World's biggest cities merging into mega-regions

[Anderson Geimz]

Originally Posted by pesto

It's true that there is a consistency in terms of wealth level and a growing cultural bond in this area (as opposed to the more eastern and southern parts of the EU). Geographically, an argument can be made that Brussels links to Amsterdam and (maybe) this links to the Ruhr and (maybe) this links to Southern Germany and (maybe) this links to Zurich; but Josham’s map deletes Munich, which makes this tougher. If the argument is that over time these links are likely to grow and this will become a somewhat homogeneous culture, then I would certainly hope so, assuming some local traditions are kept.

And now what do culture and local traditions have to do with anything?!

Let me repeat for you here loud and clear the definition of a megalopolis:

A megalopolis (sometimes called a megapolis or megaregion) is typically defined as a chain of roughly adjacent metropolitan areas.
or
A megalopolis, also known as a megaregion, is a clustered network of cities with a population of about 10 million or more.

But why include the UK and the trans-Alpine Mediterranean countries when there is such an obvious cultural and physical divide? London links fairly easily to Paris (which is well outside the banana peel) but the links to Amsterdam and the Ruhr are thinner. Josham’s map removes Barcelona/Costa Brava but still the Italian Riviera seems linked by German tourists but little else unless you are a serious mountain climber.

Why include the UK or Italy? Because not to do so is to dismiss the connections that exist that are equally strong to the connections between other parts of the Blue Banana. Connections between Zurich and Milan are equally strong to the connections between Zurich and Munich. Some of Europe's most important connections run across the Alps and the Channel.
Not to include them is also to dismiss the original definition of the Blue Banana. I don't really have a problem with that because things change over time, but connections have become stronger and if anything needs to be changed about the concept of the Blue Banana it is the addition of more cities (most importantly Paris!)

Currencies change (the UK and Switzerland), politics change, intellectual traditions change, and of course, Switzerland is not an EU member at all.

Fuck all to do with megalopoli...

And as long as I’m annoying people

You see, you are deliberatly annoying people and then you whine about how others are confrontational.

[aliveinchains]

Originally Posted by Skyline_FFM

Maybe, but when you look at Tokyo, Seoul, NYC or LA, Mexico City, Sao Paulo or Buenos Aires you really have the feeling of a megalopolis, where a huge number of cities just merged into an enormous urban area, economically and demographically and where you will see a merging of urban areas with urban areas in future. There is no way the Blue Banana will ever be such a closely integrated, merged and urban region as those others. The core of the Blue Banana, the Rhein-Ruhr Area is shrinking, Northern Italy may hold the status quo, but it is more likely to shrink demographically either. Not to forget the Channel and the Alps which are enormous obstacles as well as enormous deviders inside the Blue Banana.

So you claim that a real mega-region must include dense areas of “temporary” small wooden houses with uncontrolled eclectic cables net (Tokyo), or vast areas of huge skyscrapers and block of flats (Chinese metropolis) or there must be a mix of slums, skyscrapers (India, Brazil)…

We are talking about a mega-region consisted of big 10-12 million cities /metropolises ( London, Paris) a little bit smaller with 5-7m. inhabitants (Frankfurt am Main , Milan Metro, Amsterdam-Rotterdam ) and plenty of medium and small sized towns around that have a good connection with a bigger ones. That all look more like an archipelago net not like a constant urban area. What’s wrong with it? In my opinion all fast railway lines, regional lines, motorways, expressways, tunnels, public transport system etc and its accessibility of ordinary people play more important role.

BTW. I still do not understand why BB does not include Paris? Look at its transport connections with London or Brussels, and its role the city plays in areas of economy and culture. The Rein-Ruhr area is shrinking. But London, Paris, Lombardy Region are growing as far as the population is concerned. In a future BB should be enlarged with Lyon-Marseille area..the region which is supposed to grow demographically much better than Rein-Ruhr.

