# Large countries most dominated by capital/largest city



## poshbakerloo (Jan 16, 2007)

UK, everything revolves around London, it pretty much works as a different country!
Russia, what is outside Moscow? No one knows!
And France/Japan, the same


----------



## Yuri S Andrade (Sep 29, 2008)

VECTROTALENZIS said:


> Actually in most countries below 180 million one big city acts as "the city" and swallows almost everything.
> 
> Which countries below 180 million population don't have a one cig city that dominates everything? The first ones I can think if are Germany, Spain, Canada, Australia, and Ukraine.
> 
> ...


I totally agree. People are missing many many countries here. Having a main city is definitely the rule almost everywhere. I'd argue Brazil is very centered in São Paulo. The macrometropolitan area concentrates 16% of the population, more than 1/4 of the GDP, and most of the HQs.



Jonesy55 said:


> I get the impression that Monterrey and maybe Guadalajara are just as rich as Mexico City, maybe more so, but just on a smaller scale. :dunno:


Mexico City is 5 times larger than Guadalajara. 20% of the Mexicans live there. 1/3, on the Central Valley. I don't think you can get more concentration than that.


----------



## ukiyo (Aug 5, 2008)

The greater Tokyo Region is around 33% of Japan's GDP.

The Greater Seoul region is around 50% of South Korea's GDP.



Jonesy55 said:


> In Japan I think Osaka has around 8m in the metro area which is not small by any standard...


19 million not 8 million


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

Out of the large developed countries, South Korea would be the best example. Half of it's population live in the metropolitan area of Seoul, a share that no other country of South Korea's size achieves.

The biggest country dominated by it's capital is Indonesia I think. The US, China and India are all polycentric countries.

Japan and the UK are difficult cases. They have very dominant capitals, but their regional centers (Oasaka-Kobe-Kyoto, Sapporo, Nagoya, Fukuoka or Birmingham, Manchester-Liverpool) are also not small compared to the capital. The situation in France or Thailand is different. There the second city is totally dwarfed by the capital.


----------



## VECTROTALENZIS (Jul 10, 2010)

ukiyo said:


> The greater Tokyo Region is around 33% of Japan's GDP.
> 
> The Greater Seoul region is around 50% of South Korea's GDP.
> 
> ...


Actually I've been to Osaka and it feels more closer to a 10 million city than a 20 million city. Actually I think Urban Employment Area is the best statistic on Japanese cities because then it includes commuter's too. *According to that Tokyo had 32 million and Osaka had 12 million and those figures feels more realistic.* People living in small towns 40 km from city shouldn't directly get counted into the statistical figure because the majority of the people living there might not even commute to the large city 40 km away. Read about it here carefully as I think it's very reasonable.

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


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

VECTROTALENZIS said:


> Actually I've been to Osaka and it feels more closer to a 10 million city than a 20 million city. Actually I think Urban Employment Area is the best statistic on Japanese cities because then it includes commuter's too. *According to that Tokyo had 32 million and Osaka had 12 million and those figures feels more realistic.* People living in small towns 40 km from city shouldn't directly get counted into the statistical figure because the majority of the people living there might not even commute to the large city 40 km away. Read about it here carefully as I think it's very reasonable.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_Employment_Area


That's the old problem of polycentric vs. monocentric metropolitan areas.


----------



## ukiyo (Aug 5, 2008)

VECTROTALENZIS said:


> Actually I've been to Osaka and it feels more closer to a 10 million city than a 20 million city. Actually I think Urban Employment Area is the best statistic on Japanese cities because then it includes commuter's too. *According to that Tokyo had 32 million and Osaka had 12 million and those figures feels more realistic.* People living in small towns 40 km from city shouldn't directly get counted into the statistical figure because the majority of the people living there might not even commute to the large city 40 km away. Read about it here carefully as I think it's very reasonable.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_Employment_Area


Where you have been is irrelevant especially since online anybody can claim anything. The Osaka metropolitan area has 19 million people. That is the official definition, not a definition by a university (of Tokyo).

I just read the report, and it appears like they are separating Kobe and Kyoto from Osaka...which is doesn't make sense. Especially Kobe...

I even have videos I took myself of Osaka and Kobe, tell me where the "boundary" is?

http://youtu.be/2aFx7CtLP1A

At 2:25 you can see the entire Osaka Metropolitan region from the airplane

http://youtu.be/mGc-avDjCnw

Night time at :20 = Osaka (and across the bay as well).

http://youtu.be/pyl1XBmHrcs

We are not talking about a village 40 km away here.

I would let the Kyoto "slide" but not Kobe. I could agree to the 14.4 million figure with Kobe included.


----------



## pal7 (May 13, 2012)

Chile is probably among them, 17.5 million people, and 7 million in Santiago's Metropolitan Region.

But what's probably different in the chilean case is that the purchasing power of the inhabitants of Santiago is not significantly greater than the national average. In fact, the richest regions are in the extremes of the country.


----------



## ukiyo (Aug 5, 2008)

I did some math using the cabinet office: http://www.esri.cao.go.jp/jp/sna/data/data_list/kenmin/files/contents/pdf/gaiyou1_1.pdf

Tokyo Metropolitan Area: ¥154.59 trillion ($1.9 trillion) = *31.9%* of Japan's GDP Tokyo by itself is 17.6%
Osaka Metropolitan Area: ¥69.767 trillion ($878 billion) = *14.4%* of Japan's GDP
Nagoya Metropolitan Area: 39.046 trillion ($491 billion) = *8%* of Japan's GDP

Than there's other smaller industrial regions like Fukuoka, Sendai, Sapporo which each one is probably around 5% of GDP.

As for media, Tokyo does not particularly dominate as much as its GDP does..for fashion it kind of does but Osaka can rival it. For government Tokyo is definitely dominant.


----------



## VECTROTALENZIS (Jul 10, 2010)

ukiyo said:


> Where you have been is irrelevant especially since online anybody can claim anything. The Osaka metropolitan are has 19 million people. That is the official definition, not a definition by a university (of Tokyo).
> 
> I just read the report, and it appears like they are separating Kobe and Kyoto from Osaka...which is doesn't make sense. Especially Kobe...
> 
> ...


Cities that have grown together don't form a new big city. Kobe and Kyoto are not part of Osaka. There may not be any clear boundaries but they functions as different cities and not one big huge city. Osaka itself is about 12 million. A person that lives in Kyoto and works in Kyoto don't aren't part of Osaka in my opinion. But a person that lives in Kyoto and commutes to Osaka is part of Osaka.


----------



## ukiyo (Aug 5, 2008)

A definition from a preliminary study using 2000 data from one university doesn't tell us everything. Kobe-Osaka clearly functions as one city. And if you really visited there, you would have known that..it doesn't even need to be said. Like I said I could accept the figure without Kyoto..but not without Kobe. If you still disagree please open up a new thread in the Japan forum since this isn't the thread to talk about it. If you make a thread in the Japan forum about Kobe-Osaka I and others would be glad to talk about it.

But for now, for the sake of answering the thread title, I'm just using the official definition.


----------



## VECTROTALENZIS (Jul 10, 2010)

delete


----------



## sebvill (Apr 13, 2005)

MIBO said:


> *Argentina*, the same as with Egypt/Cairo - being Alexandria= Rosario.


Argentinas second largest city is Cordoba. And the Egyptian case is very different from the Argentinian. In Egypt, literally, theres no high income population outside Cairo and Alexandria and a very weak middle class.

Buenos Aires 13 millions










Cordoba 1.5 millions




























Rosario 1.2 millions




























Mendoza 1.0 million




























Tucuman 850,000










La Plata 750,000










Mar del Plata 670,000










Salta










Neuquen










Santa Fe










Comodoro Rivadavia










Trelew










San Juan










Pinamar










Tandil










And it goes on...


