With few exceptions, human history can be viewed as an upward trend in population density. We evolved from nomadic “hunting and gathering” societies to tribal villages, then to small towns, and ultimately to the grand and glittering cities we see today throughout the industrialized world.
Consider how rapid that shift has been. According to a United Nations report, only 3 percent of the world’s population lived in cities in 1800. In 1900, 14 percent lived in cities, but only 12 cities had at least 1 million people. By 2000, 47 percent of the world’s population was urban dwellers, and there were 411 cities with populations of 1 million or more.
As these metropolises have grown in size and importance, more and more people have been drawn to them for several reasons: abundant employment opportunities, diverse cultural experiences, and a higher standard of living.
As a result of this mass migration, for the first time in human history, more people live in cities than in the countryside.
What does it mean for the global quality of life? Is there an upper limit to the growth of cities, and when might we reach it? Are people better off living in the new “mega-cities” than they were living in more rural settings? And, are these population concentrations making us more vulnerable to disasters?
These questions are becoming more and more pressing as the urban populations soar. So, let’s try to answer them and then look at some future possibilities.
To start with, consider the fact that almost all of the world’s net population growth over the next few decades will take place in cities. According to an article in The Guardian, by 2030 the world will have to support 2.2 billion more people than it does today. And 2.1 billion of those people will live in cities.
But, it’s not simply a matter of global population growth. It’s also a matter of existing people who have been spread out across countries like India, China, and Brazil, coming together in just a few enormous cities. An average of 67 million people per year, or 1.3 million a week, are pouring into the world’s urban areas, most of them through migration.
As highlighted in an article in Singapore’s Straits Times, virtually all of this new growth is taking place in the world’s less developed nations, such as India and China, as well as in countries on the African and South American continents, where infrastructure and services are already strained to their limits.
As more people move to the world’s big urban centers, their populations soar. Experts use the term “mega-cities” to describe cities with a population of 10 million or more people who live closely together.
According to the United Nations report, Human Population: Fundamentals of Growth Patterns of World Urbanization, 41 of these mega-cities existed in 2000. By 2015, there will be 59 mega-cities, and 48 of them will be located in less developed countries.
Even among the mega-cities, some will grow faster than others. By 2015, cities like Tokyo, New York, and Los Angeles will have populations greater than 14 million. But experts do not expect the bloating of these mega-cities to cause big problems since they are in high-income countries, which are already making provisions to accommodate the growth.
But that isn’t the case in most of the world’s mega-cities. By 2015, 12 other cities will exceed populations of 14 million, and eight of those mega-cities are in Asia, according to projections from Munich Re, the German re-insurer.
These 15 largest cities in the world will have to house, feed, and employ a total of 302 million people. To put that growth into perspective, that’s 50 million more people than they had in 2000, and 220 million more than they had in 1950.
A recent spate of reports from world organizations, such as The United Nations Population Fund and the U.N. Commission on Population, have warned of the strains on resources that unchecked population growth in the world’s mega-cities is causing.
For example, according to an article in The Observer, some 35,500 square miles of forest are being lost each year to urbanization. The same story reports that in the Third World mega-cities, even the most basic services, such as water, electricity, and sanitation, are at risk. Also, the growing strain on the health care system is making the possibility of rampant disease very real in every giant metropolis outside the developed world.
In Manila, for example, with 13 million residents, housing and health care are severely inadequate. According to an article in BusinessWorld, traffic jams, poor waste disposal, and dismal air and water quality, contribute to the misery in this and numerous other such cities.
Lagos, Nigeria, is another city at risk. It will be home to 25 million people in 2015, according to an article in AllAfrica. Its population will be second only to Tokyo, which will then have a population of more than 31 million in its greater metropolitan area.
Or consider Mexico City. Its decaying infrastructure and rampant corruption promise a bleak future for its 21 million inhabitants.