[julesstoop]

Originally Posted by pesto

julesstoop: thanks; this was the best response to my question. Also, you seem less confrontational and less emotional; you must be Dutch.

Glad to be of service!
I don't think emotion is of any help in this type of discussion. And I'm happy to see your responses are well self-moderated either.

[earthJoker]

Originally Posted by aliveinchains

BTW. I still do not understand why BB does not include Paris? Look at its transport connections with London or Brussels, and its role the city plays in areas of economy and culture. The Rein-Ruhr area is shrinking. But London, Paris, Lombardy Region are growing as far as the population is concerned. In a future BB should be enlarged with Lyon-Marseille area..the region which is supposed to grow demographically much better than Rein-Ruhr.

He(Roger Brunet*) saw the Blue Banana as the development of historical precedents, e.g. known trade routes, or as the consequence of the accumulation of industrial capital. France, in his view, lost its links to the corridor as a result of its persecution of minorities (viz. the Huguenots) and excessive centralisation in Paris. In his analysis, Brunet artificially disconsidered the French conurbations, which are particularly narrowly concentrated around Paris, in order to persuade French authorities of the necessity of greater integration of business into the centre of Europe.

To a great deal it was intentional, but we also have to see that the connection of Paris has improved since 1989. LGV Nord has been opened in 1993 and LGV Est in 2009.

[George W. Bush]

Originally Posted by Isek

We are not talking about feelings. We try to find objective methods to describe or define a mega-region. Also the thread is not about mono-centric mega-cities like NYC or SaoPaulo ect. A mega-region is more than a 30 km x 30 km extremely dense built up area.
[...]
Of course, the Blue Banana spreads over more than 1000 km! How to compare this to Manhattan or SaoPaulo? Better compare it to the BosWash or Pearl River Delta ect.
That there is probably 100 km of lower populated land is maybe no criteria for a mega region. And probably there are 3 mega-regions like South England, The Rhine and North Italy?

I travel twice weekly across the whole of the so called "Ruhrstadt" and I never ever had the impression of crossing a closed urban area. Every city in the "Ruhrstadt" is clearly separated by stretches of farmland which look nowhere like being part of a city, not even like suburbia. The "Ruhrstadt" is a rather artificial creation of geographers, nothing you really would perceive as a city.

[Anderson Geimz]

Well, anyone with internet access and who can type the words "Google" and "map" can easily debunk that claim...

http://www.wikimapia.org/#lat=51.467...1&z=12&l=0&m=b

Next please!

(oh and btw this thread is about Megalopoli not urban areas)

[Pfeuffer]

[George W. Bush]

Originally Posted by Anderson Geimz

Well, anyone with internet access and who can type the words "Google" and "map" can easily debunk that claim...

http://www.wikimapia.org/#lat=51.467...1&z=12&l=0&m=b

Next please!

(oh and btw this thread is about Megalopoli not urban areas)

Not to annoy you, but the map confirms exactly what I said (rather unsurprisingly to me, as I have travelled through that area literally more than a thousand times ). The cluster Essen-Mühlheim-Bottrop is rather dense, but its overall extension is only a fraction of that of the city of Berlin. So if you want to call such a geographic configuration a megalopolis, then that's up to you. I have no problem with that. I just think it to be rather pointless.

[Anderson Geimz]

Originally Posted by George W. Bush

Not to annoy you, but the map confirms exactly what I said (rather unsurprisingly to me, as I have travelled through that area literally more than a thousand times ). The cluster Essen-Mühlheim-Bottrop is rather dense, but its overall extension is only a fraction of that of the city of Berlin. So if you want to call such a geographic configuration a megalopolis, then that's up to you. I have no problem with that. I just think it to be rather pointless.

Sigh...

The Ruhr conurbation is not a megalopolis, it's a (wait for it...) conurbation!!

Geesh, look up your definitions, then join a thread, I'm getting sick of this.

And the map doesn't confirm what you said, because you made the idiotic statement that it is not a continous urban area, which it clearly is...