----------



## ssiguy2 (Feb 19, 2005)

Of countries over 20 million my first 4 thoughts were UK, France, Argentina, S.Korea


----------



## sebvill (Apr 13, 2005)

In my opinion, from the Worlds big economies

*Centralized*

Argentina
Chile
Peru
France
Britain
Sweden
Norway
Greece
Russia
Egypt
Nigeria
Saudi Arabia
Iran
Thailand
Malaysia
Indonesia
The Phillipines
South Korea
Japan

*Average*

Mexico
Brazil
Colombia
Spain
The Netherlands
Ukraine
South Africa
Kenya
Morrocco
Israel
UAE
Turkey
Kazakhstan
India
Vietnam
New Zealand

*Non-centralized*

Venezuela
USA
Canada
Italy
Germany
Poland
China
Australia


----------



## gabrielbabb (Aug 11, 2006)

Mexico used to be extremely centralized up to about 15 years ago, where everything big was built, bussinesses, political stuff, etc, but now all the cities are growing by their own, there are huge projects and are getting more and more importance, and many people from the capital is moving to other cities.


----------



## swerveut (Jan 23, 2005)

*Countries where one city does not Dominate*

So I will list here countries (mostly from Middle East) where you THINK it does, but the biggest city certainly does not dominate:

*Iran:* Tehran is the biggest but Esfahan and Shiraz are also pretty important

*Pakistan:* Karachi is the biggest, but significant industry is also in Lahore and Islamabad

*Turkey:* Istanbul is the biggest, but Ankara is also quite weighty

*Iraq:* Baghdad is very famous and big, but Erbil in Kurdistan is rising very very fast

*UAE:* Dubai is the biggest, but Abu Dhabi also pulls its strings

*Saudi Arabia:* Riyadh is the biggest, but Mecca-Jeddah also generate significant economic activity


----------



## calaguyo (Nov 28, 2008)

We have Imperial Manila. 

For an archipelago country, it is very surprising that we have a centralized government.


----------



## Rekarte (Mar 28, 2008)

sebvill said:


> In my opinion, from the Worlds big economies
> 
> *Centralized*
> 
> ...


I don't think Saudi Arabia,South Korea and Japan is centralizad(not much)
Saudi Arabia has cities like Mecca and Medina(more than 1 million and key religious cities),Jeddah(port and trade) and others medium size cities with industrial complex and etc.
South Korea has Busan...
Japan has Osaka,Kyoto,Nagoya,Sapporo,Fukuoka and etc.


----------



## Svartmetall (Aug 5, 2007)

sebvill said:


> In my opinion, from the Worlds big economies
> 
> *Centralized*
> 
> ...


Disagree with New Zealand. The largest city is 1.5 million (Auckland) in a country of 4.5 million - one third of the country lives in Auckland. If you are calling Sweden very centralised with the Stockholm region (pop 2 million, city 1.6 million) in a country of 9.5 million (that's 20% of the population of the country in the Stockholm area) then NZ must be even more centralised.


----------



## derechaconservadora (May 11, 2012)

oh, and in chile the secodn and third metro areas are above one million of people, not so bad for a country of 17 million. but more important is that the 4,5 and sixth cities are growing faster than santiago and so much faster than the national average.


----------



## blue_man100 (Apr 17, 2004)

Chile is very very centralized, with Santiago dominating all areas, specially in the Services/Economy items...

p.s. and btw, is not a large country, but beautiful and nice


----------



## derechaconservadora (May 11, 2012)

well, chile is larger than most countries. so in relative meaning is large. is larger than most european nations (except russia). and larger than lot of countries around the world. 2 times japan, etc.


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

derechaconservadora said:


> well, chile is larger than most countries. so in relative meaning is large. is larger than most european nations (except russia). and larger than lot of countries around the world. 2 times japan, etc.


Area wise yes, but we are talking about population, so population size matters. And population wise, Chile is small.


----------



## sebvill (Apr 13, 2005)

Small for Asia, but in Latin America Chile is a middle population size country. However, is projected that in 20 years or less Ecuador and Guatemala will have a bigger population than Chile.


----------



## WeimieLvr (May 26, 2008)

Rascar said:


> Which reasonably sized country, of say *population 20 million plus*, is most dominated economically, politically, socially etc by it's capital (or largest city)? Excluding city states which would obviously defeat the objective of the question.
> 
> I am thinking of when graduates instinctively move there after graduation, the majority of company headquarters are there, the national trends in media and arts are set from there, and the government is heavily centralised there.
> 
> Note I do not necessarily think it is a good thing (I am from the UK, an obvious contender, though I have nothing against London would like a more "multipolar" country). I wondered what people from other countries thought, is it a shame when nations with long standing regional strengths and identities get too heavily centralised?


The original post of this thread (above) specified countries with a population of at least 20 million. Countries with populations below that don't qualify for the discussion.


----------



## Erran (Feb 10, 2010)

sebvill said:


> In my opinion, from the Worlds big economies
> 
> *Centralized*
> Indonesia


Indonesia is quite centralized.
Java Island (one out of 5 larger islands, from total more than 17,000 islands), where the capital is located, has 58% of total population of the whole country.

*4 out of 5 most populous cities are also located in this island. The 5th most populous is located in Sumatra Island.*
1. Jakarta Jakarta 9.607.787
2. Surabaya Jawa Timur 2.765.487
3. Bandung Jawa Barat 2.394.873
4. Bekasi Jawa Barat 2.334.871
5. Medan Sumatera Utara 2.097.610


----------



## aaabbbccc (Mar 8, 2009)

For Morocco , there are 2 capitals 
Rabat the political capital , Casablanca the economical capital and are close to each other by 100 KM ( Downtown Casa / Rabat is 100 KM ) 
the population of the 2 region ( including suburbs / towns / villages in this region ) is 8 million people , this is the only region in all of Morocco with so much sprawl and very important core . Morocco has a population of 32 million , no other city in Morocco is even that close in importance


----------



## Rascar (Mar 13, 2012)

I guess London/UK isn't quite the exemplar I thought it might be, when you consider the UKs remaining manufacturing, much of it high value, as well as the large majority of its universities, including the two most famous, are not in the capital.

I think South Korea and Thailand may have the edge, given that both comfortably exceed the populaion threshold, and the lack of large provincial cities. Can anyone comment on whether industry in Thailand is concentrated in Bangkok as well as commerce, wealth and the political class?


----------



## dougbennion (Aug 5, 2006)

Canada's population is 34 million. The population of the Golden Horseshoe, the 'largest' metro-Toronto consolidation, is about 8.5 million, 25% of the nation's total. That's considerably larger, relatively, than the BosWash corridor in the NE US, population of about 50 milllion in a nation of about 310 million.


----------



## Rascar (Mar 13, 2012)

dougbennion, although 25 % of the population is quite a lot and industry is focused in the Toronto area, I don't think other Canadian cities look to Toronto for leadership, not Vancouver, certainly not Montreal/Quebec, and not even Calgary/Edmonton. Plus it is not the seat of government.


----------



## Darryl (Jan 14, 2007)

I would say France by far is the ultimate country that comes to mind for this. Can anyone think of a country that is more dominated by a capital/largest city than France is?


----------



## Rinchinlhumbe (Dec 20, 2008)

Darryl said:


> I would say France by far is the ultimate country that comes to mind for this. Can anyone think of a country that is more dominated by a capital/largest city than France is?


pop above 20m:
Mexico, Guatemala, 

pop below 20 million, above 1 m
Uruguay, Mongolia 
(both capital: 1,2 m, 2nd biggest town: 80k)
Haiti
Mali
Mauritania (capital 1 m, 2nd biggest town 50k)
Rwanda (captial 800k, 2nd biggest town 70k)
Burundi (quite the same as Rwanda)
Togo
Liberia (capital 2m, 2nd biggest city 30k!!!)

above 100k, below 1m:
Surinam (capital 250k, 2nd biggest city 13k)
Bahamas


----------



## haikiller11 (Aug 11, 2009)

This is going to be between Thailand, South Korea, North Korea, Philippines and Indonesia.