Brazil is another country where the problems of mega-cities are already apparent and are rapidly escalating. Sao Paolo, with 19 million people, is already the fifth-largest city in the world, and is suffering a siege mentality owing to an out-of-control homicide rate of 45,000 per year. As it grows, Sao Paolo is expected to merge with Rio de Janeiro to its north within the decade. Rio now has 11.5 million people, and it’s also growing fast. By 2015 the combined megalopolis is expected to dwarf Tokyo by a factor of 100 percent.
Other cities stressed to the limits of their administrative boundaries include Mumbai in India, Dhaka in Bangladesh, Buenos Aires in Argentina, and Karachi in Pakistan. For example, Mumbai’s population is rapidly approaching 20 million, which means that more people live within the boundaries of this city than in 173 countries.
In all these mega-cities, housing and other resources can’t keep up with the rapid growth in population. Over a million people migrating globally to these cities each week is placing unimaginable strains on their resources. That has already resulted in 100 million homeless and a billion living on the edge of extinction in slums from Brazil to India. Estimates range from 30 to 60 percent of urban populations in Third World cities living in slums or shantytowns. As such, these metropolises already devote fully a quarter of their land area to “blight.”
Moreover, the enormous third-world cities are falling further behind all the time when compared with Tokyo, Paris, or New York, because they can’t make the investments that make more developed urban areas livable. They have little global political or economic influence, and therefore cannot command the resources to improve their lot. Thus, they appear doomed to get worse, not better. Lagos is a case in point, where persistent civil unrest, government incompetence, and political corruption led to the collapse of the city’s infrastructure just a few years ago.
And what’s worse is that even the best infrastructure may not save a city that grows too big, too fast. This is beginning to become apparent in some of the developed world’s fastest growing cities. For example, Tokyo arguably has the best social services in the world, yet the intensity of its crowded culture causes documented psychological damage. And, according to an article in The Bulletin, even its high standard of living can’t improve the long-term health and welfare prospects of the middle and lower classes there, not even when compared to Indians, Asians, or South Americans.
In China, matters are even worse. The superheated economy there has fueled growth not only in China’s great cities, but in places that were nothing more than obscure smaller towns, only recently. For example, Dongguan was just such a village 20 years ago. According to The New York Times, it now has swollen to 7 million people.
In fact, booming business in China has set off a fierce competition among small towns to become large cities and attract new ranks of scientists, engineers, and visionaries. China already boasts 166 cities with more than 1 million people each; compare that with nine such cities in the U.S. and only two in Great Britain.
And this dramatic urban growth often incurs high costs in the form of wasted resources, dwindling farmland, corruption, pollution, and economic crises. With no central control or planning, China is turning into one vast construction zone in which there are certain to be several big losers for every winner. And, with provincial cities able to raise their own outside investments, Beijing has little hope of stopping the runaway growth until the bubble inevitably bursts.
South Korea has suffered a similar fate, after seeming for a time to break out of the pattern of urban decay typical of cities in Africa and the Middle East. Since 1960, Seoul has grown from 2.5 million inhabitants to more than 10 million. Rich with a vibrant middle class in the 1970s, Seoul has evolved into a booming high-tech mecca.
But, the vast foreign investment in land for business development sent prices skyrocketing, making it impossible for ordinary people to purchase a home there. Also, increasing competition with China has recently destroyed the formerly strong job market. Today, some 40 percent of South Korean college graduates can’t find work.
According to the Los Angeles Times, this has led to a sharp decline in South Korea’s birth rate, which has fallen by a third since 1993. This, in turn, has resulted in a rapidly aging population. By 2026, retirees will outnumber children. This, in turn, will limit the country’s long-term economic viability.
The upshot of this global development trend is this: The largest metropolitan areas in the world are beginning to look more like 19th-century cities, with their slums, crime, grime, and poverty ? and less like the sleek, clean, efficient, and comfortable megalopolises dreamed up by futurists of the 20th century.
