With the aim of having countries adopt this definition for their own estimates, it would have to gain a very high approval rate. With such a wide array of national definitions, it will be a difficult task.
Countries have the right to define what they consider to be urban and rural settlements. Quality of living standards in urban centres is of course an important measure of wellbeing. One metric of living standards is the share of the urban population living in slum households.
A slum household is defined as a group of individuals living under the same roof lacking one or more of the following conditions: access to improved water, access to improved sanitation, sufficient living area, and durability of housing. The most recent global estimates suggest just under 1-in-3 people in urban areas lived in slum households.
The share of the urban population living in slums by country is shown in the chart. This data is available from the year Here we see that in the latest data, most countries across Asia and Latin America had between 10 to 30 percent of urban populations living in slum households some slightly higher.
Slum households were most prevalent across Sub-Saharan Africa; most had more than half of urban populations living in slum households, and some such as Sudan, South Sudan, and Central African Republic had more than 90 percent. We see that over time, for most countries, the share of the urban population living in slums has been falling.
From to , for example, the share of the urban population in slum households fell from:. How many people are living in urban slums? In the chart we see the total number of people living in urban slum households, and the urban population not living in slums. Here we see that despite continued population growth and urbanization rates across most countries, the absolute number of people living in urban slum households has also been falling across many countries.
A map of total number of people living in urban slum households by country is available to explore here. In the chart we show the percentage of the total population which live in agglomerations greater than one million people i.
These figures are available in absolute terms the total number of people living in large urban settings , found here. Here we see large differences across the world. Smaller city-based nations such as Kuwait, UAE, Japan, Puerto Rico and Israel tend to have high rates of large urban agglomeration: more than half live in large cities. Across much of the Americas, 40 to 50 percent live in large urban agglomerations.
Most other countries across Europe, Asia and Africa lie somewhere in the range of 10 to 40 percent. There are a few countries which have a very low prevalence of large cities — in Germany and the Netherlands, for example, less than 10 percent of the population live in cities over 1 million despite having large urbanisation rates. We can also look at this centralisation effect through the share of the urban population which lives in the single largest city.
This is shown in chart. Overall, this share tends to be higher in countries across Africa and Latin America; a share of 30 to 50 percent is common. Rates across Europe, Asia and North America are highly variable, ranging from over 40 percent to less than 10 percent. Many cities across the world have grown rapidly over the past 50 years in terms of total population. Beijing in , for example, had a population of 1. By this was more than 10 times higher, at more than 18 million.
Dhaka capital of Bangladesh increased from less than half a million in to almost 18 million in and projected to reach 31 million by Related chart — population density of cities. This chart shows the population density of cities across the world. In the map here we see how the share of populations living in urban areas has changed in recent curies. Data on urban shares dating back to are available only for select countries, with an estimated share at the global level.
Using the timeline on the map or by clicking on a country you can see how this share has changed over time. Here we see clearly again that urbanization has largely been confined to the past years. By , still over 90 percent of the global and country-level population lived in rural areas. Urbanization in the United States began to increase rapidly through the 19th century, reaching 40 percent by This rate of urbanization was, however, outpaced by Japan.
Urban shares in Japan were low until the 20th century. By , it had just surpassed 1-in This increased rapidly, reaching over half of the population by ; nearly 80 percent by , and surpassing the USA to over 90 percent today. China and India had not dissimilar rates of urbanization until the late s. Over this year period its urban share more than doubled to 58 percent.
The recency of urbanization becomes even more pronounced when we look at trends for countries and regions over even longer timescales — the past 10, years. This is shown in the visualization here, derived from the work of the History Database of the Global Environment. For most of our history humans lived in low-density, rural settings.
Related chart — urban land area over the past 10, years. This chart shows the change in urban land area dating back to 10, BC. The past 50 years in particular have seen a rapid increase in rates of urbanization across the world. Are these trends likely to continue?
The UN World Urbanization Prospects provides estimates of urban shares across the world through to These projections are shown in the chart — using the timeline you can watch this change over time. Across all countries urban shares are projected to increase in the coming decades, although at varied rates. In fact, by there are very few countries where rural shares are expected to be higher than urban.
Why, when most countries are expected to be majority urban , does the global total just over two-thirds? The other map shown here provides a snapshot overview of how the world is expected to continue to become more urbanized. It shows, for any given country, whether more people the majority live in urban or rural areas. In , it was predominantly high-income countries across Europe, the Americas, Australasia and Japan who were largely urban.
In the chart we see estimates of urban and rural populations in absolute terms, projected through to As of we see that there is around 7. By , global population is projected to increase to around 9. Using our timeline map of urbanization you can explore how countries are expected to transition from predominantly rural to urban in the coming decades. In the chart we show the relationship between the share of the population living in urban areas y-axis and average income gross domestic product per capita on the x-axis.
