Development of urbanization dr Jeney Lszl Senior lecturer

Development of urbanization dr. Jeney László Senior lecturer jeney@elte. hu Economic Foundations of Local Development Module 1/b: Urban and Rural development by sectors Autumn term 2016/2017. CUB Department of Economic Geography and Futures Studies

Definitions and harmonizing polices of the urban concept 2

Urban concept n General characteristics of the towns: – Their role (functions): ‚important’ places – Their demographic features: larger population number, population density, heterogeneous society – Image: suiting to the crowd n Lack of unified official definition of the concept of the towns, it varies: 1. In space: geographic places/cultures 2. In time: historical periods 3. In different disciplines

1. Geographic differences of the concept of the town n n Towns with different size in different societies, depending on: – – – Environmental factors Available material for buildings Economic structure – Less developed countries: agriculture is still determinant economic structure (weight of agriculture) matters Developed world: agriculture is not determinant in villages population density matters Basis of urban–rural separation differs – n Critical population number varies in different countries for definition of the towns – – Scandinavia: over 200 residents Some Asian countries: more 10 thousand residents

2. Dynamic change of the concept of the town – long term visible elements non-visible elements feautures of feudal towns features of modern towns Walls of the towns Densely built-up areas + n For the security of the seats high rise buildings n No significance of the walls n Etymological relation between the words of castle n Towns exceeds their limits and citizen / German (‚Burg’ n Walls are unable to defend and ‚Bürger’), Hungarian n Image of towns suits to the (‚vár’ and ‚város’) crowd Free rights Urban behaviour n More civil society less n Paradoxon: citizens behind the walls are more free significance of additional rights n Independence from the landlords: ‚Stadtluft macht n New World: lack of Middle frei’ Ages: critical population number instead of city rights n Importance of the additional city rights: trade, own taxes, n Globalization: consuming judgement, self-governance society, recreating culture

2. Dynamic change of the concept of the town – short term n n Example of Hungarian practise in definition of towns Socialism: advantages of city right less new towns – 1. 2. – n 1971: introduction of the Settlement-development Concept Better position at state permissions and supports Location of institutions and higher level of council and party organisations Smallest town, 1970: Szigetvár – app. 10 thousand residents ‚Urban boom’ (2012: 328) – – From 1985: cancellation of the Settlement-development Concept, settlement policy is facing towards the disadvantageous areas easier way of getting the urban right Smallest town, 2012: Pálháza – below 1 thousand residents, 185 towns below 10 thousand residents decreasing average size of towns

Number of towns in Hungary, 1885– 2010

3. Different approaches in different disciplines in definition of towns n n The disciplines dealing with towns are not unified Urban characteristics is different in various professional areas – – – Geography: central functions Public administration: urban right Sociology: social distribution: multicultural + polarized – Urban architecture / Urbanistics: more densely built settlement + high buildings

Characteristics of towns 1. Their functions economic–functional urban concept A. Many-sided and central function within the settlement network B. Low significance of agriculture 2. Their demographic features social–statistical urban concept A. Higher population number B. Higher population density 3. Appearance image–urbanistic urban concept A. More crowded building structure B. Higher average floor number n n Their significance if different in various periods But: these remained urban feature currently as well

Economic–functional urban concept period village town determinant urban feature 1. at the beginning of the urbanization agricultural character more functional difference: diversity of activities, functional abundance 2. after the Industrial Revolution agricultural character industrial character more economic difference: economic structure 3. nowadays, only for the developed world services more functional difference: highlevel, central institutions

Social–statistical urban concept n Population number – Towns/cities vs. villages n Population density – Urban areas/cities vs. rural areas

Types of cities n In functional term – Global cities: Saskia Sassen – World cities: Patrick Geddes, John Friedman, Peter J. Taylor n In demographical term – Megapolises / megacities: over 10 mn – Metropolises: 1– 10 mn – Regional cities: 500 th – 1 mn n n Industrial Revolution: largest cities ≈ world cities Demographic explosion: mega cities ≠ world cities – Eu: sub-/ex- and dez-/counter-urbanization slower increase of cities not characteristic (only Istanbul and Moscow) – Global peripheries: appearance of megapolises parallel with the demographic explosion of the 20 th century n Nowadays: mega cities have more global functions

Lack of regional cities in East Central Europe n n Polycentric city-network – only in Poland One regional city with no metropolis: capitals of smaller countries with young independence – Croatia, Moldavia, Latvia, Lithuania No regional city after the metropolis: Hungary, Czechia, Romania, Bulgaria Lack of cities: smallest countries with young independence: Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Slovenia, Slovakia and Estonia