Overall, the boom in urban populations has contributed to the problem of poverty, rather than solving it. Globalization has improved the situation: More children attend school; more people have access to health care; and fewer people live in extreme poverty, defined as living on less than $1 per day. Despite this progress, almost half of the world’s population still is considered “substantially deprived,” existing on incomes of less than $2 per day, according to the UN.
Part of the reason is that the migration from farms to cities has weakened the agricultural economy in many developing countries. As the UN points out, revitalizing the farm sector in these nations would go a long way toward eradicating poverty by lowering food prices, boosting labor productivity, and increasing demand for manufactured goods.
Another reason to be concerned about the growing populations in mega-cities is that, in the wake of the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster, many experts have begun to worry about what would befall a major city faced with a similar natural catastrophe. Hundreds of thousands were killed in last December’s tragedy. But, according to an article in The Independent, UN experts on emergency relief argue that millions could perish if such an event involved a modern mega-city.
Speaking at a recent World Disaster Prevention Conference, experts warned that Tokyo is at the highest risk, because it is both the largest and most crowded city in the world and situated on top of an earthquake zone in an area prone to violent storms. But Mexico City, Mumbai, Sao Paulo, Delhi, and even Manhattan are at risk, too.
As it is, Tokyo is hit by dozens of earthquakes every year ? but none of them have been catastrophic in recent years. That wasn’t the case in 1923, when an earthquake measuring 8.0 on the Richter Scale shattered the city and triggered a tsunami that cost 140,000 lives. Seismologists say that a mere 6.9 level earthquake could kill 150,000 today and put nearly 7 million people out of their homes. And, the chances of it happening in the next 25 years are roughly 70 percent.
More significantly, the damage would be far from local. Tokyo is one of the world’s great financial centers, and massive casualties there could trigger a global financial disaster. To understand why, consider that an earthquake that hit the relatively small Japanese city of Kobe in 1995 killed more than 6,400 people and caused damages exceeding $100 billion. Ten years later, that city is still recovering.
And while some of the other mega-cities at high risk from natural disaster are not as financially important as Tokyo, the death toll from calamities there could be far greater from earthquakes, storms, floods, and epidemics. That’s because lax building codes, poor living conditions, and weak health and rescue services put all these cities at tremendous risk.
The risk is not only from the immediate effects of the disaster, but from disease as well. Experts at the World Disaster Prevention Conference called those cities “death traps,” and said they could possibly play host to the worst catastrophes in human history. In fact, even in the absence of a natural catastrophe, more than 1.5 million people die each year in Asia just from diseases caused by air pollution.
In light of these pressing trends, we offer five forecasts for your consideration:
First, the mega-city is here to stay. Increased urbanization will be the dominant way of life for most of the earth’s inhabitants at least until mid-century. That means a greater concentration of people in bigger and bigger cities. The issue will not be whether we have these cities, but how we will manage them in order to make the best of the situation.
Second, some cities will fail, most likely beginning in China. The result will be much human suffering and economic loss, but it will also provide a model for what works and what doesn’t, and perhaps it will provide the impetus for needed reforms to prevent it from happening on a more widespread scale. Investors need to be alert for signs of trouble and they need to factor in the costs of resulting political and economic instability.
Third, the mega-cities will necessitate resource development and this will create big opportunities. The mega-cities of the future cannot run on fossil fuels the way our largest cities do today. This will make the development of sustainable energy sources more urgent ? and profitable ? than ever. As discussed in prior issues, nuclear power will make a big comeback, especially in China, India, and Korea. Hydrogen and fuel cell technology is also expected to play a big role. Private cars will be in big demand, but public transportation is likely to provide a highly attractive alternative in densely populated, low income settings. All of these technologies will provide big opportunities for US- and EU-based multinationals. Similarly, new systems will help these countries better manage existing resources. For example, NASA’s “Mission to Planet Earth” and “Earth Observation System” will provide air, water, land, glacier, and pollution data. In the future, high-resolution, multispectral sensors, side-looking and synthetic aperture radar, infrared, thermal mapping systems, and other devices will allow instant access to resource information from all over the world.
