Interaction between Land Use and Urban Transport

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Interaction between Land Use and Urban Transport"

Transcription

1 Interaction between Land Use and Urban Transport Addis Abeba (SW) 27 October 2012 Wendell Cox Demographia

2 OUTLINE Perspective The Evolving Urban Form Transport and the City Realities and Challenges

3 Los Angeles

4

5 Chongqing PERSPECTIVE & RESOURCES

6

7 RESOURCES DEMOGRAPHIA WORLD URBAN AREAS (9 TH EDITION 2013) THE EVOLVING URBAN FORM THE NEW GEOGRAPHY DEMOGRAPHIA INTERNATIONAL HOUSING AFFORDABILITY SURVEY (9 TH EDITION 2013) WEBSITE

8 History of Humanity ETHIOPIA: BIRTHPLACE OF LUCY Economist Steven Landsburg (2007): Modern humans first emerged about 100,000 years ago. For the next 99,800 years or so, nothing happened. Well, not quite nothing. There were wars, political intrigue, the invention or agriculture but none of that stuff had much effect on the quality of people s lives. Almost everyone lived on the modern equivalent of $400 to $600 a year, just above the subsistence level. True there were always aristocracies who lived far better, but numerically, they were quite insignificant.

9 GDP/Capita: Richest Nation: 2000$ Highest National GDPs: $45,000 $40,000 $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 650 BC TO PRESENT PRINCIPAL MODE From Maddison (OECD) Walking Mass Transit Auto Figure 9

10 World s Largest Cities (Urban Areas) 650 BC TO PRESENT Population (Millions) BC From Chandler 400BC 200BC 100AD Year: (Irregular Scale) Figure 10

11

12 Urban Areas: Densities from 17 th Century PARIS, LONDON, NEW YORK & LOS ANGELES 70,000 Population per Square Kilometer 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 Paris London New York Data Points 2000, 1950,1900, 1850, 1800 London 1700 (1680), Paris ,000 Los Angeles

13 Dubai THE PURPOSE OF CITIES

14 Why Cities (Urban Areas) Exist THE PURPOSE OF CITIES Urban areas exist because of the economic opportunities they provide. The purpose of urban areas is to improve the affluence of their residents

15 Purpose of Cities is Economic PEOPLE MOVE THERE FOR BETTER LIVES Shanghai

16 Why Cities Grow (Their Purpose) ALAIN BERTUAD, FORMER WORLD BANK PLANNER The raison d être of large cities is the increasing return to scale inherent to large labor markets. The cities economic efficiency requires, therefore, avoiding any spatial fragmentation of labor markets.

17 Global Scaling Research Double city size, 15% productivity improvement

18 Chennonceaux Aspiration

19 Shenyang THE EVOLVING URBAN FORM

20 City (Urban Organism) Metropolitan Area or Labor Market (Functional Expanse) Urban Area or Agglomeration (Physical Expanse)

21 Definition of Urban Terms PARIS METROPOLITAN AREA (AIRE URBAINE) PARIS URBAN AREA PARIS METROPOLITAN AREA Exurban Area (Rural)

22

23 Tokyo-Yokohama Jakarta Seoul-Incheon Delhi, DL-HR-UP Shanghai, SHG Manila New York, NY-NJ-CT Sao Paulo Karachi Mexico City Beijing, BJ Guangzhou-Foshan, GD Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto Mumbai, MAH Moscow Los Angeles, CA Cairo Dhaka Kolkota, WB Buenos Aires Largest Urban Areas in the World POPULATION: Millions

24 Largest 10 Year Historical Growth Rates WORLD METROPOLITAN REGIONS Beijing: Delhi: Dhaka: Jakarta: Karachi: Manila: Adjusted to 10 Year Rate Mumbai: Shanghai: Shenzhen: Tokyo: Population Change in Millions Figure 24

25

26 Dhaka, Bangladesh Chittagong, Bangladesh Most Dense World Urban Areas OVER 2.5 MILLION POPULATION: 2012 Mumbai, India Surat, India Hong Kong, China Ahmadabad, India Bogota, Colombia Medellin, Colombia Jaipur, India Metric Measure Karachi, Pakistan 0 7,500 15,000 22,500 30,000 37,500 45,000 Population per Square Kilometer Figure 26

27 Urban Area Average Population Densities DHAKA & SELECTED (METRIC MEASURE) Dhaka Mumbai Karachi Hong Kong Manila Seoul Jakarta Paris Vancouver Portland Atlanta Less Developed World More Developed World 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 Population per Square Kilometer Figure 27

28 Density Profiles at the Same Scale 7 METROPOLITAN AREAS: BERTAUD, 2003

29 Neighborhood Densities: Examples (WITHIN CITIES) 2,000,000 1,750,000 Population per KM 2 1,500,000 1,250,000 1,000, , , ,000 0 Kowloon Walled City 1990 Dhaka-Ward 28 Hong Kong: Tsueng Wan Centre New York: Highest 1910 Mumbai Marine Lines Paris 11 Arr.