Classification of the Hungarian cities by their population number, 2012 Urban size category Population number (persons) Cities belonging to the category Total population number Population share (%) City 500 th < 1 1740041 25 Megacity (megapolis) 10 mn < 0 0 0 Worldcity (metropolis) 1– 10 mn 1 1740041 25 Regional city 500 th – 1 mn 0 0 0 Mid-size town 20– 500 th 58 3036575 44 Small town < 20 th 269 2162686 31 328 69309302 100 Total

Urban and rural areas in the European Union according to the definition of the OECD n n n Predominantly urban regions: rural population less than 15% of the total population of the NUTS 3 region Intermediate regions: rural population between 15 and 50 % of the total population of the NUTS 3 region Predominantly rural regions: rural population is 50% or more of the total population of the NUTS 3 region

Urban and rural areas in the European Union according to the definition of the EU n n n Predominantly urban regions: rural population less than 20% of the total population of the NUTS 3 region Intermediate regions: rural population between 20 and 50 % of the total population of the NUTS 3 region Predominantly rural regions: rural population is 50% or more of the total population of the NUTS 3 region – This typology is based on a definition of urban and rural 1 km 2 grid cells – Critical population density: 300 inhabitants per km 2 – Critical population: 5000 res.

Tallest cities of the world (by the average height of their 10 tallest buildings) Rank City 2001 1. New York Feet 1010. 4 Rank City 2011 Feet 1. Dubai 1176. 1 2. Chicago 995. 1 2. Hong Kong 1080. 9 3. Kuala Lumpur 852. 1 3. Chicago 1036. 5 4. Hong Kong 839. 6 4. Shanghai 1010. 3 5. Houston 809. 8 5. Guangzhou 945. 7 6. Toronto 776. 3 6. New York 940. 8 7. Singapore 772. 3 7. Shenzhen 907. 1 8. Los Angeles 767. 1 8. Kuala Lumpur 897. 7 9. Tokio 754. 3 9. Singapore 835. 8 10. Shanghai 747. 1 10. Pusan 834. 5

Stages of urbanization 18

Late antique town 19

Spread of urban culture in Europe n n n 1600 B. C. : urban development also in Europe (via Asia, Egypt) 1000 B. C: global centre shifted to Europe (Athens, Rome) Frontier of European urban culture spread to Northwest (towards the cooler climatic zone) 20

Roman Empire Period Rome Other towns Kingdom Young town 8 th– 6 th City wall, fortress on the Capitolium, cent. B. C bridge on Tiber (Tiberis) Port-town: Ostia Republic 509– 31 B. C. 200 thousand citizens Towns on Italian roads too: Capua, Pompeii, Brindisium Empire 31 B. C. – A. D. 476 Augustus: 1. 1 mn (1. 5– 2 mn? ) Architecture: Forum of Caesar, Palace of Augustus, Circus Maximus, Colosseum. Modern symptoms: crowded buildings, 3– 5 -storied tenement houses, rack rent. Building laws by Augustus: 21 m max height. Antecedents of exurbanization Foundations of European cities: London, Paris, Vienna, Cologne, Regensburg, Budapest 21

Constantinople (Byzantine Empire) n 350– 800, Constantinople: largest town of the world – Link between the antique and the feudal urban development – 330, Emperor Constantine the Great (Constantinus): Constantinople – seat of the Roman Empire – Flourishing: under the age of Emperor Justinian (527– 565) on the basis of global trading role (on the meeting of Europe and Asia) – Symbol: Hagia Sophia (built: 532– 537) n Early Middle Ages: largest town of Europe 22

The feudal town 23

Characteristics of the European medieval feudal towns n n 8 th– 9 th cent. : initial feudal towns On the basis of 3 types of roles 1. Role of defence: 9 th– 12 th cent. : Pflaz/Palatinate – imperial watch -posts 2. Role of church: residences of bishops – religious seats with castles (Bordeaux, Strasbourg, Passau, Basel, Lyon, Cologne) 3. Role of trade: Wick – strengthened trading settlements (Ipswich, Norwich) – Where all roles are present faster urban development (Munster, Trier, Bruges) n Feudal towns: only in West Europe – Iberian Peninsula: Moor rule Seville (not feudal) – Southeast Europe: Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire Constantinople (between antique and feudal) 24 – East Central & East Europe: feudalism just after Migration Period