[George W. Bush]

I suggest to you to simply pay a visit to the area, to open your eyes and then you'll understand what I mean.

I'm not into definition and terminological wars. I just wanted to stress that my own senses perceive nothing like a "continuous urban area". But then it is perfectly possible that your understanding of "urban area" is different from mine. Rhine-Ruhr is a cluster of several medium sized cities. There are some parts of Rhine-Ruhr which come fairly close to being continuously urban, but by no means all of it.

In any case I don't see the relationship to the thread's title "world's biggest cities merging into mega-regions", as the only city in Germany barely qualifying as belonging to the group of the world's biggest cities is Berlin, and being an island in the middle of nowhere it's certainly not merging with anything else.

[Anderson Geimz]

Originally Posted by George W. Bush

I suggest to you to simply pay a visit to the area, to open your eyes and then you'll understand what I mean.

I probably live closer to it than you do so...

I'm not into definition and terminological wars.

That's because you are clueless about the terminology. Even in this very post you are yet again getting everything mixed up...

I just wanted to stress that my own senses perceive nothing like a "continuous urban area". But then it is perfectly possible that your understanding of "urban area" is different from mine.

Your own senses are wrong as anyone who can click that link can confirm.
Maybe your definition of urban area is WAY different of what it actually is.
The Ruhr area is a conurbation/continous urban area without any doubt. To even debate this is ludicrous.

Rhine-Ruhr is a cluster of several medium sized cities. There are some parts of Rhine-Ruhr which come fairly close to being continuously urban, but by no means all of it.

Why are you talking about Rhine-Ruhr again? We were talking about the Ruhr area. See you can't even follow such a small and simple thing.
Not that Rhine-Ruhr could not easily be considered a single urban area if we use international/American standards (instead of more restrictive German/European ones)

In any case I don't see the relationship to the thread's title "world's biggest cities merging into mega-regions", as the only city in Germany barely qualifying as belonging to the group of the world's biggest cities is Berlin, and being an island in the middle of nowhere it's certainly not merging with anything else.

LOL! Cluelessness all over. Don't even know where to begin with this one. You don't know what a megaregion is, you can't quantify "biggest", do you even know what a city is?

[George W. Bush]

Originally Posted by Isek

Dude, walk up to the TV-towers of Berlin or Munich and you think you are in the middle of a green park. Even more extrem are cities in England or the US. Lots of green everywhere. Just compare:

"Less dense" built up part of the Ruhr-valley

http://maps.google.de/?ie=UTF8&ll=51...17355&t=h&z=13

I really can not see big differences! It's green and there is no continuous dense built up area. That is also one characteristic of large cities in the western hemisphere. What do we discuss??

I certainly would never confuse Berlin's center with any part of the Ruhrstadt.

[George W. Bush]

Originally Posted by Anderson Geimz

LOL! Cluelessness all over. Don't even know where to begin with this one. You don't know what a megaregion is, you can't quantify "biggest", do you even know what a city is?

Ok, Ruhrstadt is one of the world's biggest cities and it is merging with some other of the world's biggest cities (whichever) to form a mega-region (even though Ruhrstadt's population is is on the decline, but that doesn't matter), exactly as the thread title says. Are you happy now?

[Isek]

Originally Posted by George W. Bush

Not to annoy you, but the map confirms exactly what I said (rather unsurprisingly to me, as I have travelled through that area literally more than a thousand times ). The cluster Essen-Mühlheim-Bottrop is rather dense, but its overall extension is only a fraction of that of the city of Berlin. So if you want to call such a geographic configuration a megalopolis, then that's up to you. I have no problem with that. I just think it to be rather pointless.

The same feeling of driving you get if you take e.g.

http://maps.google.de/maps?f=d&sourc...93512&t=h&z=11

http://maps.google.de/maps?f=d&sourc...87024&t=h&z=10

aaaand!

http://maps.google.de/maps?f=d&sourc...87024&t=h&z=10


What's the point? Populated places in northern Europe and the US do have the characteristic that they are very very vast and not dense built up.