30 Kowloon Walled City (Hong Kong)

31 Dhaka picture Slum (Dhaka)

32 Average Population Densities: 2012 URBAN AREAS OVER 2.5 MILLION: SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA Less Developed World More Developed World India Developing Africa China Japan Western Europe Canada Calculated from data in Demographia World Urban Areas 0 3,000 6,000 9,000 12,000 15,000 Average Population per Square Kilometer Figure 32

33 India Africa China Latin America Eastern Europe United Kingdom Japan Russia Western Europe New Zealand Canada Australia United States Urban Areas 500,000+: Density AVERAGE URBAN DENSITY (REGIONAL): ,000 6,000 9,000 12,000 15,000 Population per Square Kilometer

34 Coming to Terms with Global Urban Expansion

35 As Cities Become Larger They Become Less Dense

36 Addis Abeba Urban Area: Evolution

37

38 Cairo Urban Area: Evolution

39 Cairo Population by Governate: CAIRO METROPOLITAN AREA Population in Millions Kalyoubia Giza 5 Cairo Figure 39

40 Guangzhou-Foshan Dongguan Jiangmen Zhongshan Shenzhen Hong Kong Figure 40 Zhuhai Macau Pearl River Delta Urban Areas

41 Guangzhou-Foshan Pre-Lehman Brothers Population Losses : BY SHARE MARKET OF METROPOLITAN CLASSIFICATION GROWTH Outer Suburbs & Exurbs 38% Core Districts 23% Inner Suburbs 39% Figure 41

42 Population Increase in Millions Shanghai Population by Sector CHANGE: Source: Census of India Inner Core Outer Core Suburban Figure 42

43 Shanghai Population Density by Sector CHANGE: ,000 Population per Square KM 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10, Inner Core Outer Core Suburban Figure 43

44

45 Shenzhen Inner & Outer Area Population Population in Millions OUTER DISTRICTS 2 CORE DISTRICTS Figure 45

46 30 Jakarta: Population: CORE & SUBURBAN POPULATION Population in Millions Inner suburb data not available before 2000 SUBURBS & EXURBS OUTER SUBURBS & EXURBS INNER SUBURBS 5 JAKARTA (CORE) Figure 46

47 Pre-Lehman Jakarta: Growth Brothers by Sector Losses BY MARKET CLASSIFICATION Jakarta 16% Outer Suburbs & Exurbs 53% Inner Suburbs 31% Figure 47

48 Population Increase in Millions Delhi Urban Area Population by Sector CHANGE: Source: Census of India 0.0 Inner NCT Balance Outside NCT Figure 48

49 Population Increase in Millions Delhi Urban Area Population by Sector CHANGE: Source: Census of India 0.0 Inner NCT Balance Outside NCT Figure 49

50 Population by District: MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION 30,000,000 25,000,000 RAIGAHR 20,000,000 15,000,000 THANE 10,000,000 5,000,000 OUTER MUMBAI 0 INNER MUMBAI

51 16 Kolkata Urban Area: CORE & SUBURBAN POPULATION 14 Population in Millions SUBURBS 2 KOLKATA (CORE) Figure 51

52 Core & Suburban Population: MANILA URBAN AREA Population in Millions SUBURBS MANILA (CORE) Figure 52

53 Manila Pre-Lehman Urban Area Brothers Population Losses by Sector BY MARKET ESTIMATED CLASSIFICATION : 2010 Outer Suburbs 41% Manila 8% Inner Suburbs 51% Figure 53

54 Moscow Pre-Lehman Area Population Brothers Growth Losses by Sector BY MARKET CLASSIFICATION Suburban 27% Inner Moscow 3% Outer Moscow 70% Figure 54

55 Ho Chi Minh City Population by Sector Source: Derived from Asian Development Bank data PAST AND PROJECTED Outside Ho Chi Minh City Millions Urban Fringe Suburban Inner Core Outer Core

56 12 Sao Paulo Urban Area Population : CORE CITY AND SUBURBS 10 8 Millions Figure 56

57 Istanbul Urban Area: Figure 57

58 8 7 6 Istanbul: Population by Sector 1985, 2000 & Millions Core Inner Suburbs Outer Suburbs Exurbs Figure 58

