View Full Version : Primate Cities


mic
September 14th, 2004, 04:15 PM
The Law of the Primate City and the Rank-Size Rule
Dateline: 09/20/04

A country's leading city is always disproportionately large and exceptionally expressive of national capacity and feeling. The primate city is commonly at least twice as large as the next largest city and more than twice as significant. - Mark Jefferson, 1939

Geographer Mark Jefferson developed the law of the primate city to explain the phenomenon of huge cities that capture such a large proportion of a country's population as well as its economic activity. These primate cities are often, but not always, the capital cities of a country. An excellent example of a primate city is Paris, which truly represents and serves as the focus of France.
They dominate the country in influence and are the national focal-point. Their sheer size and activity becomes a strong pull factor, bringing additional residents to the city and causing the primate city to become even larger and more disproportional to smaller cities in the country. However, not every country has a primate city, as you'll see from the list below.

Some scholars define a primate city as one that is larger than the combined populations of the second and third ranked cities in a country. This definition does not represent true primacy, however, as the size of the first ranked city is not disproportionate to the second.

The law can be applied to smaller regions as well. For example, California's primate city is Los Angeles, with a metropolitan area population of 14.5 million, which is more than double the San Francisco metropolitan area of 6.3 million. Even counties can be examined with regard to the Law of the Primate City.

Examples of Countries With Primate Cities


Paris (2.2 million) is definitely the focus of France while Marseilles has a population of 800,000.
Similarly, the United Kingdom has London as its primate city (6.9 million) while the second largest city, Birmingham, is home to a mere one million people.
Mexico City, Mexico (9.8 million in the city; 16.6 million in the metropolitan area) outshines Guadalajara (1.7 million).
A huge dichotomy exists between Bangkok (5.9 million) and Thailand's second city, Nakhon Ratchasima (278,000).
Examples of Countries that Lack Primate Cities

India's most populous city is Mumbai (formerly Bombay) with 9.9 million; second is Dehli with 7 million, third is Kolkata (formerly Calcutta) with 4.4 million, and fourth is Chennai (formerly Madras) with 3.8 million.
China, Canada, Australia, and Brazil are additional examples of non-primate-city countries.
Utilizing the metropolitan area population of urban areas in the United States, we find that the U.S. lacks a true primate city. With the New York City metropolitan area population at approximately 20.1 million, second ranked Los Angeles at 15.8 million, and even third ranked Chicago at 8.8 million, America lacks a primate city.

Rank-Size Rule
In 1949, George Zipf devised his theory of rank-size rule to explain the size cities in a country. He explained that the second and subsequently smaller cities should represent a proportion of the largest city. For example, if the largest city in a country contained one million citizens, Zipf stated that the second city would contain 1/2 as many as the first, or 500,000. The third would contain 1/3 or 333,333, the fourth would house 1/4 or 250,000, and so on, with the rank of the city representing the denominator in the fraction.

While some countries' urban hierarchy somewhat fits into Zipf's scheme, later geographers argued that his model should be seen as a probability model and that deviations are to be expected.

http://geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa092099.htm

Randwicked
September 14th, 2004, 04:22 PM
Randwicked's maxim:

Federal nations don't have one domineering or primate city, because of their federal nature. examples: USA, Australia, Germany, Switzerland, Canada.

Unitary nations on the other hand will have a primate city. examples: France, Ireland, Denmark, UK, Russia.

This rule does not apply to Southern or Developing nations. Mexico is federal but has a strong primate city.

I pulled this out of my arse in under 3 minutes!

ParraMan
September 14th, 2004, 10:26 PM
Countries with (IMHO) primate cities:

Japan- Tokyo population-wise is between two and three times as large as Osaka-Kobe, and its political/economic influence of an even greater multiple

Russia- Moscow pop two times as large as St Peterburg, prob ten times as much economic/political influence

Argentina- Buenos Aires, 6 or 7 times as large as Rosario (or Cordoba)

France- Paris 4 or 5 times the size of Lyon and Marseille

New Zealand- Auckland 3 times as big as other cities

Uruguay- Montevideo 10 times as big as others

And then some of the others I can think of-

Africa:
Angola-Luanda, Burkina Faso- Ouagadougou, Congo- Kinshasa, Cote d'Ivoire- Abidjan, Ethiopia- Addis Ababa, Kenya- Nairobi, Nigeria- Lagos, Senegal- Dakar, Tanzania- Dar Es Salaam,

