Where are largest cities in the world? 2015 edition

The world's biggest cities from above. Image: Getty.

The number of people who live in a city, as we may have mentioned before, is surprisingly hard to work out. That's partly because populations shift and change, unnoticed by demographers.


Mostly, though, it's because you quickly run into the fact that different authorities define their cities in entirely incompatible ways, rendering any attempt to compare them a bit like comparing apples with trucks. What you really need is a single source that follows a single set of rules: the results may not be perfect, but at least they'll be consistent.

That’s where Demographia comes in. The St. Louis-based consultancy was founded by the urban planner Wendell Cox (who, unusually for someone in that line of work, likes to write articles for conservative publications about the benefits of private car ownership). It also has a website that is, with the best will in the world, not massively easy on the eye.

But every year Demographia publishes something rather good: the World Urban Areas Report, a sort of bumper book of city population stats. You can check out the 11th edition here.

Here’s how it defines a city:

An urban area ("built-up urban area," urbanized area or urban agglomeration) is a continuously built up land mass of urban development that is within a labor market (metropolitan area or metropolitan region). An urban area contains no rural land... [It] is best thought of as the “urban footprint” – the lighted area that can be observed from an airplane (or satellite) on a clear night.

This year's edition of the World Urban Areas Report covers more than a thousand of the largest cities in the world, from Tokyo (pop. 37,000,000), right down to tiddlers like 850th-ranked Leicester (Pop. 534,000): all 1,009 cities, in fact, with a population of half a million of more.

Here are the top 10. See if you can spot any pattern.

 

Seeing it yet? Need a clue?

Okay, here's the same chart again. This time, we’ve coloured the cities by continent.

 

Yep.

Asia's dominance continues as you move down the league tables, too. Here's the top 20:

 

The world's largest continent, in fact, is home to 33 of the world's 50 largest cities, and 50 of the top 100. After that we got bored and stopped counting.

This isn't quite as extreme a result as it may appear: Asia, after all, is home to just shy of 60 per cent of the world's population. So the way in which the 2.1bn people who live in cities of half a million souls or more are distributed around the globe is largely a function of where people actually live. Look:

Comparing those two graphs, you can see that the Americas and Australia are unusually urbanised, Africa unusually under-urbanised, and Europe and Asia are pretty close to what you'd expect.

There are two other striking things about these league tables.

China rules

The first is the dominance of China, which takes 12 places in the top 50, and 22 of the top 100.

Again, this shouldn't be surprising – it's the world's most populous country, home to nearly a fifth of humanity – but nonetheless, it's striking how many of these megacities you almost certainly haven't heard of.

Where power lies

The other striking thing here is how far down the league tables many of the world's most powerful cities fall. Here's where some of the places that commonly make the “world city” league tables fall:

 

Size, it seems, isn't everything.

The data

Here, for completism's sake, is a chart showing the figures for all the city population charts above. You can find the full data set on Demographia's website, here.

Rank City Population
1 Tokyo-Yokohama 37,843,000
2 Jakarta 30,539,000
3 Delhi 24,998,000
4 Maniilla 24,123,000
5 Seoul-Incheon 23,480,000
6 Shanghai 23,416,000
7 Karachi 22,123,000
8 Beijing 21,009,000
9 New York 20,630,000
10 Guangzhou-Foshan 20,597,000
11 Sao Paulo 20,365,000
12 Mexico City 20,063,000
13 Mumbai 17,712,000
14 Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto 17,444,000
15 Moscow 16,170,000
16 Dhaka 15,669,000
17 Cairo 15,600,000
18 Los Angeles 15,058,000
19 Bangkok 14,998,000
20 Kolkata 14,667,000
25 Shenzhen 12,084,000
28 Tianjin 10,920,000
29 Paris 10,858,000
31 Chengdu 10,376,000
32 London 10,236,000
37 Chicago 9,156,000
41 Dongguan 8,442,000
43 Wuhan 7,509,000
45 Hangzhou 7,275,000
46 Hong Kong 7,246,000
47 Chongqing 7,217,000
50 Quanzhou 6,710,000
57 Nanjing 6,155,000
58 Shenyang 6,078,000
59 Xi'an 5,977,000
62 Qingdao 5,816,000
68 Singapore 5,624,000
72 Suzhou 5,246,000
76 Zhengzhou 4,942,000
77 Washington DC 4,889,000
79 Harbin 4,815,000
89 Boston 4,478,000
90 Xiamen 4,420,000
94 Dalian 4,183,000
97 Berlin 4,069,000
99 Fuzhou 3,962,000
101 Dubai 3,933,000
299 Amsterdam 1,624,000
832 Geneva 599,000
 