59

60 In Situ Urbanisation

61 High Income World: 1960s-2000s NEARLY ALL URBAN GROWTH IN SUBURBS: 35+YEARS 114% 97% 94% 93% 92% Australia Canada United States Western Europe Japan Moscow

62 New York Urban Area Expansion POPULATION & URBAN LAND AREA % 180% 160% 140% 120% 100% 80% 60% Urban Land Area 40% 20% Population 0% Figure 62

63 New York Urban Area Population Growth Population in Millions SUBURBS CITY OF NEW YORK Figure 63

64 Seattle Metropolitan Region: ,500,000 4,000,000 POPULATION (COMBINED STATISTICAL AREA) 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 Data from US Census Bureau Exurban Outer Suburbs 1,000, ,000 City of Seattle Inner Suburbs Figure 64

65 Paris Urban Area Expansion

66 Paris Urban Area Population Growth Population in Millions SUBURBS 2 VILLE DE PARIS Figure 66

67 450,000 Barcelona: Growth By Sector , ,000 Population Growth 300, , , , , , ,000 50, ,000 0 City of Barcelona Balance of Urban Area Balance of Metropolitan Area Figure 67

68 25,000,000 Seoul Metropolitan Area: POPULATION BY PROVINCIAL LEVEL JURISDICTION 20,000,000 METROPOLITAN AREA 15,000,000 10,000,000 MUNICIPALITY OF SEOUL GYEONGGI 5,000,000 0 MUNICIPALITY OF INCHEON

69 Tokyo Core & Suburban Population ,000,000 25,000,000 20,000,000 Data: Japan Statistics Bureau 23-Wards (Core) Suburban Population 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000, Figure 69

70 % of Housing Detached Tokyo: Detached Housing Share: 2006 BY DISTANCE FROM CENTRAL TOKYO: % 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Data: Japan Statistics Bureau Detached Housing 44.3% (Region) 0% Distance from Central Tokyo (Kilometers) Figure 70

71 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 Hong Kong Population by Sector New Territories Kowloon Hong Kong Island Population by Sector 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000, Figure 71

72 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000, , , , ,000 Zürich Urban Area Population Growth CITY & SUBURBAN RINGS: Source: Statistik Stadt Zürich & FSO Suburban Rings 4-6 ( ) Suburban Rings 1-3 ( ) City Figure 72

73 Why Urban Expansion Happens Natural growth & migration Migrants are lower income Price of land on periphery is less Transport improvements

74 Population, Households & Employment 160% U.S. CHANGE: % Households 120% 100% Employment 80% 60% 40% Population 20% 0%

75 US: Age in 2000: Change by 2010 MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS: CORE & SUBURBAN 15.0% 10.0% Change in Population: % 0.0% -5.0% -10.0% -15.0% Historic Core Cities Suburbs Population in 2010 Compared to in 2000 Source: US Census Data -20.0%

76 US: Age in 2000: Change by 2010 MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS: CORE & SUBURBAN 0.0% -2.0% Historic Core Cities Suburbs Other Change in Population: % -6.0% -8.0% -10.0% -12.0% Population in 2010 Compared to in 2000 Source: US Census Data -14.0%

77 Largest Employment Centre in Canada Chicago? Pearson picture PEARSON AIRPORT AREA 355,000 Employees, 120 KM 2 (<10% Transit) Downtown Toronto: 325,000-6 KM 2 (67% Transit) Downtown Montreal 240,000-5 KM 2 (59% Transit)

78 Difficult for Public Transport To Compete With Auto To Such Locations Luis Berini Center (Peripheral Center)

79 Cairo TRANSPORT AND THE CITY

80 Democratization of Prosperity ASSOCIATION BETWEEN MOBILITY & AFFLUENCE Chicago Time is Money Reduced Minority Unemployment With Cars U. of California PRUD HOMME Mobility Improves Productivity U. Of Paris HARTGEN-FIELDS Mobility Improves Productivity

81 Daily Motorized Trips & GDP/Capita 1995 DATA $40,000 $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 1995$ (OECD) R 2 = 0.71 (1% Conf. Level) Africa Japan High-Income Asia Low Income Asia Western Europe Latin America Canada United States Eastern Europe Middle-Income Asia Australia-NZ Daily Trips

82 Mass Transit Service Densities MILLENNIUM CITIES DATABASE: 1995 Manila Hong Kong Dakar Singapore Zurich Vienna Tokyo Paris Toronto New York Vancouver Denver Calculated from data in Millennium Cities Database (UITP) Vehicle Kilometers per Square Kilometers Figure 82