Then come UK, France, Poland, Japan.


----------



## sebvill (Apr 13, 2005)

France is an odd case where the capital city is probably more famous than the country itself.



Rinchinlhumbe said:


> pop above 20m:
> Mexico, Guatemala,


Guatemalas population is 14.3 millions.


----------



## Fallout (Sep 11, 2002)

jwojcie said:


> Actually Poland in aspects of media, economy and governance is hugely dominated by Warsaw, it is not so dominating in aspects of population though. Poland is rather among centralized countries.


Still, Warsaw is not even largest urban area (Upper Silesia) nor tourist destination (Krakow), nor seat of largest polish company (Plock). Even by widest count, it has only about 8% of country's population. That doesn't compare to cities like Buenos Aires or Seul which are locateted in countries of similar size. I would count Poland as average centralized.

Most centralized large country I can think of is Thailand. In my mind, its just Bangkok and rice fields. I didn't even know what their 2nd city is.


----------



## onosqaciw (Feb 13, 2011)

i think manila contibuted a lot for philippines...
the same like bangkok, when the 2011 flood hit bangkok thai has a negative economic growth at the last quarter of 2011
jakarta is huge but it's not as important to indonesia as say 80's or 90's


----------



## weava (Sep 8, 2007)

Rinchinlhumbe said:


> pop above 20m:
> Mexico, Guatemala,


The economic capital of Mexico is considered to be Monterrey.


----------



## Fitzrovian (Oct 12, 2011)

Jonesy55 said:


> I'm not an expert on Russia by any means but while St. Petersburg is a perfectly decent city it still seems a long way behind Moscow and isn't that big for the second city of a nation of 145m.


I would disagree. St Petersburg _is_ a big city. At almost 5m it's among the 4 or 5 largest cities in all of Europe (depending on how you count) which is nothing to sneeze at. It is also a very important cultural and historic center (although Moscow is dominant in business, politics, media and pretty much everything else). 

After these big 2 though there is indeed a huge drop-off in Russia. I would say it is somewhat analogous to Japan where Tokyo dominates but Osaka is also a large and important city.


----------



## Erran (Feb 10, 2010)

onosqaciw said:


> jakarta is huge but it's not as important to indonesia as say 80's or 90's


Due to decentralization and autonomy of each province policy. Domination of Jakarta as capital city is expected to be decreasing in the future, proven by relatively higher growth of both population and economy outside Java Island lately.


----------



## gerardo16 (Apr 11, 2008)

weava said:


> The economic capital of Mexico is considered to be Monterrey.


what???? :nuts:, the economical capital of Mexico is Mexico City


----------



## Fitzrovian (Oct 12, 2011)

avechkin8 said:


> Not really. Yhea Moscow + Moscow oblast is around 15% of Russia's population
> but Moscow oblast itself is the size of Denmark. Moscow is dominant in media and politics but Sankt Petersburg is more important culturally and much more powerful as an industry and scientific center.
> 
> _*Statisticaly Sankt Petersburg is growing faster than Moscow*_.



Really? According to the population figures on Wiki, SP's population has declined in the last 20 years while Moscow's has shot up almost 30%. Maybe just last couple years?

But I do agree with the larger point: Saint Petersburg's stature and historic and cultural significance can not be underestimated.


----------



## weava (Sep 8, 2007)

gerardo16 said:


> what???? :nuts:, the economical capital of Mexico is Mexico City


Its actually considered to be Monterrey. Its the richest city in Mexico.
Do a google search and you can find tons of articles that call it the economic and industrial capital of Mexico.


----------



## ManRegio (Jul 6, 2005)

weava said:


> Its actually considered to be Monterrey. Its the richest city in Mexico.
> Do a google search and you can find tons of articles that call it the economic and industrial capital of Mexico.


Actually GDP per capita is greater in Monterrey than Mexico City. Productivity is greater in Monterrey. But in absolute terms Mexico City economy is bigger. Monterrey has the second biggest economy in the nation. Guadalajara is third. 

Monterrey indeed was the industrial capital city of Mexico but nowadays comercial activities and services are the most important activities for Monterrey economy although Industry represent a bigger portion of the economy for Monterrey than in Mexico City or Guadalajara. 

About education, health and good jobs in Monterrey you can have the same or even better than in Mexico City. It is very common people moving to Mexico City or People from MC moving to Monterrey for job offers. Also the business relations between the two cities are the biggest in the nation. If people want to have better jobs in the financial sector or in big corporations there are only two options in Mexico: Mexico City and Monterrey. 

Regards


----------



## gerardo16 (Apr 11, 2008)

ManRegio said:


> Actually GDP per capita is greater in Monterrey than Mexico City. Productivity is greater in Monterrey. But in absolute terms Mexico City economy is bigger. Monterrey has the second biggest economy in the nation. Guadalajara is third.
> 
> Monterrey indeed was the industrial capital city of Mexico but nowadays comercial activities and services are the most important activities for Monterrey economy although Industry represent a bigger portion of the economy for Monterrey than in Mexico City or Guadalajara.
> 
> ...



You are right, Mexico City in absolut terms is the most important economical city in Mexico by far, so it confirm Mexico city still is the most important economical city/area in Mexico, per capita is different Monterrey and Queretaro should have better figures

And for health and education there is not difference between Mexico City, Monterrey and Guadalajara, good jobs in some segments Monterrey and Mexico City are in a better position cause the big coorporatives located there


----------



## Copperknickers (May 15, 2011)

Rascar said:


> I guess London/UK isn't quite the exemplar I thought it might be, when you consider the UKs remaining manufacturing, much of it high value, as well as the large majority of its universities, including the two most famous, are not in the capital.


20% of British students study in London. It has by far the greatest amount of higher education establishments of any city in the UK, and a much better density of high quality ones: most large cities in the UK have one or two good universities, but London has Imperial College, LSE, and all the University of London colleges: KCL and UCL are both equal or better than the likes of Glasgow or Manchester unis despite being about 1 mile away from each other, and the same from LSE, Imperial, and SOAS.


----------



## sebvill (Apr 13, 2005)

Bangkok is 60 times the countrys second city!

Buenos Aires is 9 times Cordoba
Lima is 8 times Arequipa
Paris is 7 times Lyon
Santiago is 6 times Concepcion
Tokyo is 6 times Osaka
Lagos is 5 times Cano
Greater London is 5 times Greater Birmingham
Beirut is 5 times Tripoli
Auckland is 5 times Wellington
Mexico City is 5 times Monterrey
Manila is 5 times Quezon City
Yakarta is 4 times Surabaya
Cairo is 4 times Alexandria
Istambul is 3 times Ankara
Karachi is 2 times Lahore


----------



## Neungz (Jan 7, 2012)

^^









http://thaipublica.org/2012/05/world-bank-report-the-federal-budget-local/


----------



## abrandao (Sep 8, 2006)

sebvill said:


> *Bangkok is 60 times the countrys second city!*
> 
> Buenos Aires is 9 times Cordoba
> Lima is 8 times Arequipa
> ...


Greater Bangkok (14 million) is 14 times bigger than Greater Chiang Mai (1 million), not 60 times.

And Greater Tokyo (35.6 million) is not even twice as big as the Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto area / Keihanshin (18.6 million).


----------



## skyscrapercity (Aug 31, 2004)

Rascar said:


> I think South Korea and Thailand may have the edge, given that both comfortably exceed the populaion threshold, and the lack of large provincial cities.


Seoul dominates south korea.
But there are many provincial cities in south korea which are not very well-known to the world yet.
Actually, most of them fuction their roles as provincial cities.

