# Poll:tokyo the biggest city in future ?



## Azia (Nov 18, 2007)

I make a poll: So , will tokyo in the futre on top of the biggest cities in world ?

Tokyo yet have 33 million inhabitans ,but cities like Mumbai , New york or Sao Paulo are booming also!

So please vote and write your comment !


----------



## SuburbanWalker (Jun 23, 2007)

Depends on who'll be most creative with the numbers.


----------



## Don Omar (Aug 10, 2006)

the Pearl River Delta will destroy everyone, along with Mumbai


----------



## Ashok (Jul 17, 2004)

I think Tokyo will stay around that pop. While other cities will grow. Like Mumbai, a lot of villagers are starting to move in and everything.


----------



## Beware (Oct 30, 2007)

:yes: *Most likely, It'll be a city in China or India.... * simply because Those are, by far, the most populous and rapidly-developing nations. Whichever city prevails depends not only upon economic and political stability, but livability to sustain that populace.


----------



## goschio (Dec 2, 2002)

Lagos, Nigeria. No doubt.


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

Tokyo is just way too ahead of the rest for the time being.


----------



## icracked (Feb 15, 2007)

Jakarta, Sao Paulo, or Mumbai have my vote.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Shenzhen. It was a farmer's field 30 years ago. Today it has over 9 million people, but many believe it is much higher. This city is located in the Pearl River Delta 25 km north of Hong Kong. It has been the fastest growing city in China for 30 years since it was chosen as China's first special economic zone. It has the highest per capita income of any city in mainland China and is witnessing a massive flood of inland Chinese moving there to join in the prosperity. It could easily become, by far, the biggest city the world has ever seen.


----------



## dhuwman (Oct 6, 2005)

If there's gonna be any one city that'll exceed tokyo population-wise in the future, i'll say shanghai.


----------



## Tom_Green (Sep 4, 2004)

Tokyo is still growing. 
The growing cities in the developing countries will change. I think that the people will stop to move in, in Chinas and Indias biggest cities. It will be the other way the people in the cities will start to move out. 

An example: Seoul is one of the largest cities in the world. Some time ago South Korea was a third world country. Many people moved to Seoul. Now South Korea is developed. The people are moving out.


----------



## SYDNEYAHOLIC (Nov 3, 2006)

Pearl River Delta consolodising or Shanghai and it's surrounding cities forming one megalopolis. Heard somewhere that within the Shanghai 'area' (not sure of the definitions for the 'area') there were already 40 million people. 

I don't know if the Pearl River Delta area will ever form into one contiguous urban mass because it is an absolutely vast area...


----------



## the spliff fairy (Oct 21, 2002)

actually the Pearl River Delta already counts 45 million people in an area smaller than LA, NYC, Tokyo etc.










However it faces stiffer competition from the Yangtze Delta 70 million. The picture below only actually counts the area between Shanghai-Hangzhou as the Yangtze Delta cities, which if youve ever gone through by train is almost contiguous, an endless plain of development and Russian domed buildings (i kid ye not). A total count for the picture would be over 120 million.


----------



## Energy2003 (Jun 13, 2007)

Chongqing, not classical town, but "peking-made-town"


----------



## gladisimo (Dec 11, 2006)

Probably not, like someone said, probably a city in China or India

The thing with Japan is that its population is stagnating, and predicted to decline because of low birthrates...


----------



## Azia (Nov 18, 2007)

*re.*



Tom_Green said:


> Tokyo is still growing.
> The growing cities in the developing countries will change. I think that the people will stop to move in, in Chinas and Indias biggest cities. It will be the other way the people in the cities will start to move out.
> 
> An example: Seoul is one of the largest cities in the world. Some time ago South Korea was a third world country. Many people moved to Seoul. Now South Korea is developed. The people are moving out.


i think the same


----------



## spongeg (May 1, 2006)

isn't Japans birth rate decreasing?


----------



## polako (Apr 7, 2005)

In 25 years it will be Lagos or Dhaka.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Oh god! Those 2 cities are already hell on earth. The last thing they need is more people.


----------



## tigerboy (Jun 7, 2006)

TenRot said:


> Tokyo is just way too ahead of the rest for the time being.


