once you have a small settlement, then you would find one person maybe was better and making tools that the others –so you got division of labour.There always tended to be a division of labour between men and women – the men would do a bit of hunting while the women stayed around the farmstead and minded the animals and grew the crops.
8 So how did it all begin?(2) Soon it became obvious that some groups produced more of one sort of good while another might need that but have something else surplus to requirement so trading began.So established routes for traders evolved and you got small settlements building up along the routes, at a river crossing or where 2 routes crossed.Then it seemed sensible to meet up regularly and sell your excess goods and buys from others – so markets began to occur regularly and settlements that had a market would get bigger and prosper.As people became more skilled at making tools, it was more efficient to have the craftsmen making their goods in centres where people came to buy and sell things. So not only were the towns centres of trade but also centres of production. Hence they grew in size and in importance.
9 So how did it all begin?(3) As areas came together in tribes or states, then the most important settlements took on roles of defence , government and finance.At this time most people were still involved in primary production, so the rural population was still the majority.But, as agriculture has become more mechanised and secondary industrial production moved away from workshops and into factories, the urban areas have grown and grown. However, even in Europe until the Second World War, more that half the population were involved in primary production in rural areas, but since then, agriculture has required fewer people and more machines.As service industries have grown and secondary industry has expanded, more jobs that are better paid are in the cities. With the greater availability of health and education in larger settlements, the towns and cities have become more attractive, especially as a country has developed.
10 So in summaryUrban growth is linked to development. As country gets wealthier, fewer people work in the primary industries, farming, mining and wood production, that are based in rural areas.More people work in manufacturing occupations (secondary) and in the service industries (tertiary), which are found almost exclusively in urban areas.The growth of urbanisation on LIC/MICs is because ofthe expansion of secondary economic activitythe push and pull factors lead to high rural-urban migrationcities experience high rates of natural rates of increase (those living there tend to younger and so have their children there)
11 Will urbanisation continue to grow? Looking at the percentage of urban dwellers by continent, in some areas the % is increasing quite quickly still. Which are increasing most at the moment? Look at the slope of each line between 2000 and Which are the fastest growing areas?World average
12 Will urbanisation continue to grow? I hope you saw that Africa, Asia and South and Central America are the steepest. This means they are going up fastest. But we also need to take into account that in all of these places, the population growth is also rapid so this means that not only is the % of people in the cities growing but also the total population.[Most population counters estimate that the world will pass 7 billion during October 2011]If you look at the world figures then it is possible to work out that the general trend towards urbanisation has been fairly steady, increasing at about 4% every 10 years, and this trend looks to continue until But with those continents where urban population are increasing faster than the average, there are other areas where the growth is much slower or even in decline.
13 Who are leaving the cities and why? When did the people who lived in Inner London started to leave?Where does it appear some of them might have gone?Moving out of the centre is know as suburbanisation. What might do you think inner London may have been like towards the end of the Victorian Age and in the early parts of the twentieth century?The unpleasant things about an environment that encourage people to leave are called pushes.So urbanisation in the UK and other highly developed countries is not increasing and London for example has actually lost population over the past 70 years.
14 Who are leaving the cities and why? The issues likely to encourage suburbanisation are over crowding, poor housing, too much noise, too much traffic, bad air conditions – these would all push the people away.Good things about the place they are going are called pulls. What pulled them out to the suburbs? The underground meant you could get to the centre and to work easily. The GLC (Greater London Council as it was then) built a lot of council estates in the suburbs which has modern facilities such as inside toilets and bathrooms. The houses even had small gardens. The air was cleaner and there was less traffic and noise and was generally a lot healthier.
15 Who are leaving the cities and why? It is still the case that people with families still prefer the suburbs as they are safer, cleaner and have less crime. Land was in short supply in the centre. As people who moved to the city earned more money than before, they wanted good quality housing for their families and they could afford to buy it.So many private developments grew up in the suburbs where the land was available and much cheaper that in the centre.But young single people still enjoy living in Central London, although as there is so much pressure on land in Central London it can be very expensive.However, single working people do not need much space and lots of tiny flats can be crammed into a small area. But they like the cinemas and clubs and all the shops nearby, as well as museums and lots of activities all within easy reach. So the pull of the city centre is still strong for young people.