Fourth, the mega-city longer term will give rise to the tele-city. By mid-century, fast, secure communications technology will globally enable the kind of exodus from the cities that we’re now beginning to see in the United States. Given the cost and inconveniences of life in the mega-cities, workers who can telecommute will increasingly choose to do so. Knowledge workers of every kind will increasingly opt to live outside the city and do their work remotely, relieving pressure on resources there. We’re already seeing the seeds of this in Japan, which began its planning after the 1995 Kobe earthquake knocked out transportation, fiber-optic communications systems, and key infrastructure for months. The government has more than 4,000 satellite terminals now scattered throughout the country to ensure communications. Soon 10,000 will be in place to provide secure bandwidth far exceeding that in any other country. Others will soon follow suit. And, this trend is progressing rapidly in the United States, as well. For example, Hewlett-Packard already has some 40,000 tele-workers. Nationwide, there are at present more than 15 million tele-workers, and experts predict the number will rise to more than 50 million by 2010.
Fifth, over the long haul, the Trends editors forecast that cities will trim down to size once again. In light of vulnerability to natural disasters, epidemics, terrorism, and other forces, corporations, governments, and individuals will recognize the wisdom of having large ? but not super-large ? cities. With the means to distribute work over large areas through technology, the lure of the mega-city will evaporate into history. By 2060, exurban growth will become a widespread global trend.
References List : 1. The Guardian, September 11, 2005, “2015: The Biggest Cities in the World.” ⓒ Copyright 2005 by Guardian Newspapers, Ltd. All rights reserved.2. The Strait Times, February 19, 2005, “Megacities Heighten Risk of Mega-disasters,” by Michael Richardson. ⓒ Copyright 2005 by Singapore Press Holdings Limited. All rights reserved.3. For more information about rapid urban population growth, visit the Population Reference Bureau website at: http://www.prb.org/Content/NavigationMenu/PRB/Educators/Human_Population/Urbanization2/Patterns_of_World_Urbanization1.htm4. The Observer, October 19, 2003, Worlds Mega Cities Expand as Millions Quit the Countryside,” by Peter Beaumont. ⓒ Copyright 2003 by Guardian Newspapers, Ltd. All rights reserved.5. BusinessWorld, December 16, 2004, “Six Cities Seen to Suffer Social Ills from Population Boom,” by Kristine L. Alave. ⓒ Copyright 2004 by Business World Publishing Corporation. All rights reserved.6. AllAfrica, January 21, 2004, “Challenges of an Emerging Mega City,” by Bamidele Ogunwusi. ⓒ Copyright 2004 by AllAfrica Global Media. All rights reserved.7. The Bulletin, March 30, 2004, “Welcome to the Jungle,” by Creed C. OHanlon. ⓒ Copyright 2004 by ACP Publishing Pty. Ltd. All rights reserved.8. The New York Times, July 29, 2004, “Chinese Cities Growing Beyond Beijings Control,” by Howard W. French. ⓒ Copyright 2004 by The New York Times Company. All rights reserved.9. Los Angeles Times, December 5, 2004, “Sizzle to Fizzle,” by Joel Kotkin. ⓒ Copyright 2004 by The Los Angeles Times. All rights reserved.10. The Statesman, October 6, 2004, “Poverty and the Megacity.” ⓒ Copyright 2004 by The Statesman. All rights reserved.11. The Independent, January 21, 2005, “Mega-Cities Facing Mega Disasters, UN Warns,” by David McNeill. ⓒ Copyright 2005 by Independent Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved.12. Futurist, January 2004, “The Rise of Telecities: Decentralizing the Global Society,” by Joseph N. Pelton. ⓒ Copyright 2004 by World Future Society. All rights reserved.
