# Statistical Maps of BIG Cities (with irregular updates)



## Ian (Nov 26, 2006)

Santiago less than 1 million??? :nuts:

It belongs to the big circle!! more than 5...


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

Chrissib said:


> I also made a map, source is citypopulation.de, definitions are sometimes out of administrative boundaries.


You've got to update your map for Madrid and Barcelona. They are now not growing as fast as on your map. In 2009 the province of Madrid grew by only 0.65%. The province of Barcelona grew by only 0.12%.

See: http://www.ine.es/jaxiBD/tabla.do?per=01&type=db&divi=EPOB&idtab=6


----------



## stefano1895 (Dec 26, 2009)

wow mexico city is in all the maps


----------



## Justme (Sep 11, 2002)

Anderson Geimz said:


> Using urban area will always favour low density sprawling cities like in North America or Australia and underestimate well defined compact cities with green belts like in Europe.
> 
> Anyway, using metro area will give you 50 over 1m in the US (plus 6 more in Canada), about 100 over 1m in Europe (85 in the EU alone) and some 234 over 1m in China.


Very well said.


----------



## Alexriga (Nov 25, 2007)

Please, delete first maps, they are totally awful, seems some pupil draw them.

Helsinki has 550 000 for example etc. etc. All of them have so many mistakes even useless to mention, those maps are wrong. Delete them now!


----------



## Anderson Geimz (Mar 29, 2008)

Alexriga said:


> Please, delete first maps, they are totally awful, seems some pupil draw them.
> 
> Helsinki has 550 000 for example etc. etc. All of them have so many mistakes even useless to mention, those maps are wrong. Delete them now!


I agree that the maps are awful but Helsinki actually has 1.3 million in its metro area, which is the only usefull measure to have a somewhat fair comparison to other cities.


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

brisavoine said:


> You've got to update your map for Madrid and Barcelona. They are now not growing as fast as on your map. In 2009 the province of Madrid grew by only 0.65%. The province of Barcelona grew by only 0.12%.
> 
> See: http://www.ine.es/jaxiBD/tabla.do?per=01&type=db&divi=EPOB&idtab=6


I used the average growth rate from the last census, spain had one at the beginning of the 2000s.


----------



## olhol (Feb 20, 2008)

diz said:


> What the hell?
> 
> Portland, OR can't be a '1 million' city!
> 
> That would mean at least 1/3 of the whole state lives there.


Same with Helsinki which is about 600.000 , but no Riga which is 750.000 )


----------



## null (Dec 11, 2002)

Fixing a map:


----------



## KingNick (Sep 23, 2010)

4 dots in France? hno:


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

Chrissib said:


> I also made a map, source is citypopulation.de, definitions are sometimes out of administrative boundaries.



A little update to my previous map (whose link obviously isn't working anymore):


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Canada has more cities over 2 million that Russia or France?



null said:


> Fixing a map:


Edmonton, Alberta was listed at 1,034,945 in the 2006 Census. Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_100_largest_metropolitan_areas_in_Canada


----------



## DarkLite (Dec 31, 2004)

null said:


> Fixing a map:


Valencia, Spain?
Seville, Spain?
Guatemala City, Guatemala?
Valparaiso, Chile?
Panama City, Panama?

The map isn't too accurate.


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

isaidso said:


> Canada has more cities over 2 million that Russia or France?
> 
> 
> 
> Edmonton, Alberta was listed at 1,034,945 in the 2006 Census. Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_100_largest_metropolitan_areas_in_Canada


Yes. The thing is that Russia has a lot of metropolitan areas between 1 and 2 million inhabitants. France also has several areas between 1 and 2 million people, like Lyon, Marseille or Lille.


----------



## CNGL (Jun 10, 2010)

DarkLite said:


> Valencia, Spain?
> Seville, Spain?
> Guatemala City, Guatemala?
> Valparaiso, Chile?
> ...


Neither Valencia nor Seville have 1000000 inhabitants. According to last data, they have 798033 and 703021 inhabitants, respectively.


----------



## thib8500 (Jun 12, 2006)

Chrissib said:


> Yes. The thing is that Russia has a lot of metropolitan areas between 1 and 2 million inhabitants. France also has several areas between 1 and 2 million people, like Lyon, Marseille or Lille.


Actually, Lyon metropolitan area is about 2 150 000 inhabitants. But we don't really know whether the maps is talking about municipalities, urban areas or metropolitan areas.


----------



## Metro007 (Apr 18, 2011)

Since it seems that the map above with the red dots shows the urban areas and not the cities proper, Zurich is also missing: depending on the statistics it has beetween 1.2 mio and 3.5 mio (Greater Zurich area).


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

thib8500 said:


> Actually, Lyon metropolitan area is about 2 150 000 inhabitants. But we don't really know whether the maps is talking about municipalities, urban areas or metropolitan areas.


citypopulation.de still puts Lyon into the 1-2 million group and I think that a Lyon with over 2 million people would be too generous at the moment. 