16 Who are leaving the cities and why? Look at the graph of London’s populationWe have talked about why the centre’s population went down in the 1930s and 40s while the population in Greater London did not start to drop until the 1950s. So about 1950, people started to leave the capital all together.Where did they go? This was mostly the better-off who could afford cost of long train journeys or had their own transport to travel into town. This is counter urbanisation.Later on, in the 1980s, some of the new high-tech firms did not start up in the big cities at all, but chose nicer (and cheaper) surroundings as these industries are often called ‘footloose’.The older heavy industries were tied to particular places where the raw materials were but these new industries only needed small amounts of materials or components and so had a greater choice of location.
17 Who are leaving the cities and why? These new industries often looked for localities on the outside of towns near a good road network.So the highly skilled people who want to work in these industries tend to live in small towns and villages around the work place, for example, there is a lot of high-tech industry along the M4 motorway and the workers can choose pretty villages in the Cotswold and Chilton Hills to live in.
18 Review 1. What is urbanisation? 2. Where did it happen first of all? 3. Where is most urbanisation taking place now? Why?4. What are the causes of urbanisation?5. What is suburbanisation? Why did it happen?6. What is counterurbanisation? Why did it happen?
19 But as we have seen, the pattern does change with development Stage 3Mature urbanisationStage 4CounterurbanisationStage 1Early urbanisationThe urbanisation pathwayStage 2Acceleration urbanisationSo what do you think are the typical features of each stage?
20 The history of urbanisation Urban areas first appear as a result of agglomerisation – that is the concentration of people and economic activities at favourable locations – and these might be?As towns expand, people move from near the centre outwards in a process of suburbanisation – which city did we use as an example of this? What were the push/pull factors that encouraged this?Agglomerisation + suburbanisation can lead to conurbations – the joining of several urban areas to form one huge sprawling. Can you name one?
21 The history of urbanisation As an urban area prospers and grows, other factors come into play. People may move out of the city they work in to live in smaller more rural settlements - dormitory settlements. They then commute to the city to work and so still make use of the city services.Over time, a different process sets in – people move further out into the country and often take their businesses with them – this is counterurbanisation.
22 These processes can be linked back to the urbanisation pathway diagram Agglomeration and suburbanisation go hand in hand with stage 1 and 2, while dormitory towns and commuting come with Stage 3 and counterurbanisation are relevant to stage 4.Urban regeneration could be added to stage 3 – that is the re-using of older parts of the city, that no longer serve the purpose that was designed for, such as old factories and poor housing. – we will return to this later. The upmarket version of this is called re-imaging, in it simplest form means not just re-using it but making sure everyone is aware of what a great place it is! Classic example – London Docklands.Urbanising the suburbs is another part of development pathway – Stage 3/4. Originally suburbs had wide roads, big gardens etc – but now the push for brownfield development means that in-filling between houses, adding houses to large old back gardens etc
23 2. What affects the rate of urbanisation and the emergence of mega-cities?
24 We looked at some of the reasons … Businesses settle in cities because the infrastructure of transport, services, labour and so on while people go there for improved job prospects, better schools and health facilities etc. We have got an idea of why, but have yet to tackle what affects how fast it happens.Only 20 years ago there were only 171 million cities but now there in excess of 400.
25 Each dot represents a one million city in 2006. Where is there the most red?So there is a concentration in China and another across the Indian sub-continent – and surprisingly another in Middle and Eastern Europe – so that it where most of them are now, but are all these areas increasing in the number they are getting?
26 Take a look at the graph – I know the x-scale is not regular – the graph would not let me do that, but you can see the drift. Note this is a bit of an odd graph the pink numbers on the right refer to the world total line and the violet numbers on the right refer to the continent bars.The lilac in Europe is increasing, but taking a look at the yellow for Asia!
27 But are there any patterns as to why this is happening? To find GDP per capita you need to take the total income generated by a country, area or district – this is the Gross Domestic Product. You then divide the GDP by the population to get the income per person – ‘per capita’ means for each head.Now in general I hope you can see that the poorer the country is (the lower the GDP), the faster its cities are growing, and that for the richest countries, the growth is virtually non-existent. The latter idea ties in with the counterurbanisation we discussed in the last section.
28 But are there any patterns as to why this is happening? Here is another graph pattern:We know that one of the pulls towards the city is the possibility of a higher income.The numbers along the bottom is the urban/rural income gap.At 1, the urban/rural incomes are roughly the same.At 2, the urban income is twice as much as the rural one.At 3 it is 3 times as muchWhat is the pattern?
29 Mega-cities Cities with more than 10 million population How many are in HICs?Which are the largest 3 mega-cities?Which continent has the most?