[Isek]

Originally Posted by George W. Bush

I certainly would never confuse Berlin's center with any part of the Ruhrstadt.

Berlin is very urban within lets say 15 km x 15 km. It is monocentric (also it has 2 or three urban cores within that 15 km x 15 km). If you combine all dense built up centers of the Ruhr cities i would not be surprised if you get the same area of dense urban space. The rest of Berlin is quite compareable to quarters in the Ruhr area, Cologne, Hamburg, London ect. pp

[George W. Bush]

I think all this talk of "megalopolises" is some nonsensical excercise in hunting for superlatives. The bigger, the better, it seems. Some may feel a chill running down their spine when they think they live in a "megalopolis". After all telling somebody one is a proud inhabitant of the megalopolis Rhein-Ruhr sounds a bit more impressive than saying one lives in groovy "Jelsenkirschen".

What about a gigalopolis? Any suggestions?

[George W. Bush]

Originally Posted by Isek

Berlin is very urban within lets say 15 km x 15 km. It is monocentric (also it has 2 or three urban cores within that 15 km x 15 km). If you combine all dense built up centers of the Ruhr cities i would not be surprised if you get the same area of dense urban space. The rest of Berlin is quite compareable to quarters in the Ruhr area, Cologne, Hamburg, London ect. pp

Well, yes ... I'm not debating that the "Ruhrstadt" as a whole has more urban area than Berlin -- I simply don't know it, but it's quite possible, as it has more inhabitants than Berlin. What I am having a hard time to accept is seeing all of the "Ruhrstadt", which extends from Duisburg to Dortmund, as a closed conurbation. It may be the closest approximation to a large scale conurbation you'll find in all of Germany, but it doesn't reach that level and will not do so in the future to come, as the region's population is declining.

[Anderson Geimz]

Originally Posted by George W. Bush

I think all this talk of "megalopolises" is some nonsensical excercise in hunting for superlatives. The bigger, the better, it seems. Some may feel a chill running down their spine when they think they live in a "megalopolis". After all telling somebody one is a proud inhabitant of the megalopolis Rhein-Ruhr sounds a bit more impressive than saying one lives in groovy "Jelsenkirschen".

What about a gigalopolis? Any suggestions?

My suggestion is that people like you stay out of threads like these and let the grown ups talk amongst themselves.

The concept of megapoli and the Blue Banana being one has been an accepted fact among geographers/economists/historians/etc for over 20 years and has nothing to do with "the bigger the better"...

And for the last time...Rhein-Ruhr is not a megalopolis! You STILL can't seem to get your definitions right!

[Anderson Geimz]

Originally Posted by George W. Bush

Well, yes ... I'm not debating that the "Ruhrstadt" as a whole has more urban area than Berlin -- I simply don't know it, but it's quite possible, as it has more inhabitants than Berlin. What I am having a hard time to accept is seeing all of the "Ruhrstadt", which extends from Duisburg to Dortmund, as a closed conurbation. It may be the closest approximation to a large scale conurbation you'll find in all of Germany, but it doesn't reach that level and will not do so in the future to come, as the region's population is declining.

Anyone with eyes can see it is...Are you deliberatly trying to annoy or are you really that stupid? Are you going to claim next the sky is pink instead of blue?

[George W. Bush]

Originally Posted by Anderson Geimz

My suggestion is that people like you stay out of threads like these and let the grown ups talk amongst themselves.

Considering your "grown-up" discussion style, it's likely you'll always end talking to yourself, no matter which thread.

The concept of megapoli and the Blue Banana being one has been an accepted fact among geographers/economists/historians/etc for over 20 years and has nothing to do with "the bigger the better"...

And for the last time...Rhein-Ruhr is not a megalopolis! You STILL can't seem to get your definitions right!

Maybe, but then I'm in good company. According to this article Rhine-Ruhr is a megacity including the "Ruhr Area megalopolis". Go figure!