Evolution of modern towns 25

1. Agglomerating process n n = clustering, knitting Also referred falsely to as urbanization, urban explosion – Urbanization, but: whole process is referred to as urbanization agglomeration is the 1 st stage of the urbanization – Urban explosion, but: instead of diverging (centrifugal) powers converging (centripetal) powers n Absolute concentration – Population of whole agglomeration: increases dynamically – Initially just the city increases, later city and also the suburban zone increase n City and its suburban zone coalesce / accrete – It is often followed by the enlargement of the city boundaries 26 n Its concurrent: generated by the Industrial Revolution

The spread of the Industrial Revolution in Europe n Diffusion of the Industrial Revolution, agglomerating process: NW SE – Reverse way to the spread of the antique urbanization (SE NW) – 18 th cent. : England – Mid 19 th cent. : West Europe – Turn of the 19 th cent. : N-Eu, ECentral-Eu, Northern part of S-Eu 27 – First half of the 20 th cent. : S-Eu – Mid 20 th cent. : E-Eu, Balkans

Effects of Industrial Revolution n n 1. Industrialization (→shifts in employment) Fordism: appearance of bigger producing units (→spatial concentration of population) Rural urban migration (→rapid urbanization) Factors: Overall demographic boom – – 2. 3. 4. England 1750: 6 mn; 1850: 18 mn France 1800: 27 mn; 1900: 39 mn Germany 1800: 23 mn; 1900: 56 mn Developing (3 rd) World: nowadays ‚Push’ factor: rural labour surplus ‚Pull’ factor: urban labour demand Changing technical background of urban planning (→metropolitan 28 infrastructure)

Leading role of Europe in the appearance of the modern cities 1840 1929 n Europe becomes leader – Towns over 100 th citizens n n n Contemporary built-up areas of n Greater-London 1800: Eu 21/ World 65 1900: Eu 148/ World 301 Primacy of Great Britain – First country where the proportion of the urban population: >50% London – 18 th cent. : first modern city (over 500 th citizens) in Europe – 19 th cent. : over 2 mn citizens – 1850– 1920: largest city of the world – 1 st megapolis (over 8 mn 29 citizens) of the World

number Number of Europeans in the rank of the 25 largest towns of the World 30 year

Advantages of agglomerating n From residential point of view: better quality of life (partly) – – – n Rich supply of workplaces Higher incomes Existence of educational and cultural institutions Rich and better quality of housing Wide range of services (retail trade etc. ) From economic point of view: higher productivity (positive externalities) P. Krugman: new economic geography – – – Rich „quality” supply of labour-force Availability for cooperation Innovation advantages (research etc. ) Cheaper and better infrastructure (e. g. transport) Closeness of markets 31

Europe, the craddle of the modern city n Antecedent: antique Rome n Earlier: ancient Rome n Modern cities: after the Industrial Revolution n Modern city: after industrial revolution – Spreaded from West Europe: London, Paris – Spread from West-Europe: London, Paris before 1850 between 1850– 1900 after 1950 32 Source of data: censuses

Development of the Budapest agglomeration n n 1873: foundation of Budapest = Pest + Buda + Óbuda Early 20 th cent. : massive suburban development – 1900– 1907: build-up of tramlines to the suburban zone – 1908: coming up the thought of creature of Greater Budapest – 1937: legal sphere of action of the Council of Public Works spread also to the 22 suburban settlements 1 st January, 1950: foundation of Greater Budapest Agglomeration – 1970 s: 44 settlements – 1997: 78 settlements – Today: whole Pest county (≠ with Budapest agglomeration) 33

„Shadows” of agglomeration process n Inorganic, rapid, spontaneous urban development unwished negative byeffects – Slums – Overcrowding (back-to-back dwelling houses) – Lack of green areas – Pollution of environment (smog) – Lack of public utilities (sanitation) – Cholera epidemic – in 1832 London: 5000; Glasgow: 2800 victims – Crime – Early 19 th cent. , slums of Liverpool: 16 years life expectancy at birth 34

Reactions of urban planning on the crowding 1. 2. New urban planning and architectural acts, laws Reaction of the urban architecture of the modern era – 1933 Athens Charter – style of modern architecture – Le Corbusier (1887– 1965) – Spread upwards instead of dense horizontal built-up zones + more green area – Mistakes in socialist housing estates: time lag, without green areas ‚Havanna’ housing estate of the 1970 s in Budapest 35

Reactions of urban planning on the crowding 3. Foundation of new towns (most expensive) – West Europe (GB, F, S): „planned” suburbanization for the exoneration of the cities (London: Hatfield, Milton Keynes; Paris: Cergy. Pontoise), garden city campaign, New Lanark (Robert Owen) – Socialist countries: ‚socialist industrialized towns’ for the goal of forced industrialization Socialist new towns in East Central Europe 36