The departement of Rhone (which I use as a proxy of the size of Lyon) still has fewer than 2 million people.


----------



## DarkLite (Dec 31, 2004)

@CNGL Their metro areas have more than one million people, or do they not? I was under the impression they did.
If a city proper has to have more than one million people to earn it a red dot then I think the map would be half full.


----------



## FAAN (Jun 24, 2011)

null said:


> Fixing a map:


In Brazil you did not mention cities such as:

Sorocaba: 1,488,410 inhabitants
São Luís: 1,211,270 inhabitants
Maceió: 1,160,393 inhabitants
João Pessoa: 1,146,461 inhabitants
Teresina: 1,116,303 inhabitants
Joinville / Blumenau (northeast of Santa Catarina): 1,094,570 inhabitants
Florianópolis: 1,012,831 inhabitants

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_major_cities_in_Brazil#Largest_metropolitan_areas


----------



## thib8500 (Jun 12, 2006)

Chrissib said:


> citypopulation.de still puts Lyon into the 1-2 million group and I think that a Lyon with over 2 million people would be too generous at the moment.
> 
> The departement of Rhone (which I use as a proxy of the size of Lyon) still has fewer than 2 million people.


It's not too generous, 2 142 732 inhab. is the official population of the metro area in 2009, according to Insee.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

^^ I'm always surprised how few 1 mil+ cities France has.



Chrissib said:


> Yes. The thing is that Russia has a lot of metropolitan areas between 1 and 2 million inhabitants. France also has several areas between 1 and 2 million people, like Lyon, Marseille or Lille.


Russia and France must be made up of thousands of small cities and towns. Are you Finnish?


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

isaidso said:


> ^^ I'm always surprised how few 1 mil+ cities France has.
> 
> 
> 
> Russia and France must be made up of thousands of small cities and towns. Are you Finnish?


No, I am German. Why do you think I am Finnish?


----------



## thib8500 (Jun 12, 2006)

isaidso said:


> ^^ I'm always surprised how few 1 mil+ cities France has.
> 
> 
> 
> Russia and France must be made up of thousands of small cities and towns. Are you Finnish?


France has 54 urban areas with more than 100 000 inhabitants, 20 with more than 300 000 inhab. and 10 with more than 500 000.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Chrissib said:


> No, I am German. Why do you think I am Finnish?


I'm not sure.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

thib8500 said:


> France has 54 urban areas with more than 100 000 inhabitants, 20 with more than 300 000 inhab. and 10 with more than 500 000.


Thanks for the breakdown. It puts things into perspective. I'll show a comparison to Canada. Considering France has about 85% more people than Canada, Canada is more skewed towards large cities than France.

*Over 100,000 inhabitants*
France: 54
Canada: 36

*Over 300,000 inhabitants*
France: 20
Canada: 16

*Over 500,000 inhabitants*
France: 10
Canada: 9


----------



## julesstoop (Sep 11, 2002)

Compared to the Netherlands, which has again about half the population of Canada (figures are based on those for municipalities, unfortunately, but I left out rural municipalities without an actual urbanized area with over a 100.000 pop. (Haarlemmermeer, Westland, Emmen). I added Eindhoven as the fifth urban area with more than 300.000, although the municipality by itself won't cut the mark. One could also contend that Utrecht should be in the over 500.000 group, but because most suburbs are clearly detached from the central city, I didn't count it in):

*Over 100.000*
France: 54 = 1 per 1,2 million inh.
Canada: 36 = 1 per 0,97 million
Netherlands: 23 = 1 per 0,73 million

*Over 300.000*
France: 20 = 1 per 3,2 million
Canada: 16 = 1 per 2,2 million
Netherlands: 5 = 1 per 3,4 million

*Over 500.000*
France: 10 = 1 per 6,4 million
Canada: 9 = 1 per 3,9 million
Netherlands 3 = 1 per 5,6 million

So it's not just France, also the Netherlands seems rather skewed to a more poly centric distribution than Canada.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Germany is another poly centric country. It would be interesting to see it added.


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

Australia is even more skewed towards big cities.

Maybe it is because those countries have grown rapidly through immigration and immigrants are attracted to a handful of large centres rather than growth being mostly internal spread around a large number of historic communities each growing a little.


----------



## aaabbbccc (Mar 8, 2009)

null said:


> Fixing a map:


Morocco 2? Not true Morocco has 4 cities with metro population of over 1 million 
Casablanca is 4 million 
Rabat 1.8 million 
Fes 1.5 million 
Marrakech 1.3 million 
this map is wrong


----------



## julesstoop (Sep 11, 2002)

Jonesy55 said:


> Australia is even more skewed towards big cities.
> 
> Maybe it is because those countries have grown rapidly through immigration and immigrants are attracted to a handful of large centres rather than growth being mostly internal spread around a large number of historic communities each growing a little.