For examples, 
Busan is No.1 trade port city which has about 3.5 million population. 
Incheon has Incheon international airport and exceeds 3 million population.
Daegu has 2.5million population and is becoming the hub of Gyungsang province.
Ulsan has the highest GDP per capita and is the power house of shipbuilding and car industry with 1.2 million people. 
Deajeon is the hub city of technology and science in Korea with 1.5million people.
Changwon(including Masan) exceed 1 million and has national industrial complex.

Most importantly, South Korea relocates its administrative capital to Sejong city to decentralize the population around the capital area for the balanced development.


----------



## alekssa1 (Jan 29, 2009)

avechkin8 said:


> Anyway Russia contrary to the stereotype is really decentralized country.


Really? Population of Russian macro-regions (blue) and cities of at least 1 million (red) as of Jan 1, 2012


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Neungz said:


> ^^
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Central, North, Northeast, and South sound like regions not cities in Thailand.


----------



## Hadrami (May 12, 2010)

Rinchinlhumbe said:


> Mauritania (capital 1 m, 2nd biggest town 50k)


2nd biggest town is more like 100k


----------



## megacity30 (Oct 8, 2011)

isaidso said:


> Central, North, Northeast, and South sound like regions not cities in Thailand.


Yes, that's the whole point Neungz has made.

Although Bangkok City contains only 17.2% of the country's (Thailand's) population and generates only 25.8% of the country's GDP, more than 72% of the entire country's expenditure is lavished on Bangkok City.
:lol:


----------



## Wapper (Feb 24, 2011)

France is one of the best examples because almost everything happens in Paris (until a few years ago literally everything). Paris is the political, economical and cultural capital of the country and by far the largest city. Almost everything is decided there, while the rest of the country simply executes. Paris also has all major administrative schools. If you want to be someone in France, you should study in Paris.


----------



## sebvill (Apr 13, 2005)

Thats not true. There are good well ranked business schools in Lille, Lyon and Nize.


----------



## Occit (Jul 24, 2005)

sebvill said:


> In my opinion, from the Worlds big economies
> 
> *Centralized*
> 
> ...


I would adjust your list in this way:

*Centralized*
Argentina
Chile
Peru
France
Britain
Greece
Egypt
Saudi Arabia
Iran
Thailand
Malaysia
The Phillipines
South Korea
Japan
Mexico
Sweden

*Average*
Indonesia
Nigeria
Russia
Norway
Spain
The Netherlands
Ukraine
Kenya
Morrocco
Israel
UAE
Turkey
Kazakhstan
Vietnam


*Non-centralized*
India
South Africa
New Zealand
Venezuela
Colombia
Brazil
USA
Canada
Italy
Germany
Poland
China
Australia


----------



## Occit (Jul 24, 2005)

sebvill said:


> Auckland is 5 times New Zealand


^^
:crazy: WTF xD 

BTW, Caracas is only 1,5 times Maracaibo


----------



## Wapper (Feb 24, 2011)

sebvill said:


> Thats not true. There are good well ranked business schools in Lille, Lyon and Nize.


Yes, but no administrative schools. But it's true that I shouldn't have said that last sentence. 
But France is more unique than Thailand or Nigeria because Paris has dominated the country for centuries. I think it must be since the rise of absolutist kings when the state started to grow (although before that, Paris was already politically and culturally very important). Since then, the dominance of Paris has always grown further until recently, when some minor decentralisation efforts were established.


----------



## Svartmetall (Aug 5, 2007)

Occit said:


> ^^
> :crazy: WTF xD
> 
> BTW, Caracas is only 1,5 times Maracaibo


He got it a bit mixed up. Auckland is 1.6 million people in a country of 4.5 million people, ergo Auckland is 35% of the population of NZ. Since you listed Sweden as "Average" with Stockholm metropolitan region accounting for 21% of the population of Sweden, I don't see how one can say one is decentralised whilst the other is more centralised especially based on population. The only difference is that Wellington is the capital of NZ, whilst Stockholm is actually the capital of Sweden. 

Perhaps it is also worth looking at second city sizes relative to population to see how big the jump is between second city and total. That will give an impression as to how many people are concentrated in the largest city relative to the rest.


----------



## Occit (Jul 24, 2005)

Svartmetall said:


> Since you listed Sweden as "Average" with Stockholm metropolitan region accounting for 21% of the population of Sweden, I don't see how one can say one is decentralised whilst the other is more centralised especially based on population.


You are right, i`ve changed that


----------



## Svartmetall (Aug 5, 2007)

Occit said:


> You are right, i`ve changed that


But you left New Zealand in "decentralised" when it is even more centralised. Nice reasoning.


----------



## caserass (Feb 16, 2008)

Wapper said:


> France is one of the best examples because almost everything happens in Paris (until a few years ago literally everything).


Not really, for example, the french gastronomy is born in Lyon... 
it's just an example...



> Paris is the political, economical and cultural capital of the country and by far the largest city. Almost everything is decided there, while the rest of the country simply executes.


:lol: yes it's true ! but that's normal actually, the president and our parliament are in Paris. 
France has got a lot of different cultures, for example while you know fashion and perfume made in Paris you also know the food, or the way of life of the south of France, so no, all the french culture is not in Paris. 



> Paris also has all major administrative schools. If you want to be someone in France, you should study in Paris.


No... 



Wapper said:


> Yes, but no administrative schools. But it's true that I shouldn't have said that last sentence.
> But France is more unique than Thailand or Nigeria because Paris has dominated the country for centuries. I think it must be since the rise of absolutist kings when the state started to grow (although before that, Paris was already politically and culturally very important). Since then, the dominance of Paris has always grown further until recently, when some minor decentralisation efforts were established.


ENA (école nationale de l'administration) is by far the most important administrative school and is based in... Strasbourg
L'École nationale d’administration pénitentiaire (ÉNAP) is based in Agen
L'École des hautes études en santé publique (EHESP), is based in Rennes
L’Institut national des études territoriales (INET) is based in Strasbourg
École nationale de la magistrature based in Bordeaux
etc...

Grandes écoles - Haute fonction publique

Actually most of the french administrative school are not in Paris.

Also, the absolutist king AKA Louis XIV left Paris for Versailles... that was not Paris at that time.

But you're right, France is a perfect example of a centralized country, you can just take a map of the highways or the high speed railways to see it...


----------



## vladanng (Aug 2, 2009)

FRANCE! except Paris and Marsei, which city in France have more than milion inhabitants in urban core? and France have 60 milion, very centralised country, more than Uk, then, Hungary with Budapest, here in Serbia Belgrade, Greece is perfect example, Mexico, Argentina, Russia, TURKEY!


----------



## caserass (Feb 16, 2008)

vladanng said:


> FRANCE! except Paris and Marsei, which city in France have more than milion inhabitants in urban core? and France have 60 milion, very centralised country, more than Uk, then, Hungary with Budapest, here in Serbia Belgrade, Greece is perfect example, Mexico, Argentina, Russia, TURKEY!


Actually, even Marseille doesn't have one million people living in its administrative city limits...

The Urban area of the largest french cities : 

Paris : 10,3 million
Marseille : 1,558
Lyon : 1,509
Lille : 1,014
Nice : 0947
Toulouse : 0,859
Bordeaux : 0,831

_Source : INSEE (french institute of stats)_


----------



## movic (Jul 1, 2006)

WeimieLvr said:


> It seems like Mexico is pretty dominated by Mexico city, at least in the areas of importance and size. There are several cities in Mexico with populations of at least 1 million, and both Guadalajara and Monterrey are 4 million+...but Mexico city with more than 20 million really dwarfs them.
> 
> I'm not sure how Mexico City is viewed within Mexico or if people are drawn to it in order to become successful.


It used to dominate everything, and to be honest it still does in things like media, arts, politics, culture.
When it comes to economy, there are different cities (and regions) that have been developing through the years and it is not necessary to move to Mexico City to have a succesful carreer (as it may have been before).