Suburbanization planned by urban planning: the garden city campaign n Garden city model of Ebenezer Howard (1848– 1928) – 1885. : Garden Cities and Town Planning Association – 1898. : „Garden Cities of 37 Tomorrow”

Main street of Welvyn, 32 km from London n Realized garden cities north from London: – Letchworth (1903) – Welwyn (1920) 38

Latter stages of the modern urban development: sub-, dez-, re- and postsuburbanization 39

2. Suburbanization / exurbanization n Anglo-Saxon: exurbanization Relative deconcentration n Outmigration of city dwellers n Its phases: n – Population number of total agglomeration increases – Population number of city decreases, that of suburban zone increases economic, social and urban structure on agglomeration transforms – Spontaneous – Directly towards the suburban zone – Early phase: outmigrants keep their urban workplace commuting – Late phase: number of workplaces (industrial and tertiary) decrease in the central city, increase in the suburban zone (dezurbanization? false statement) 40

Suburbanization / exurbanization n Suburbanization of population n Initial: public transport (local railways) radial diffusion n Developed countries: from 1920 s to 1970 s n Result: population increase in cities slows down, than decrease – Insufficient housing supply and environment in central city – Development of transportation infrastructure spatial separation of residential and working zones – Later: cars, public roads: diffusion among radiuses as well – Today: motorways radial diffusion again – Characteristics of East Central Europe: official restriction of moving only from 1970 s – But workplaces remain here n Suburban zone: mainly residential functions, sparselier 41 built-up, green areas

Later: moving out of industry and services too n Ways of industrial suburbanization n Suburbanization of services 1. moving out 2. greenfield investments – Its characteristics: high-tech industries (just in time) + suppliers – – Consumer-oriented branches with high interest for space Logistics Recreational activities (Disneyland) Office functions 42

3. Dezurbanization / counterurbanization Population change in Ruhr area n Anglo-Saxon: counterurbanization – Brian Berry (1976) n n (Somebody understands falsely the industrial and tertial suburbanization under the dezurbanization) Absolute deconcentration – Number of population workplaces of total agglomeration decreases (from the 43 early 1970 s

Population change in Ruhr area 3. Dezurbanization / counterurbanization n Initially USA, later West Europe: outmigration to more and more distance – Not only to the suburban zones, but also to the further countryside – Rapidly increasing population of some rural areas n 1970 s, developed countries: change of global economic paradigm – Modern urban and industrial regions became unattractive for both the residents and the companies – Rural areas, countryside became attractive (e. g. Sunbelt) n 2 -typed social groups – People using the ICTs (internet, wi-fi, skype, msn, e-mail, facebook) – People escaping to the nature from the urban technics (own generator, passive house) 44

Population change in Ruhr area 4. Reurbanization n Relative concentration n UK: Appearance of special ‚Urban Development Corporations’ for the urban renewal Spread of the enterprise form of public private partnership (PPP) n – Population number of total agglomeration decreases – Population number of city (especially the centre) increases again – – n Clearing of the area Configuration of the public utilities Configuration of the transportation network Selling the building plots, seeking for investors Gentrification – Yuppie: young urban professional – New social class strongly attracting to the traditional colourful 45 metropolitan milieu

Early 1980 s, Europe: 1 st big urban rehabilitation projects Population change in Ruhr area n Emblematic city: London n Later – Dock Quarter: Canary Wharf – – – Birmingham Berlin Hamburg Amsterdam: Waterfront Program New York: Harlem Budapest: Middle Ferencváros (Corvin Quarter) 46

5. Postsuburbanization n 1. Urban models of Cedric Price (2001) Middle Ages: model of soft-boiled egg – Towns with obvious borders (walls) 2. Industrial Revolution: model of fried egg 3. Post-modern city: model of scrambled eggs – Expanded cities: functions surrounded the CBD by concentric, sectoral way – Post-suburbanization: city-region with sub-centres – Central functions in the suburban zone – Universities, touristic attractions, international events, meetings (Gödöllő in the suburb of Budapest: Hungarian EU Presidency 2011) 47

Population change of the urban agglomeration Agglomerating Suburbanization Dezurbanization Reurbanization process Exurbanization Counterurb. Urban agglomeration Suburban zone City Concentration Deconcentration Concentration 48

Stages of urban development according to the change of population Stages of urban development Change of population City Suburban zone Urban agglomeration 1. Agglomerating process Increase Decrease increase Decrease 2. Suburbanization / Exurbanization Increase decrease Increase Decrease 3. Dezurbanization / Counterurbanization Decrease Increase decrease Increase 4. Reurbanization Decrease increase Decrease 49 Decrease