In sparsely populated countries like Canada and Australia, a poly centric geography would also be quite expensive. All places need to be connected through infrastructure. In the Netherlands or Germany distances are obviously much shorter.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Canada is poly centric though. The largest city accounts for 16% of the population which is a little high, but there are lots of large regional centres: Montreal, Quebec City, Winnipeg, Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver and Ottawa. We don't have a situation where one city dominates.

You're right about it being expensive though. Canada has more road per capita than any nation in the OECD or 5.7 times more road per capita than the Germans, 6.2 more road per capita than the Dutch (Australia is 2nd). We have an awful lot of territory to link up and a small population burdened with paying for it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_OECD_countries_by_road_network_size


----------



## thib8500 (Jun 12, 2006)

julesstoop said:


> So it's not just France, also the Netherlands seems rather skewed to a more poly centric distribution than Canada.


Saying France is polycentric is a bit abusive. Paris has 10 millions inhabitants in its urban area, when the second city has 1,5 million in it.


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

Paris urban area is home to around 16% of the French population, very similar to Toronto in Canada...


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Jonesy55 said:


> Paris urban area is home to around 16% of the French population, very similar to Toronto in Canada...


But there's a big drop off in the size of cities in France, not so in Canada. Lyon is France's 2nd largest city with 2.2 million people, and Marseille France's 3rd largest with 1.9 million. Montreal is Canada's 2nd largest city with 3.9 million people, and Vancouver is Canada's 3rd largest with 2.3 million. 

Considering France has almost double Canada's population, Canada's 2nd and 3rd largest cities are big compared to the corresponding cities in France. France has 7 cities over 1 million people vs. 6 for Canada. Canada is poly-centric, France isn't.

*Largest in France vs. Canada* (with % of national population)

1. Paris 16% vs. Toronto 16%
2. Lyon 3.4% vs. Montreal 11.3%
3. Marseille 2.9% vs. Vancouver 6.7%
4. Toulouse 2.2% vs. Ottawa 3.6%
5. Lille 2.0% vs. Calgary 3.6%
6. Bordeaux 1.8% vs. Edmonton 3.5%
7. Nice 1.7% vs. Winnipeg 2.2%
8. Nantes 1.2% vs. Quebec City 2.2%

Surely poly-centric means lots of big centres rather than being dominated by 1. Both Canada and France have a strong premier city, but Canada has a handful of other cities that are big enough to offer some counterbalance. Of Canada's top 6, they're all growing as fast or faster than Toronto with the exception of Montreal. This bodes well for Canada becoming even more poly-centric.


----------



## Dimethyltryptamine (Aug 22, 2009)

julesstoop said:


> In sparsely populated countries like Canada and Australia, a poly centric geography would also be quite expensive. All places need to be connected through infrastructure. In the Netherlands or Germany distances are obviously much shorter.


Most people fly, so a lot of money is poured into airports and runways, etc. It costs as little as $50 to fly from Brisbane to Sydney, and $70+/- to Melbourne... We also have rail, but it takes days so not many people (except the elderly with nothing better to do) use it. Road infrastructure is expensive, though - mainly due to labor costs.


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

isaidso said:


> But there's a big drop off in the size of cities in France, not so in Canada. Lyon is France's 2nd largest city with 2.2 million people, and Marseille France's 3rd largest with 1.9 million. Montreal is Canada's 2nd largest city with 3.9 million people, and Vancouver is Canada's 3rd largest with 2.4 million.
> 
> Considering France has almost double Canada's population, Canada's 2nd and 3rd largest cities are big compared to the corresponding cities in France. France has 7 cities over 1 million people vs. 6 for Canada. France isn't poly-centric, but Canada is.
> 
> ...


True, but that does mean that France has many more mid-sized cities of 0.25-1.0m metro population dotted around the country which act as regional employment, transport and leisure/retail centres.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

According to Post #66, it's almost an even split. Canada has 16 cities over 300,000 vs. 20 cities over 300,000 in France. Or Canada has 10 cities between 300,000 and 1,000,000 vs. 13 cities in France between 300,000 and 1,000,000.

France has lots more towns and very small cities and how much of a counterbalance to Paris could these towns and very small cities possibly be? Montreal, Vancouver, Ottawa, Calgary, and Edmonton all garner quite a bit of sway in Canada and manage to distribute power/influence more evenly in this country. Furthering this poly-centrism is the fact that our capital is Ottawa. Toronto's #1, but it has substantial competition from other Canadian cities. Paris within France has little.


----------



## Metro007 (Apr 18, 2011)

It's well known that France is a very centralistic country. Not worth talking about this...


----------



## Minato ku (Aug 9, 2005)

France is a country of small city, Paris in this way is an anomaly.
This is why there are often some dificulties to manage this big city (lacks of a Greater Paris autority, big housing shortage...).
Much of the urban ideology in France is based on small cities.


----------