To sum it up, MC is about 35-30% of the economy and population of the country so its definetly of huge importance, it just doesn't dominate everything anymore.


----------



## movic (Jul 1, 2006)

weava said:


> The economic capital of Mexico is considered to be Monterrey.


That's a myth.
It's a rich, industrialized city (by latin american standards), but in total GDP it is maybe 1/4 of Mexico City's


----------



## FAAN (Jun 24, 2011)

Argentina
Uruguay
Mexico
Paraguay
Egypt
Algeria
Greece
Russia
Saudi Arabia
UAE
Japan
Indonesia
....


----------



## abrandao (Sep 8, 2006)

FAAN said:


> Argentina
> Uruguay
> Mexico
> Paraguay
> ...


From this list I would surely exclude* Japan *(Osaka-Kobe region is enormous and an economic powerhouse in terms of the whole Asian continent), *UAE* (Abu Dhabi and Dubai do compete in many issues), *Saudi Arabia* (Djeddah and Mecca are also very important cities) and, to a lesser extent, *Mexico* and *Greece* (Thessaloniki has its "own history" and a lot of influence over the north of Greece and neighbouring countries).


----------



## megacity30 (Oct 8, 2011)

abrandao said:


> From this list I would surely exclude* Japan *(Osaka-Kobe region is enormous and an economic powerhouse in terms of the whole Asian continent), *UAE* (Abu Dhabi and Dubai do compete in many issues), *Saudi Arabia* (Djeddah and Mecca are also very important cities) and, to a lesser extent, *Mexico* and *Greece* (Thessaloniki has its "own history" and a lot of influence over the north of Greece and neighbouring countries).


Accurate and perceptive post, abrandao.

Thailand is one of the world's most centralized major countries.
More than 72% of the entire country's expenditure is lavished on Bangkok City.

As mentioned by you, some other highly centralized countries are:-

Argentina
Uruguay
Paraguay
Egypt
Algeria
Russia
Indonesia


----------



## thib8500 (Jun 12, 2006)

vladanng said:


> FRANCE! except Paris and Marsei, which city in France have more than milion inhabitants in urban core?


Actually, talking about cities administrative limits in France is not very relevant because they are very very very small. For example, Lyon has 479 000 inhab. in 47 km² while a city like Antwerpen is 204 km² large, Torino is 130 km² large, Cologne is 405 km², etc. 

There are more than 36 000 administrative cities in France. This is the half of the UE cities.


----------



## FAAN (Jun 24, 2011)

abrandao said:


> From this list I would surely exclude* Japan *(Osaka-Kobe region is enormous and an economic powerhouse in terms of the whole Asian continent), *UAE* (Abu Dhabi and Dubai do compete in many issues), *Saudi Arabia* (Djeddah and Mecca are also very important cities) and, to a lesser extent, *Mexico* and *Greece* (Thessaloniki has its "own history" and a lot of influence over the north of Greece and neighbouring countries).


I made my list from my own experience. Just when I think of Mexico I see their capital (where the economy and population is really concentrated) or a resort in Cancun or Acapulco, and Japan generally the most frequently mentioned city and is known by many people is Tokyo, and Greece, I think Athens is always the first to come to mind.


----------



## miguelon (Oct 25, 2006)

FAAN said:


> I made my list from my own experience. Just when I think of Mexico I see their capital (where the economy and population is really concentrated) or a resort in Cancun or Acapulco, and Japan generally the most frequently mentioned city and is known by many people is Tokyo, and Greece, I think Athens is always the first to come to mind.


Brazil and Mexico cases are in a different situation, being both really large countries both in terrotorial and demographic terms, even if Mexico City and Sao Paolo are by far the biggest and most important economic centers, its hard for a single city to hold the entire development of a country.

Still other cities like Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte, Brasilia, Guadalajara and Monterrey are really entering in the world class city rank. Cities mentioned are getting a development seen only in major cities (universities, shopping malls, international airports, financial districts, mass urban transport, etc...) 

Rio GDP is close to Sydney and Phoenix
Brasilia between Portland and Cleveland
Monterrey larger than Pittsburgh and Vancouver
Guadalajara almost like Manchester


----------



## FAAN (Jun 24, 2011)

^^
Brasilia is more like Milan or Baltimore
Belo Horizonte, like Munich
Porto Alegre, like Lyon or Munich
Curitiba, like Amsterdam
Manaus, like Caracas and Oslo
Recife, like Cologne

Two cases are different, but I think that Mexico has the strong industrial growth only in Mexico City, and as Brazil has today the most widespread industrial growth by country, but still very concentrated.


----------



## Wapper (Feb 24, 2011)

thib8500 said:


> Actually, talking about cities administrative limits in France is not very relevant because they are very very very small. For example, Lyon has 479 000 inhab. in 47 km² while a city like Antwerpen is 204 km² large, Torino is 130 km² large, Cologne is 405 km², etc.
> 
> There are more than 36 000 administrative cities in France. This is the half of the UE cities.


It's true that differences between countries are very big, so you should watch out when you compare. Antwerp is a good example, because half of its territory is just uninhabited undustrial land (port of Antwerp). On the other hand, some very urban parts to the south and east are not part of the administrative area. 
In France, the city of Paris has only 2 million inhabitants, which is crazy:nuts: The real city of Paris has about 10 million inh.

Still, France has realtively small cities (outside Paris) if you compare with similar countries like the UK, Germany and Italy.


----------



## UnHavrais (Sep 19, 2010)

Everything is centered on Paris in France !

The train :










The highways :










The wealth :










The tourism :










The population :










The atmospheric pollution :










The light pollution :











ETC...


----------



## Los Earth (Jun 23, 2011)

megacity30 said:


> Accurate and perceptive post, abrandao.
> 
> Thailand is one of the world's most centralized major countries.
> More than 72% of the entire country's expenditure is lavished on Bangkok City.
> ...


You can't really count Uruguay and Paraguay since they both have very small populations


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Of course you can. If they were the size (area) of Luxembourg, that would be different.


----------



## megacity30 (Oct 8, 2011)

Los Earth said:


> You can't really count Uruguay and Paraguay since they both have very small populations


Uruguay is a bigger country area-wise than Hungary, Slovenia and Croatia combined!

Paraguay is substantially larger than Uruguay.

So they're both quite large countries, area-wise.

What would be the population threshold to become a major country?


----------



## Chrissib (Feb 9, 2008)

megacity30 said:


> Uruguay is a bigger country area-wise than Hungary, Slovenia and Croatia combined!
> 
> Paraguay is substantially larger than Uruguay.
> 
> ...


Like the thread starter said, 20 million people.


----------



## Los Earth (Jun 23, 2011)

isaidso said:


> Of course you can. If they were the size (area) of Luxembourg, that would be different.


If Luxembourg had more than 20 million people than it would of course qualify


----------



## sebvill (Apr 13, 2005)

Occit said:


> ^^
> :crazy: WTF xD
> 
> BTW, Caracas is only 1,5 times Maracaibo


whoops I meant Wellington.


----------



## sebvill (Apr 13, 2005)

FAAN said:


> Two cases are different, but I think that Mexico has the strong industrial growth only in Mexico City, and as Brazil has today the most widespread industrial growth by country, but still very concentrated.


Is very typical for Brazilians to know nothing about what is going on in the rest of Latin America. You tend to enlarge what happens in Brazil and minimize neighbouring economies.

Mexicos industry is quite descentralized around the entire country, althought its more notorious in the northern cities like Monterrey, Tijuana and the central area in Mexico City, Guanajuato, Queretaro and Toluca.