 
 
 

Covid-19 is highlighting cities' unequal access to green space

In the UK, Londoners are most likely to rely on their local park for green space, and have the best access to parks. (Leon Neal/Getty Images)

As coronavirus lockdowns ease, people are flooding back to parks – but not everyone has easy access to green space in their city.

Statistics from Google show that park attendance in countries across the globe has shot up as people have been allowed to move around their cities again.

This is especially true in urban areas, where densely populated neighbourhoods limit the size of private green space – meaning residents have to go to the park to get in touch with nature. Readers from England can use our interactive tool below to find out how much green space people have access to in their area, and how it compares to the rest of the country.

 

Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s announcement Monday that people are allowed to mingle in parks and gardens with groups of up to six people was partially following what people were doing already.

Data from mobile phones show people have been returning to parks across the UK, and also across Europe, as weather improves and lockdown eases.

People have been returning to parks across the world

Stay-at-home requirements were eased in Italy on 4 May, which led to a flood of people returning to parks.

France eased restrictions on 1 May, and the UK eased up slightly on 13 May, allowing people to sit down in public places so long as they remain socially distanced.

Other countries have seen park attendance rise without major easing of lockdown – including Canada, Spain, and the US (although states there have individual rules and some have eased restrictions).

In some countries, people never really stopped going to parks.

Authorities in the Netherlands and Germany were not as strict as other countries about their citizens visiting local parks during lockdown, while Sweden has famously been avoiding placing many restrictions on people’s daily lives.


There is a growing body of evidence to suggest that access to green space has major benefits for public health.

A recent study by researchers at the University of Exeter found that spending time in the garden is linked to similar benefits for health and wellbeing as living in wealthy areas.

People with access to a private garden also had higher psychological wellbeing, and those with an outdoor space such as a yard were more likely to meet physical activity guidelines than those without access to outdoor space. 

Separate UK research has found that living with a regular view of a green space provides health benefits worth £300 per person per year.

Access is not shared equally, however, which has important implications for equality under lockdown, and the spread of disease.

Statistics from the UK show that one in eight households has no garden, making access to parks more important.

There is a geographic inequality here. Londoners, who have the least access to private gardens, are most likely to rely on their local park for green space, and have the best access to parks. 

However the high population in the capital means that on the whole, green space per person is lower – an issue for people living in densely populated cities everywhere.

There is also an occupational inequality.

Those on low pay – including in what are statistically classed as “semi-skilled” and “unskilled” manual occupations, casual workers and those who are unemployed – are almost three times as likely as those in managerial, administrative, professional occupations to be without a garden, meaning they rely more heavily on their local park.

Britain’s parks and fields are also at significant risk of development, according to new research by the Fields in Trust charity, which shows the number of people living further than a 10-minute walk from a public park rising by 5% over the next five years. That loss of green spaces is likely to impact disadvantaged communities the most, the researchers say.

This is borne out by looking at the parts of the country that have private gardens.

The least deprived areas have the largest gardens

Though the relationship is not crystal clear, it shows at the top end: Those living in the least deprived areas have the largest private green space.

Although the risk of catching coronavirus is lower outdoors, spending time in parks among other people is undoubtedly more risky when it comes to transmitting or catching the virus than spending time in your own outdoor space. 

Access to green space is therefore another example – along with the ability to work from home and death rates – of how the burden of the pandemic has not been equally shouldered by all.

Michael Goodier is a data reporter at New Statesman Media Group, and Josh Rayman is a graphics and data visualisation developer at New Statesman Media Group.