1 million inhabitants in 1875 and 1900, respectively. The pyramidal structure of
urban population sizes was altered by the Industrial Revolution, with the cities of
upper Eurasia and North America and Oceania leading a movement toward larger
city sizes. They were followed by the cities of other regions, with the exception of
the sub-Saharan Africa region, which did not experience this trend until later.
5.3.3 Urban Populations from 1900 to 1950
In this section, we discuss the urban population from 1900 to 1950, noting that the
data sources differ from those for the earlier period discussed above, and hence there
may be some discontinuity or contradictions in the data between these periods. The
first megacity to exceed 10 million inhabitants was New York, in the 1930s, in North
America and Oceania region. In 1950, Chicago and Los Angeles were the next
largest cities in this region, with over 4 million inhabitants. In total, 22 of the cities in
North America and Oceania doubled their populations between 1900 and 1950.
These cities were based on vast, regular, and uniform urban planning.
In upper Eurasia, London, Paris, Moscow, and Berlin had populations exceeding
4 million between 1900 and 1950. Indeed, London in 1900 had the largest population in the world. Berlin’s population decreased to 3,338,000 in 1950 following the
WWII bombings and similar effects were observed in Vienna, Dresden, and Warsaw. The average population growth rate of each city in this region between 1900
and 1950 was lower than in the North America and Oceania region.
Despite bombing during WWII, Tokyo became the world’s second megacity in
1950. The next largest cities in monsoon Asia were Osaka, Kolkata, and Shanghai,
with populations exceeding 4 million in 1950. In 1950, the structure of urban
population sizes observed in North America and Oceania was becoming evident in
monsoon Asia. However, an important difference was that the urban morphology of
big cities varied between the two regions, with cities in monsoon Asia lacking the
morphology of uniformity. The big cities in the New Continent were based on vast,
regular, and uniform urban planning, though many small urban developments by the
private sectors happened in the big cities in monsoon Asia. Comparing the five cities
of 1950s, in spite of the fact that monsoon Asia where the people tended to create
flat, sparsely populated cities traditionally, New York’s urban area is prominently
vaster than other cities in monsoon Asia. It means formal urban planning and urban
expansion could not catch up population growth in monsoon Asia.
In Latin America, the population of Buenos Aires exceeded 4 million in 1950;
subsequently Mexico City and Rio de Janeiro exceeded this number of inhabitants in
1955. The urban morphology of these three cities was based on the master plan for
urban development observed in New York and other vast cities in the USA. The
average population growth rate of each city in this region from 1900 to 1950 was
higher than that in North America and Oceania, indicating that the structure of the
urban population in Latin America was catching up with North America and
Oceania.
82
N. Fukami
urban population sizes was altered by the Industrial Revolution, with the cities of
upper Eurasia and North America and Oceania leading a movement toward larger
city sizes. They were followed by the cities of other regions, with the exception of
the sub-Saharan Africa region, which did not experience this trend until later.
5.3.3 Urban Populations from 1900 to 1950
In this section, we discuss the urban population from 1900 to 1950, noting that the
data sources differ from those for the earlier period discussed above, and hence there
may be some discontinuity or contradictions in the data between these periods. The
first megacity to exceed 10 million inhabitants was New York, in the 1930s, in North
America and Oceania region. In 1950, Chicago and Los Angeles were the next
largest cities in this region, with over 4 million inhabitants. In total, 22 of the cities in
North America and Oceania doubled their populations between 1900 and 1950.
These cities were based on vast, regular, and uniform urban planning.
In upper Eurasia, London, Paris, Moscow, and Berlin had populations exceeding
4 million between 1900 and 1950. Indeed, London in 1900 had the largest population in the world. Berlin’s population decreased to 3,338,000 in 1950 following the
WWII bombings and similar effects were observed in Vienna, Dresden, and Warsaw. The average population growth rate of each city in this region between 1900
and 1950 was lower than in the North America and Oceania region.
Despite bombing during WWII, Tokyo became the world’s second megacity in
1950. The next largest cities in monsoon Asia were Osaka, Kolkata, and Shanghai,
with populations exceeding 4 million in 1950. In 1950, the structure of urban
population sizes observed in North America and Oceania was becoming evident in
monsoon Asia. However, an important difference was that the urban morphology of
big cities varied between the two regions, with cities in monsoon Asia lacking the
morphology of uniformity. The big cities in the New Continent were based on vast,
regular, and uniform urban planning, though many small urban developments by the
private sectors happened in the big cities in monsoon Asia. Comparing the five cities
of 1950s, in spite of the fact that monsoon Asia where the people tended to create
flat, sparsely populated cities traditionally, New York’s urban area is prominently
vaster than other cities in monsoon Asia. It means formal urban planning and urban
expansion could not catch up population growth in monsoon Asia.
In Latin America, the population of Buenos Aires exceeded 4 million in 1950;
subsequently Mexico City and Rio de Janeiro exceeded this number of inhabitants in
1955. The urban morphology of these three cities was based on the master plan for
urban development observed in New York and other vast cities in the USA. The
average population growth rate of each city in this region from 1900 to 1950 was
higher than that in North America and Oceania, indicating that the structure of the
urban population in Latin America was catching up with North America and
Oceania.
82
N. Fukami