----------



## onosqaciw (Feb 13, 2011)

well i'll give my personal insight, Indonesia as like the rest of south east asia has a capital city that it's urban area has a lot of people and economic prowess
but Indonesia is not dominated by capital city Jakarta, the more suitable term would be dominated by island java (both population and economic) afterall it is an island that has 130 million people on 138000 sqrkm so i'll list it on average


----------



## FAAN (Jun 24, 2011)

sebvill said:


> Is very typical for Brazilians to know nothing about what is going on in the rest of Latin America. You tend to enlarge what happens in Brazil and minimize neighbouring economies.
> 
> Mexicos industry is quite descentralized around the entire country, althought its more notorious in the northern cities like Monterrey, Tijuana and the central area in Mexico City, Guanajuato, Queretaro and Toluca.


I only said if the two countries there is still some concentration, but in recent decades this concentration is decreasing. 

And no I do not try to minimize anything that happens in Brazil, I speak with the utmost tranquility that the Brazilian industry is mostly in the southeastern region of the country, but as Mexico and other Latin countries today are much less centralized. 

In Brazil, the Northeast in general has a great growth, in the north are large technology industries, namely, Brazil is alot more decentralized today.


----------



## Marcus Mendell (Nov 29, 2011)

Chrissib said:


> Like the thread starter said, 20 million people.


I think is 100 million people.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

onosqaciw said:


> well i'll give my personal insight, Indonesia as like the rest of south east asia has a capital city that it's urban area has a lot of people and economic prowess
> but Indonesia is not dominated by capital city Jakarta, the more suitable term would be dominated by island java (both population and economic) afterall it is an island that has 130 million people on 138000 sqrkm so i'll list it on average


I agree!


----------



## gabrielbabb (Aug 11, 2006)

FAAN said:


> I only said if the two countries there is still some concentration, but in recent decades this concentration is decreasing.
> 
> And no I do not try to minimize anything that happens in Brazil, I speak with the utmost tranquility that the Brazilian industry is mostly in the southeastern region of the country, but as Mexico and other Latin countries today are much less centralized.
> 
> In Brazil, the Northeast in general has a great growth, in the north are large technology industries, namely, Brazil is alot more decentralized today.


Well I don't think we consider Mexico City as a potency for industry, when we mexicans talk about that we imagine other cities which are small or medium but with a great potential for that. 

Most industrialized states









What every single one produces


----------



## ParadiseLost (Feb 1, 2011)

VECTROTALENZIS said:


> Actually in most countries below 180 million one big city acts as "the city" and swallows almost everything.
> 
> Which countries below 180 million population don't have a one cig city that dominates everything? The first ones I can think if are Germany, Spain, Canada, Australia, and Ukraine.


Netherlands, Belgium, Bolivia, Italy probably many more.


----------



## Phoenyxar (Mar 4, 2012)

ParadiseLost said:


> Netherlands, *Belgium*, Bolivia, Italy probably many more.


 Well... actually Brussels does dominate everything, we're quite centralized. A (relatively) high population density does not necessarily mean that a country is decentralized.


----------



## santakine (Aug 13, 2012)

yo tengo el mismo problema y es que antes si daba el internet pero de un momento a otro no se conecto y si voy a estado "" sol hay archivos recidos tiene numeracion y archivos enviados 0 . ya descnecte el moden y lo raro es que en otra maquina portatil si hay internet con la misma red por favor ayudenme de antemano gracias.


----------



## Alex Roney (Apr 22, 2007)

sebvill said:


> *Is very typical for Brazilians to know nothing about what is going on in the rest of Latin America. You tend to enlarge what happens in Brazil and minimize neighbouring economies*.
> 
> Mexicos industry is quite descentralized around the entire country, althought its more notorious in the northern cities like Monterrey, Tijuana and the central area in Mexico City, Guanajuato, Queretaro and Toluca.


You have a serious problem with Brazilians every now and again it comes out. It makes you look rather bitter. :lol:


----------



## fastboyRD (Jun 8, 2010)

santakine said:


> yo tengo el mismo problema y es que antes si daba el internet pero de un momento a otro no se conecto y si voy a estado "" sol hay archivos recidos tiene numeracion y archivos enviados 0 . ya descnecte el moden y lo raro es que en otra maquina portatil si hay internet con la misma red por favor ayudenme de antemano gracias.


:nuts::nuts::nuts:


----------



## mintgum84 (Aug 18, 2011)

Chrissib said:


> Out of the large developed countries, South Korea would be the best example. Half of it's population live in the metropolitan area of Seoul, a share that no other country of South Korea's size achieves.
> 
> The biggest country dominated by it's capital is Indonesia I think. The US, China and India are all polycentric countries.
> 
> Japan and the UK are difficult cases. They have very dominant capitals, but their regional centers (Oasaka-Kobe-Kyoto, Sapporo, Nagoya, Fukuoka or Birmingham, Manchester-Liverpool) are also not small compared to the capital. The situation in France or Thailand is different. There the second city is totally dwarfed by the capital.


Bro, the UK is dominated by London. It creates about 40% of GDP and acts as a black hole sucking in resources. Other 'industrial' cities like Manchester and Birmingham are dumps.

I dont even like London so much, so big and crowded. The charming cities are Oxford (150,000 people only, so green) and Bristol (500,000) - except 1 part which sucks. 

Quite frankly, most other cities bite.


----------



## mintgum84 (Aug 18, 2011)

megacity30 said:


> Yes, that's the whole point Neungz has made.
> 
> Although Bangkok City contains only 17.2% of the country's (Thailand's) population and generates only 25.8% of the country's GDP, more than 72% of the entire country's expenditure is lavished on Bangkok City.
> :lol:


This must vex the rest of Thailand out! hno:


----------



## mintgum84 (Aug 18, 2011)

swerveut said:


> So I will list here countries (mostly from Middle East) where you THINK it does, but the biggest city certainly does not dominate:
> 
> *Iran:* Tehran is the biggest but Esfahan and Shiraz are also pretty important
> 
> ...


Yes, in Pakistan Karachi and Lahore both present opportunities, as does Islamabad. 

What of Bangladesh and Dhaka? I mean who - globally - knows of Chittagong etc?


----------



## Rascar (Mar 13, 2012)

> It creates about 40% of GDP and acts as a black hole sucking in resources.


Only if you include the unofficial extended conurbation stretching into Surrey, Herfordshire etc. Even then 40% sounds a bit high.

While London dominates services exports, successful manufacturing exporters, like premium cars, aerospace components etc are not London centric at all, (probably cost wise it wouldn't make sense)


----------



## CigaretteSmoker (Aug 8, 2012)

England is very much dominated by London, and the wealth is disproportionately centred on London.

As the vast majority of tourists to the UK only ever visit London and surrounding towns such as Oxford, etc, I think they get an inaccurate representation of the prosperity of England.

If they visited Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, etc, they would get a very different perspective of English prosperity and wealth.


----------



## mintgum84 (Aug 18, 2011)

As stated, anything North of Bham is rubbish. Oxford & Bristol are the UK's gems.


----------



## Rascar (Mar 13, 2012)

Agree with you on bristol, and if its ever not genteel enough bath is 20 mins away if that.

Oxford is a bit of a one off, and it certainly has an insalubrious underbelly to it, a bit of a mixture like most UK cities, which is why I object to all points north of there being characterised as a sh*thole.


----------



## mintgum84 (Aug 18, 2011)

As a born and raised Oxonian, I am going to have to protest. Blackbird Leys is ****, but the rest is pretty awesome.

Tennis anyone?


----------



## Harry (Nov 8, 2002)

mintgum84 said:


> As stated, anything North of Bham is rubbish. Oxford & Bristol are the UK's gems.


I honestly don't know where to start with that.

So I won't.


----------



## mintgum84 (Aug 18, 2011)

C'mon dude, its not literally true - obviously. Durham is a nice town, Lancaster is ok too. But broadly speaking, the south is way nicer then the north.


----------



## Rascar (Mar 13, 2012)

Mintgum, if landscape and countryside is your thing the north is better. Ditto varied cities with their own identities. Southern accents and identities have become rather homogonised somewhere between r.p. and estuary.


