Is it beneficial for developing states to have 1 dominant city?

[rumoroso]

Only in small countries either in territory or population.

[Aaronj09]

It's not beneficial to the UK at all.

[1+1=3]

Originally Posted by Chrissib

Bratislava and Prague for example. According to the EU, their GDP/capita equals to those of many Western European cities.

That's because the product of companies is located for the purpose of GDP to location where the HQ is. So it's only virtual number. If you look at purchasing power both Prague and Bratislava are behind even former Eastern Germany.

[VECTROTALENZIS]

Originally Posted by 1+1=3

That's because the product of companies is located for the purpose of GDP to location where the HQ is. So it's only virtual number. If you look at purchasing power both Prague and Bratislava are behind even former Eastern Germany.

Czech republic is quite developed actually. Their GDP per capita PPP is close to Spain and Italy.
It's just Slovakia which just recently is about to join the developed club.

[castermaild55]

I think Tokyo is just too big.
tokyo's GDP is more than South korea's one.

Hyogo prefecture is as same as Hong kong's GDP
Kanagawa is Saudi Arabia
Fukuoka is Egypt　or Philipines
If the prefecture in Japan is compared with GDP of other countries, it couldn't say tokyo is 1 dominant city

[1+1=3]

Originally Posted by VECTROTALENZIS

Czech republic is quite developed actually. Their GDP per capita PPP is close to Spain and Italy.
It's just Slovakia which just recently is about to join the developed club.

GDP indicates only how many products are made in the country, it may correlates with actual wealth of the people but not absolutely. GNP (Gross national product) says much more, or the purchasing power of the people.

[Name user 1]

the best measurement for wealth is disposable income

[mintgum84]

I didnt know this concept of 1 core city was known as a 'Primate City'. Wiki says this:

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