Asia:
Afghanistan- Kabul, Bangladesh- Dhaka, Brunei- Bandar Seri Begawan, Cambodia/Kampuchea- Phnomh Penh, Indonesia- Jakarta, Lebanon- Beirut, Malaysia- KL, Myanmar- Yangon, North Korea- Pyongyang, Pakistan- Karachi, Philippines- Manila, Singapore!!! South Korea- Seoul, Thailand- Bangkok, etc

Europe:
Austria- Vienna, Belarus- Minsk, Bulgaria- Sofia, Czech Republic- Prague, Denmark- Copenhagen, Greece- Athens, Ireland- Dublin, Lithuania- Vilnius, Monaco!!! Norway- Oslo, Romania- Bucharest, Turkey- Istanbul, UK- London

Americas:
Chile- Santiago, Cuba- Habana, Dominican Republic- Santo Domingo, Guatemala- Guatemala, Mexico- Mexico, Peru- Lima, Suriname- Paramaribo etc

I would say that Toronto is Canada's primate city in terms of both population an influence

Notable countries (either with big population or economy) without primate cities- Australia, Belgium, Brazil, China, Germany, India, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Spain, South Africa, Taiwan, USA, Ukraine, Vietnam

jellyman
September 14th, 2004, 11:40 PM
perhaps Aussie tall poppy syndrome helps keep Sydney in check. Enough people want to side with the 'underdog' to keep Melbourne etc in touch.

AcesHigh
September 15th, 2004, 12:39 AM
the only countries I know with PRIMATE cities are the ones in Planet of the Apes... :)

Jimmy James
September 15th, 2004, 01:14 PM
:lol:

Unfortunately Australia's states can be seen to have Primate cities, although Queensland may be the ultimate detractor to this theory if the GC population keeps up.

I think this is more due to the fact that the prescence of Government in the city has created a lot of employment and therefore population growth - people go where the jobs are.

BruceAlmighty
September 15th, 2004, 01:15 PM
As a nation Australia lacks a primate city but looking at the individual states it can be said that the state capitals are extremely primate in relation to the secondary cities. ie: Perth 1.4 million / Bunbury 25000 (56x difference). Melbourne 3.3 million / Geelong 160000 (21 x). Adelaide 1.1 million / Port Augusta 15000 (73 x).

Jimmy James
September 15th, 2004, 01:37 PM
Only Tasmania holds water with the half-size Primate Theory >> Hobart 180000/ Launceston 100000 (Almost 2x - well 1.8x to be precise!)

Qld comes close if you count the municipal areas: Brisbane 900000/ Gold Coast 400000, Caboolture & Redland Bay 200000 ea / Logan, Ipswich, Caloundra, Cairns, Toowoomba and Townsville (all around 100000 ea)

tayser
September 15th, 2004, 01:45 PM
Where would you fit the three big ones of The Netherlands?

by themselves they're not 'primate' cities, but (I've forgotten the dutch word) they're all grouped together in one big metro (Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Den Haag [The Hague]) ???

Toronto as a primate is stretching it a bit - 5.5 million to Montréal's 3.6 million, Toronto however is growing at double the rate of Montréal though (TO: ~100k p/a, MTL: ~50k p/a afaik) - and this is probably the primary characteristic where both of Australia's big two and Canada's big two differ - Melbourne and Sydney both grow around 40-50k p/a.

BruceAlmighty
September 15th, 2004, 05:05 PM
Where would you fit the three big ones of The Netherlands?

by themselves they're not 'primate' cities, but (I've forgotten the dutch word) they're all grouped together in one big metro (Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Den Haag [The Hague]) ???

''De Randstad'' (Rim city). It holds about 7 million of the population. The Randstad is in the form of a (unclosed) ring with a large rural area (the green heart) in its middle. The city network runs around the borders of the green heart. Although the cities of the Randstad have a high connectivity, the cities (in many cases atleast) are physically clearly defined from one another. Between Rotterdam and Utrecht, Amsterdam and Utrecht there are large areas of rural land. The Hague and Rotterdam areas and Amsterdam / Almere/ Hilversum on the other hand are phycally very closely knit.