----------



## mintgum84 (Aug 18, 2011)

A uniform, decent Southern drawl is better then that Northern stuff.


----------



## Pennypacker (Mar 23, 2010)

"Southern drawl" is an America-specific term and certainly doesn't apply to most Southern English accents.


----------



## Cherguevara (Apr 13, 2005)

CigaretteSmoker said:


> England is very much dominated by London, and the wealth is disproportionately centred on London.
> 
> As the vast majority of tourists to the UK only ever visit London and surrounding towns such as Oxford, etc, I think they get an inaccurate representation of the prosperity of England.
> 
> If they visited Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, etc, they would get a very different perspective of English prosperity and wealth.


Or indeed if they visited large parts of London.


----------



## SE9 (Apr 26, 2005)

^ which they do. There's currently a very large contingent of young Chinese people staying in and around my South London neighbourhood.



Rascar said:


> Mintgum, if landscape and countryside is your thing the north is better. Ditto varied cities with their own identities. Southern accents and identities have become rather homogonised somewhere between r.p. and estuary.


Accents here are moving and shifting. A new "inner London accent" is growing and replacing Cockney, which has been shifted out into Essex. I'd argue that the different identities in the south (south coast towns vs. Chiltern vs. Essex/Cockney etc.) still stay individual.


----------



## mintgum84 (Aug 18, 2011)

I just meant a uniform Southern accent, you know, with elongated vowels et al.


----------



## LaNacha91 (Oct 22, 2011)

*Argentina is the 8th largest country in the world but we only have a population of 40 million, and more than 12 millions in Greater Buenos Aires, 

Other important cities are Córdoba, Rosario and Mendoza with more than 1 million, and Tucumán, La Plata, Mar del Plata, Salta and Santa Fe with more than 500.000 people.*


----------



## alexandru.mircea (May 18, 2011)

Wapper said:


> France is one of the best examples because almost everything happens in Paris (until a few years ago literally everything). Paris is the political, economical and cultural capital of the country and by far the largest city. Almost everything is decided there, while the rest of the country simply executes. Paris also has all major administrative schools. If you want to be someone in France, you should study in Paris.


That's not at all true. France has made tremendous progress in this respect in the last two decades. If you're want to be an engineer, you might be better off in Toulouse; if you want to be a doctor, you might want to choose Lille instead. The national administration school has been moved from Paris to Strasbourg in the '90s already if I'm not wrong. (Strasbourg has been boosted a lot by the European institutions.) Nantes is also a hub city for innovation. Grenoble has France's best research in several exact sciences (like biotechnologies). The national L'Etudiant portal rates the best places to study in France like this: 
1. Toulouse 2. Grenoble 3. Montpellier 4. Marseille-Aix 5. Lyon 6. Bordeaux 7. Nantes 8. Rennes 9. Nice 10. (!!!) Paris

In terms of administration, France will never be a federal-type country, but if you go around the country and see the projects that the regional governments are undergoing you'll see that the "everything is decided in Paris" is just a self-perpetuating cliche nowadays. 
In terms of population and economy, yes, Paris remains by far the largest urban agglomeration and the largest economy, BUT, in terms of percentage of the_ total _population and economy, it is not that dominant when compared to several other countries.


EDIT: only realized it's an old thread and I was responding to an old post. I've been ninja'd several times. :lol: 




UnHavrais said:


> Everything is centered on Paris in France !
> 
> The train :
> 
> ...


All very good info, but you are missing the point though - this thread is not about cities that are #1 in their country and in every aspect, but about cities that are #1 to the extent that they take up the _majority_ in each of those aspects. How "dominated" are the rest of France, considering they do make up about 82% of the population and about 71% of the country's GDP? Not a huge domination, I would say.

For comparison, Bucharest contributes about 23% of the country's GDP, 25% of the country's industrial production and almost a third of all the taxes paid in Romania - while containing only about 9% of the country's population. Also, purchase power in Bucharest is more than twice compared to the national average and, when compared to France, there is no equivalent of the regional governments (only an equivalent of the departments). In terms of population, Bucharest is about 2M, while the next level is that of cities at about 300k. That's fairly more dominant and centralized, which comes from centralized political planning of the country from the very beginning and absolutely no real effort in the opposite direction.


----------



## geococcyx (Dec 27, 2011)

sebvill said:


> Is very typical for Brazilians to know nothing about what is going on in the rest of Latin America. You tend to enlarge what happens in Brazil and minimize neighbouring economies.


+1


----------



## the spliff fairy (Oct 21, 2002)

mintgum84 said:


> C'mon dude, its not literally true - obviously. Durham is a nice town, Lancaster is ok too. But broadly speaking, the south is way nicer then the north.


I heard they opened a Marks & Spencer in Birmingham. The 'queues' were round the block, riot police n everything. Apparently a US Studio took the opportunity to shoot the next decade's worth of zombie apocalypse scenes from the roof.

Maybe.


----------



## The Cake On BBQ (May 10, 2010)

Turkey is definitely an ultimate example of it. 80 million pop and 20 million of them living in Istanbul and cities surrounding it.


----------



## VECTROTALENZIS (Jul 10, 2010)

South Korea is the ultimate example.
25 million living in metro Seoul while the country's pop is 50.

Thailand too. Bangkok is the only real city. The rest are only small towns.


----------



## eddeux (Jun 16, 2010)

The Cake On BBQ said:


> Turkey is definitely an ultimate example of it. 80 million pop and 20 million of them living in Istanbul and cities surrounding it.


I red an article the other day about how Istanbul is overdue for an earthquake, and doesn't have a large percentage of its buildings prepared to withstand a large 7.0 one (for example). It'd be interesting if this were to happen, and large parts of the city flattened like the article mentioned.


----------



## koolio (Jan 5, 2008)

Yes, it would be quite interesting to see thousands of people get flattened underneath massive amounts of rubble.


----------



## andretanure (Jun 20, 2012)

What about Uruguay?

Montevideo - 1,336,878 people
Total of the country - 3 424 595 people

The second biggest city in Uruguay is Salto with 118 013 inhabitants, huge difference


----------



## The Cake On BBQ (May 10, 2010)

èđđeůx;97052392 said:


> I red an article the other day about how Istanbul is overdue for an earthquake, and doesn't have a large percentage of its buildings prepared to withstand a large 7.0 one (for example). It'd be interesting if this were to happen, and large parts of the city flattened like the article mentioned.


Government recently passed a law that allows to demolish buildings that aren't up to earthquake regulations.

It's planned to be enforced from 2013 but some demolitions already started in Istanbul.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1463427&page=17
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=587726&page=17 

A lot of people are selling their homes and buyings newer ones.

Although I'm not sure if they can actually demolish all weak buildings, because a great deal of them are occupied by some really rich people (for their bosphorus view), and municipality/state can't simply force them to leave. Still, its a pretty big deal, and it's kind of gonna be like Hausmann thing for Istanbul.


----------



## annaamazing (Aug 30, 2012)

Metro Manila, Philippines

Home of 21,700,000 People


----------



## eddeux (Jun 16, 2010)

^^So Metro Manila dominates the Philippines' economy? 21.7 million people, that's 1/5 of the entire population.

Btw I think you posted more than enough photos.


The Cake On BBQ said:


> Government recently passed a law that allows to demolish buildings that aren't up to earthquake regulations.
> 
> It's planned to be enforced from 2013 but some demolitions already started in Istanbul.
> 
> ...


Good to know. Hope you're in a building that's up to code.


koolio said:


> Yes, it would be quite interesting to see thousands of people get flattened underneath massive amounts of rubble.


It would because it's just not something you see everyday.:jk:


----------



## The Cake On BBQ (May 10, 2010)

èđđeůx;97212352 said:


> Good to know. Hope you're in a building that's up to code.