83 Why are all these people in cars? Toronto

84 Transit: Strong Downtown: Weak Elsewhere SEATTLE URBAN AREA: 2000 EMPLOYMENT # OF TRANSIT COMMUTERS Elsewhere 87% Downtown 13% Elsewhere 43% Downtown 57%

85 Transit & Auto Access: 30 Minutes FROM CENTRAL VANCOUVER TRANSIT AUTO

86 Travel by Transit Takes Longer 6 MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS: CANADA One Way Work Trip Minutes All Car Transit

87

88 Perth Western Europe, United States & the West There is no practical mass transit for most trips

89 Capability of Transit: 45 Minute Job Access METROPOLITAN AREAS OVER 2,000,000: 2008 Atlanta Baltimore Boston Chicago Cincinnati Cleveland Dallas-Fort Worth Denver Detroit Houston Kansas City Los Angeles Miami Minneapolis-St. Paul New York Orlando Philadelphia Phoenix Pittsburgh Portland Riverside-San Bernardino Sacramento San Antonio San Diego San Francisco Seattle St. Louis Tampa-St. Petersburg Washington Accessible by Transit Not Accessible by Transit Average Transit Job Access: 5.6% (NYC: 9.8%) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

90 100% Public Transport: 7 US Largest Markets ACCESS TO TRANSIT STOPS/ACCESS TO JOBS 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 90.3% Public Transport within Walking Distance NY, CHI, LA, WDC, SF, BOS, PHI Average work trip travel time: Car alone: 24.0 minutes Public transport: 47.4 minutes 8.1% 45 Minute Job Access

91 Paris Suburbs: Cars Provide Quicker Travel FROM MAJOR SUBURBAN RAIL STATIONS: 1 HR TO JOBS Paris Jobs Accessible 84% Auto 16% Not Accessible Transit 59% Not Accessible Jobs Accessible 41%

92 Public Transport & Auto Market Shares Paris Metropolitan Area Car Public Transport

93 Transit s Last Kilometer Problem ELSEWHERE TRANSIT IS SLOWER FOR MORE TRIPS Annual Cost: More than gross annual income of metropolitan area An auto competitive system for Portland? 800 Meter Metro Grid Required

94

95 Ho Chi Minh City Area: Travel Share 2007 Source: Derived from Asian Development Bank data Transit 8% Automobile 1% Motorcycle 91%

96 Density & Roadway Travel ROAD VEHICLES: MAJOR METROPOLITAN COUNTIES Daily Vehicle Travel (KMs) per Square KM 450, , , , , , , ,000 50,000 R 2 = % confidence level 422 Counties in 51 Metropolitan Areas Over 1,000,000 y = x R² = ,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Population Density (Population per Square KM):

97 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 Higher Density Means More Traffic Congestion DENSITY & TRAFFIC VOLUMES: INTERNATIONAL Vehicle Hours/KM 2. R² = , Population/ KM 2 Hong Kong 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000

98 3.5 Density & Traffic Congestion UNITED STATES, CANADA & EUROPE Index USA Canada Europe 0.0 Average Urban Density Traffic Congestion (Excess Travel Time) Figure 98

99 Automobile Market Penetration 0.75 AUTOS PER HOUSEHOLD

100 Comparing Toronto & Dallas-Fort Worth URBAN AREAS COMPARED (2010 & 2011) Toronto Dallas-Ft. Worth Toronto/ DFW Population (Population Centre/Urban Area) 5,132,794 5,121, % Land Area (KM 2 ) 1,751 4, % Density 2,931 1, % One Way Work Trip % Reach Work in 30 Minutes 48% 59% -18.6% Median Multiple (House Price/Household Income % Transit Work Trip Share 21% 2% 935.0%

101 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Hong Kong & Atlanta: Motorized Travel MASS TRANSIT & AUTO MARKET SHARE Hong Kong Cars (& Motorcycles) Mass Transit Atlanta Figure 101

102 A well governed city delivers: Mobility & economic growth Lower cost of living (housing affordability) Shenzhen

103 REALITY & CHALLENGES (CONCLUSION) Kolkata

104 $50,000 $45,000 $40,000 $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 Manila Prosperity is not Guaranteed ECONOMIC POLICIES MATTER Japan United States Germany Argentina

105 Chennonceaux Aspiration

106 Bucharest Increasing Motorization

107 Evolution of Urban Growth Curitiba and Metropolitan Region YEAR POPULATION

108 ECONOMIC GROWTH: REQUIRED FOR SOCIAL COHESION