Here we see a strong relationship between urbanization and income: as countries get richer, they tend to become more urbanized. The link between urbanization and economic growth has been well-documented. Urbanization is complex, however there are many recognised benefits of urban settings when developed successfully including high-density of economic activity, shorter trade links, utilisation of human capital, shared infrastructure and division of labour.
Is there a causal feedback by which urbanization is also a predictor of future economic growth? The evidence for this is relatively weak — assessments of this effect suggest that countries with a higher initial urban population share do not achieve faster or slower economic growth than countries with a low initial urban population share.
There are many examples — across broad areas of development — which suggest that, on average, living standards are higher in urban populations than in rural. Some examples include:. The Nature Action Agenda initiative, within the Platform for Accelerating Nature-based Solutions, is an inclusive, multistakeholder movement catalysing economic action to halt biodiversity loss by Dynamic and flourishing natural ecosystems are the foundation for human wellbeing and prosperity.
To support these transitions, the Platform for Accelerating Nature-based Solutions has convened a community of Champions for Nature promoting the sustainable management of the planet for the good of the economy and society. The Nature Action Agenda also recently launched the Million Farmers initiative, which will drive the transition of the food and agriculture system towards a regenerative model, as well as the BiodiverCities by initiative to create an urban development model that is in harmony with nature.
Get in touch if you would like to collaborate on these efforts or join one of our communities. Each theme has a set of five indicator topics which, once assessed, provide a baseline on which targets can be set for each of the six themes. The UNI recognises that the ecological footprints of cities extend far beyond their boundaries, encompassing the immediate urban sphere but also the city-bioregional sphere and global spheres where cities have significant telecoupled impacts and dependencies.
When complete, the UNI will provide every city mayor or leader in the world with a cost-effective simple method for setting robust, transparent and science-based targets to protect and restore nature within and beyond their city. As baselines are assessed and targets are set, the IUCN Urban Alliance will also collate data from across the world in a central platform in order to track trends in urban ecosystem recovery, reporting these into global reporting frameworks such as the Sustainable Development Goals and the Global Biodiversity Framework as well as sharing learning through its extensive network of members and partners.
The Singapore Index comprises three components: native biodiversity in the city; ecosystem services provided by biodiversity and governance; and management of biodiversity. Those cities wishing to go delve into a deeper understanding of the management of biodiversity within their city jurisdiction will find the Singapore Index an invaluable practical tool.
The Singapore Index has been implemented by over 50 cities spread across the globe for the past 12 years. Those cities wishing to set science-based targets for natural capital assets within the city more broadly, and understand their telecoupled impacts beyond city boundaries, will find the UNI a similarly valuable tool. Undoubtedly however, implementing the two indices together, with the Singapore Index providing a level of detail on biodiversity to complement the UNI, is an approach most likely to generate the greatest insights to inform management actions.
Rolling out both the IUCN Urban Nature Index and Singapore Index is now urgent if we are to systematically transform the health of urban ecosystems and shift city footprints from nature-negative to nature-positive. Having robust indices is one thing, following them up so they unlock transformative change will require us to unleash the collaborative and innovative power that lies within our networks.
Suburban residents were more likely to choose access to good schools 12 per cent than residents elsewhere, reflecting the needs of residents who are more likely to have children than elsewhere, while proximity to friends and family 29 per cent was also a more commonly chosen reason for suburban residents.
The rural hinterlands around cities offer much more limited access to recreational amenities or jobs, but offer plentiful countryside and green space.
This was significantly more important for those aged over 55 than for any other age group, and was the most commonly selected reason why residents surveyed in rural hinterlands chose to live there 38 per cent.
This was traded off against the availability of public transport, which was one of the most commonly selected drawbacks of living in these places 16 per cent , when compared to those surveyed in city centres and suburbs.
Although elderly residents tend to have more limited access to a car, 8 this was an accepted trade-off for many residents. The first part of this research series, Urban Demographics: Where people live and work, showed that different parts of cities are home to different types of people, at different stages of their lives.
In , city centres, especially in large cities, tended to be made up of students and single young professionals. Suburbs tended to be home to over 30s with children. And in rural hinterlands, a much larger share of residents were over Suburbs provide the space and the houses needed by families. And rural hinterlands offer the access to countryside and green spaces that over 55s have such a strong preference for.
But this movement across the city region, between city centres, suburbs and hinterlands, crosses the local authority boundaries in which housing, transport and public services are typically planned.
Recognising how these patterns work across a city region require local authorities to cooperate at a strategic, city-regional level to deliver services in the places where people need them. You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. For information about our privacy practices, please visit our privacy policy. We use MailChimp as our marketing platform. By clicking to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to MailChimp for processing.
Learn more about MailChimp's privacy practices here.
0コメント