I am :cheers:


----------



## Apoc89 (Mar 4, 2010)

The UK is up there, especially in terms of London's economic and transport dominance, but I think the amount of population and cultural influence coming from other regions such as the West Midlands, the Manchester-Liverpool area, not to mention Scotland, gets it beaten by some other examples in this thread.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Good grief, this is not a photo thread. How about just saying that Manila dominates the Philippines and making your argument regarding population, culture, politics, industry, etc? 33 photos of Manila doesn't prove a thing nor does it belong in this thread. Stop spamming. 

hno:


----------



## Yuree (May 31, 2012)

Hmmm..

Thailand
South Korea
Argentina
Japan
United Kingdom
Philippines
Malaysia
Taiwan


----------



## Daverytimes (Mar 24, 2012)

Galro said:


> How about Japan? Tokyo appears to dominate everything over there.


Nah Yokohama and Osaka sort of Balances out Tokyo's importance and there are other important cities in the Country (Nagoya, kyoto, kobe), Tokyo is just the most well known.


----------



## Rascar (Mar 13, 2012)

> but I think the amount of population and cultural influence coming from other regions such as the West Midlands, the Manchester-Liverpool area, not to mention Scotland


It is not just population though. The vehicle, aerospace, defence and pharmaceutic industries (the most important to Britain) are all located in the "provinces". In fact I can't think of any major premises that any of those industries has within the M25, and most are outside the home counties. Of course service industries are focused on London, at least the value added ones that generate exports.


----------



## Minato ku (Aug 9, 2005)

Daverytimes said:


> Nah Yokohama and Osaka sort of Balances out Tokyo's importance and there are other important cities in the Country (Nagoya, kyoto, kobe), Tokyo is just the most well known.


I agree with Osaka but not Yokohama.
Yokohama is in Tokyo metropolitan area.


----------



## onosqaciw (Feb 13, 2011)

japan has 3 big metropolis, kanto, keihanshin, and nagoya (chubu) that pretty balance and only 550 km among the 3 metropolis


----------



## skyscrapercity (Aug 31, 2004)

Why do people keep saying that South Korea is the extreme example of countries most dominated by capital?

South Korea has around *82* cities in such a small country.(smaller than Iceland and Cuba, similar size of Portugal)

The population of Seoul itself has only *9,794,304*(2010 Census) and keep on shrinking by government policy.

There are 8 cities over 1 million in South Korea. 
There are 11 cities over 0.5 million in South Korea. 
There are 46 cities over 0.1 million in South Korea.

If South Korea is dominated by one and only city, Seoul, how is it possible to develop so many cities in such a small country? 


Yes, Seoul metropolitan has over 20,000,000 People.
But Seoul metropolitan(수도권, 首都圈) is *NOT a city*, it's a* big region(provinces) *. which has over 30 cities around Seoul, not to mention it covers a large area within such a small country. 

Of course, Seoul is very important to Korea.
But I don't think that South Korea is the extreme example of a country that the most dominated by capital(largest city). 
Just because the other cities in South Korea are not well-known to outside world. 

This is the list of South Korean cities.(Seoul is big but there are many medium-sized cities.) 

1. The population of Seoul : 9,794,304
2. The population of Busan : 3,604,950
3. The population of Incheon : 2,637,652
4. The population of Daegu : 2,532,077
5. The pupulation of Deajeon : 1,495,453
6. The Population of Gwanju : 1,469,293
7. The population of Ulsan : 1,081,985
8. The population of Suwon : 1,064,951
9. The population of Changwon : 1,062,731

Source : http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_South_Korea_by_population


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Metropolitan Seoul may be made up of 30 different cities, but that's an exercise in deception. South Korea is dominated by this metro.


----------



## annaamazing (Aug 30, 2012)

isaidso said:


> Metropolitan Seoul may be made up of 30 different cities, but that's an exercise in deception. South Korea is dominated by this metro.


^^^^^^^^^^^^

that's right like Metropolitan Manila is composed of 16 cities and 1 municipality


Manila
Caloocan
Las Piñas
Makati
Malabon
Mandaluyong
Marikina
Muntinlupa
Navotas
Pasay
Pasig
Parañaque
Quezon City
San Juan
Taguig
Valenzuela
Pateros


----------



## citypia (Jan 9, 2005)

isaidso said:


> Metropolitan Seoul may be made up of 30 different cities, but that's an exercise in deception. South Korea is dominated by this metro.


The title of this thread is *"Large countries most dominated by capital/largest city?"*

Please, read the title carefully.

First of all, since when South Korea becomes really *a large country*?

Second of all, Seoul metropotian is a not a city at all. it is almost 1/5 land mass of south korea except mountains.It is almost a similar size of Israel.
No one in Korea think Seoul metro is a city.(it is a similar concept of the state in Korea, such as California in USA,)
It's a quite different situation to big countries like Canada, Austrailia, USA and China.
If we consider Seoul metropolitan as a city, It is like we consider California a city. 

Seoul influences other cities in many ways. But it is not a extreme example of countries most dominated by capital/largest.

Last of all, Seoul is NOT a administrative capital of South Korea any more.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

citypia said:


> The title of this thread is *"Large countries most dominated by capital/largest city?"*
> 
> Please, read the title carefully.


I did read it carefully, but sometimes its useful to understand what the intent of the thread is. We're obviously discussing about domination of a country by one place in that country. 

I'm sure that point wasn't lost on you.


----------



## citypia (Jan 9, 2005)

isaidso said:


> I did read it carefully, but sometimes its useful to understand what the intent of the thread is. We're obviously discussing about domination of a country by one place in that country.
> 
> I'm sure that point wasn't lost on you.


I am 100% SURE what I am talking about.
I just point out that we need to be exact, at least me myself.

One thing more, my point is that Seoul doesn't dominate South Korea *THAT MUCH ANY MORE*.
For example, Ulsan is one of the powerhouses of korean economy. Busan is becoming a convention city ahead of Seoul. Dejeon is the science Mecca. Go-heung is the hub center for korean space industry. This list goes on forever.

My point is that many korean cities eventually play their parts. Seoul is merely doing her parts as a largest city, which we can't easily jump to conclusion her domination without careful insight of other cities's great supports and efforts.

I think that korean cities are like our body parts, organ system.
If you don't agree, it's OK. IGNORE ME.


----------



## Guest (Nov 15, 2012)

Peru, Argentina, France, UK, Russia...


----------



## Pennypacker (Mar 23, 2010)

citypia said:


> The title of this thread is *"Large countries most dominated by capital/largest city?"*
> 
> Please, read the title carefully.
> 
> First of all, since when South Korea becomes really *a large country*?


It has a population of 50 million.

Almost half of those people live in Seoul.


----------



## eddeux (Jun 16, 2010)

citypia said:


> I am 100% SURE what I am talking about.
> I just point out that we need to be exact, at least me myself.
> 
> One thing more, my point is that Seoul doesn't dominate South Korea *THAT MUCH ANY MORE*.
> ...


When others say Seoul, they mean the entire national capital area.


----------



## citypia (Jan 9, 2005)

Pennypacker said:


> It has a population of 50 million.
> 
> Almost half of those people live in Seoul.


No, people live in less than 1/5 in Seoul.
Seoul is a tiny part of Seoul Metroplitan area.

For example, Pyeongtaek is in Seoul Metropolitan area.
No one in Pyeongtaek think that they lilve in Seoul.

No matter foreigners like you said, *NOTHING *can change in Korea ANYWAY.


----------



## citypia (Jan 9, 2005)

èđđeůx;97368684 said:


> When others say Seoul, they mean the entire national capital area.


That's why I correct.

Can I repeat it again?
Seoul Metropolitan is NOT a city.
Seoul is a tiny part of Seoul Metroplitan area.

Don't confuse Seoul with Seoul Metropolitan. 
It's like LA is California.
The end.


----------