30 Why are they occurring now? Only 60 years ago there were only 3. Rapidly increasing population, mechanisation of agriculture, industry moving from HICs to MICs and LICs etc.You have enough to cover this topic. However, I did find a brilliant document put out by the German Central bank of all people, from which a number of these graphs were obtained (Thanks guys!).I have put a copy on the wiki. Feel free to explore!
31 Classic question: What are the reasons for the growth of megacities? Make sure you include these 4:Economic developmentNatural population growth + migrantsEconomies of scaleMultiplier effectMost expansion takes place in centres where is easiest to get the goods and services needed to succeed – these 2 can be grouped under economic development and economies of scale.Cities attract the young – as the cool place to be, where there is plenty going on – young people go on to have families.The multiplier effect is that business brings jobs, that bring money that have need of basic services and with additional prosperity, luxury services.
32 The downside of mega cities Is there enough good quality housing for all the new arrivals?Are there enough basic services to give a decent quality of life to everyone living there?Are there enough roads and public transport to move people around efficiently?Is there enough health case? Education?Answer no to any of these and you have a down side!
33 The downside of mega cities Additionally – if there are not enough jobs in the formal economy*, then there are likely to be crime and/or job issues.This can lead to gang culture and possibly gun crime.But there are disadvantages for the country containing the megacity – it acts as a magnet for all resources, economic activity – making it a core (like a big magnet), and so creates a periphery around them – an area of deprivations as it e little investment or improved services.*What is the informal economy?
34 One more mention of cities (and a new one on me, BTW) A global or a world city – this has no minimum size - thus far 31 have been so defined.They have high status asEconomic world centres – have important stock exchanges, banking centres etc (London)Politically they are most often capital cities and are often centres of political organisations e.g UN, World Bank (e.g. Geneva – WHO, UNHCR)Transport hubs: air, road and rail (London Heathrow)Cultural centres – big theatre, museums etc (New York – Broadway)UN high commission of human rights
36 One final idea: What is a primate city? A primate city is one that has much more than twice the population of the next biggest city. An example is Lima (Peru) that is more than ten times larger than the next settlement or Mexico City in Mexico.The presence of a primate city in a country may indicate an imbalance in development — usually a progressive core, and a lagging periphery, on which the primate city depends for labour and other resources.[Core = middle periphery = edge]What this means is that while the primate city can develop, the rest of the country has a hard time keeping up, because all the jobs and investment and services are concentrated there.
37 One final idea: What is a primate city? To an extent this applied to the UKLondon had a substantially higher standard of living until redevelopment became a key issue for the EU and UK government.From the graph, you can see that housing is still an issue.
38 Bangkok – Primate CityBangkok Population 9 million and Thailand population:: 63 million so that Bangkok contains 14% of the populationExamples of the effects of primacyAlthough all areas have banks, 80% of the lending goes on in Bangkok, nearly x6 the rest.All the main government departments are there and this means that Bangkok’s needs are met first, often at the expense of the other areas.Over ¾ of the best universities are in Bangkok, and with many of the best schools there too, with 50% of the scholarships to university going to people from Bangkok, x 3½ what you would expectIncome difference: Bangkok residents earn from x 2 to x 7 as much as the other regions.Access to health care: 60% of the doctors and 50% of nurses work in the cityHouseholds with running water: 80% against 10% outside the city.Efforts to reduce the primacyIncrease the number of universities in the provincesJob creation in rural areasImproved basic health care schemes for all
39 Called ‘Tops and Tails’, you join the word on the sheet to the correct definition agglomerisationsuburbanisationconurbationsdormitory settlementscommutecounterurbanisationUrban regenerationurban re-imagingUrbanising the suburbsMegacitiesmultiplier effecteconomies of scalecoreperipheryglobal/world cityPrimate cityA city that is far bigger than any other city in that regionA city that is internationally significant in some way, politically, economically, culturallyAn area at the centre of activityAn area on the fringe of economic activity e.g. a poor backward region of a country.Changing the way a place is seenCities with more than 10 million peopleConcentration of people and activities in one placeIncreaing the number and types of housing/activity on the edge of citiesMoney spent on renewing a run down areaMovement of populations from cities to the surrounding countrysideMovement of populations from the centre of a settlement to its edgesPlaces where people sleep, but who go to work elsewhereSavings made as a result of large scale productionThe 'snowballing' of economic activity, more jobs means more money to spend on services, more taxes and so more jobs…To travel form one place to another on a daily basisWhere several urban areas join up into one big one
40 In summary We have look at where? And why? And how they are changing. Next week we will look at issues for LIC/MIC cities and what they are doing about it.Later on we will look at patterns of development of cities and how they have changed and what is happening now to cities in HICs.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.