Yes. Tokyo is the imperial city of the first half of the 21st century. NY was post war. London was in the late 19th century. Paris and Rome had their times as well. Now and for the foreseeable future no city will combine sheer size and economic weight as much as Tokyo which is the superlative city in so many ways. I mean Michelin recently designated 150 restaurants as starred. More than London and NYC combined. Just an indicator of its simply immensity.


----------



## Epi (Jul 21, 2006)

Tokyo will probably remain the top city for some time yet, at least until HK's 50 years of SAR are up.

Japanese are still flocking to Tokyo, and it is truly the only city in the world with the infrastructure necessary to truly support that many people in relative comfort and ability. In my own unscientific definition, Tokyo is truly one city, because it's inhabitants can easily enjoy all the fruits of the city, whether it is going to Shibuya on weekends, or working in Shinjuku and living far away because of it's superior infrastructure and income levels.

As well because the city is still growing, and buildings are finally growing taller and taller with new technologies, it has some 'space' to grow yet.

It's true that cities like Laos and Mumbai will continue to grow, but I believe because of insufficient infrastructure, those cities while having the population could not possibly be considered the same city if they keep growing. The population of the slums do not have anything to do with the population of the richer city dwellers, and the resources available (clean water, sanitation) will reach an upper carrying capacity limit as the slums do not have money to invest in better systems.

The biggest 3 competitors to Tokyo are Greater Shanghai (already at 18 million, although the Chinese government could attempt to halt further development if they feel it is getting too unwieldy), Mexico City, and Hong Kong-Shenzhen.

I have a feeling that once the border drops, Hong Kong and Shenzhen will be truly linked and be allowed to be considered one city. Already the furthest suburbs of Hong Kong are basically on the Shenzhen border, with the only real seperation being the border. Once the SAR ends in another 10 years the greater area would probably have upwards of 40 million people (Guangzhou is too far away to truly be considered part of the city) all intricately linked via multiple railroads (some high speed), subways, highways and roads. It wouldn't be hard to imagine people living in Shenzhen and working in HK and vice versa. One thing though is that we have to keep in mind that both HK and Shenzhen are hemmed in by water and mountains and have limited space for further growth, and further landfill may prove to be too costly.


----------



## tablemtn (May 2, 2006)

Mexico City isn't really growing very fast anymore. In fact, Mexico's population growth rate in general isn't that high anymore, which is one of the reasons 'excess' people from the villages have stopped flocking to Mexico City in massive numbers to find jobs.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

I have the feeling that China will have the biggest cities. Shanghai might be no.1. It was during the early 80s


----------



## city_thing (May 25, 2006)

Epi said:


> Tokyo will probably remain the top city for some time yet, at least until HK's 50 years of SAR are up.
> 
> Japanese are still flocking to Tokyo, and it is truly the only city in the world with the infrastructure necessary to truly support that many people in relative comfort and ability. In my own unscientific definition, Tokyo is truly one city, because it's inhabitants can easily enjoy all the fruits of the city, whether it is going to Shibuya on weekends, or working in Shinjuku and living far away because of it's superior infrastructure and income levels.
> 
> ...


Good argument. I guess it does boil down to whichever city can actually provide the infrastructure to support a massive population. Not just in terms of transport, but also jobs, health, education, water (which will be a very important factor in future years) and standard of living. 

Thanks for bringing this to my attention, I hadn't really given thought to this subject before.


----------



## ZZ-II (May 10, 2006)

i'm very sure tokyo will not be the biggest city in the future


----------



## friedemann (Jun 29, 2006)

The second question is _when_ in the future. 
In 20 years or in 50 or 100?

Tokyo has 10-15 Mio more inhabitants than NY, Shanghai or Mumbai, so it still in 20 years will be the biggest city, regardless how fast the other cities grow.

I think the only rival is the Pearl-River-Delta.


----------



## ssiguy2 (Feb 19, 2005)

polako said:


> In 25 years it will be Lagos or Dhaka.


I agree with Dkaka. It was the very first city that came to mind. 
It is already growing like wildfire and Bangledesh already has 150mil in an area about the size of Colorado. People are flocking to Dhaka and it is by far the largest city in Bang. unlike India/China where there are many large cities offering their citizens choice.


----------