Brief summary of the stages of urban development n It affects smaller crowds in time n Leading, dominant continent n Dynamics of the process: n n – Agglomerating: more millions, reurbanization: a few thousands, post-suburbanization: no significant movement – Stages of moving inwards (agglomerating, reurbanization): initially in Europe – Stages of moving outwards (sub-, and dezurbanization): initially in North America – – – Initially agglomerating Followed by suburbanization Later could be followed by dez-, re and post-suburbanization More stages could coexistence parallel in cities Cities could be classify upon the dominant stage – (Whole countries are classified falsely) 50

Space-specific elements in the demographic process of the European cities

Annaul average population change of cities from 1950 s n n % n 1950 s: faster growth 1970 s, 1980 s, 1990 s: decreasing population After the turn of the Millennium: population increase again cities actually over half million residents 59 cities 52 Source: calculations based on the data of censuses and World Gazetteer (2007)

1950– 1960 significant increase (0. 5%<) moderate increase (0– 0. 5%) moderate decrease (– 0. 5– 0%) significant decrease (>– 0. 5%) n n Increase: almost everywhere Decrease: on the British Isles Source: calculations based on the data of censuses 53 and World Gazetteer (2007)

1960– 1970 significant increase (0. 5%<) moderate increase (0– 0. 5%) moderate decrease (– 0. 5– 0%) significant decrease (>– 0. 5%) n Decrease spreads to West Central Europe (the Netherlands, Germany, Austria) too Source: calculations based on the data of censuses 54 and World Gazetteer (2007)

1970– 1980 significant increase (0. 5%<) moderate increase (0– 0. 5%) moderate decrease (– 0. 5– 0%) significant decrease (>– 0. 5%) n n Decrease spreads further to Belgium, France, North Italy, North Europe Increase only on the lagging peripheries (Ireland, Mediterranean, socialist countries) Source: calculations based on the data of censuses 55 and World Gazetteer (2007)

1980– 1990 significant increase (0. 5%<) moderate increase (0– 0. 5%) moderate decrease (– 0. 5– 0%) significant decrease (>– 0. 5%) Line of Iron Curtain appears in city growth n Decrease: developed Europe (exp. North Europe: inner North– South migration n Increase: socialist Europe (exp. Budapest): more restricted mobility, lack of motorization and highways Source: calculations based on the data of censuses 56 and World Gazetteer (2007) n

1990– 2000 significant increase (0. 5%<) moderate increase (0– 0. 5%) moderate decrease (– 0. 5– 0%) significant decrease (>– 0. 5%) Pattern radically turned n Decrease: East Central Europe (besides suburbanization international migration too (e. g. Riga, Vilnius) n Increase again: somewhere in developed Europe (mainly London): reurbanization + guest workers Source: calculations based on the data of censuses 57 and World Gazetteer (2007) n

2000– 2007 significant increase (0. 5%<) moderate increase (0– 0. 5%) moderate decrease (– 0. 5– 0%) significant decrease (>– 0. 5%) n n Dominantly increase: developed Europe Dominantly decrease: East Central Europe Source: calculations based on the data of censuses 58 and World Gazetteer (2007)

Clusters of cities according to its population dinamics between 1950 – 2007 cluster number Cities 1 17 Amsterdam, Vienna, Berlin, Birmingham, Brussels, Dresden, Glasgow, Hague, Leeds, Leipzig, Lisbon, Liverpool, London, Lyon, Manchester, Rotterdam, Sheffield 2 13 Bremen, Dortmund, Duisburg, Düsseldorf, Essen, Frankfurt, Gothenburg, Hamburg, Hannover, Helsinki, Paris, Stockholm, Stuttgart 3 2 Dublin, Valencia 4 3 Sofia, Vilnius, Zaragoza 5 13 Budapest, Bucharest, Cologne, Cracow, Lodz, Malaga, Palermo, Poznan, Prague, Riga, Seville, Warsaw, Wroclaw 6 11 Athens, Barcelona, Genova, Copenhagen, Madrid, Marseille, Milano, Munich, Napoli, Rome, Torino 59 Source: calculations based on the data of censuses and World Gazetteer (2007)

Annual average population change of the clusters % 1950 s 1960 s 1970 s 1980 s 1990 s 2000 s 1 West Europe 2 West Central 3 South Europe 4 East Central Europe 6 Sofia, Vilnius, Zaragoza 60 clusters Source: calculations based on the data of censuses and World Gazetteer (2007)

Geographic location of the clusters stateborder EU-border cluster 1 cluster 2 cluster 3 cluster 4 cluster 5 cluster 6 61 Source: calculation based on the data of censuses and World Gazetteer (2007)