Week 13 Reflection
Population & U
rban G eography
Part 1: Population
Population Term s
• P
o p
u latio
n o
f Latin A
m e
rica d id
n o
t re tu
rn to
p re-
co lo
n ial n
u m
b e
rs (afte r d
e m
o grap
h ic co
llap se
) u n
til 1
9 0
0 (6
0 M
) –
P o
p u
la tio
n in
2 0
1 3
w a
s 6 0
6 M
; p o
p u
la tio
n is e
x p
e c te
d to
b
e 7
8 0
M b
y 2
0 5
0
– A
t th e
p re
se n
t ra te
o f g
ro w
th th
e p
o p
u la
tio n
o f L
a tin
A
m e
ric a
w o
u ld
d o
u b
le in
5 4
y e
a rs (d
o u
b lin
g tim
e )
• But the population grow
th rate is actually declining overall – as it
does, the doubling tim e w
ill increase, m eaning it w
ill take longer for the population to double
• Population grow
th can often be tied to urbanization – children
cost m ore to raise in cities, and they are often still an econom
ic asset in rural areas
– Rural to urban m
igration is the m ajor population trend today
Factors Related to Population Change •
R e
a so
n s fo
r h a
v in
g m
o re
c h
ild re
n –
Econom ic value –
labor, especially in rural areas –
Social security – take care of you w
hen your old –
H ealth issues –
birth rates tend to be higher in areas w ith higher infant
m ortality rates and less reproductive health care
– Social function –
prestige in fulfilling idealized gender roles (for both m
en and w om
en) •
R e
a so
n s fo
r h a
v in
g fe
w e
r c h
ild re
n –
W om
en’s opportunities* – educational and occupational
opportunities for w om
en tend to lim it the num
ber of children w om
en have
• This is typically the num
ber one factor influencing population grow th
rates –
Econom ic costs –
particularly in urbanized and industrialized places, children becom
e an econom ic burden rather than asset
– Im
proved health care – low
er infant m ortality; im
proved reproductive health care
Population & U
rban G eography
Part 2: U rbanization
A ztec capital: Tenochtitlan
D evelopm
ent of Cities •
M a
jo r c
itie s e
x iste
d a
t tim e
o f c
o n
q u
e st
– E
X : T
e n
o c h
titla n
– a
c ity
la rg
e r th
a n
th e
la rg
e st E
u ro
p e
a n
c ity
a
t th e
tim e
• C
u ltu
ra l im
p o
rta n
c e
o f u
rb a
n ism
in h
e rite
d fro
m th
e R
o m
a n
e
m p
ire –
e sta
b lish
e d
in th
e A
m e
ric a
s a s p
a rt o
f th e
C o
n q
u e
st
• U
rb a
n p
rio rity
le d
to a
p e
rsiste n
t p a
tte rn
o f u
n d
e rd
e v
e lo
p m
e n
t
– R
u ra
l e x iste
d to
se rv
e th
e u
rb a
n —
se rfd
o m
o f p
e a
sa n
try to
u
rb a
n a
risto c ra
c y
• C
ity c
o n
tro lle
d e
x te
n d
e d
ru ra
l a re
a a
ro u
n d
th e
m in
ste a
d
o f h
a v
in g
a “
c ity
lim it”
lik e
N o
rth A
m e
ric a
n c
itie s
– C
itie s e
x iste
d in
v irtu
a l iso
la tio
n –
d ista
n c e
c o
m b
in e
d w
ith
to p
o g
ra p
h y
– th
e re
fo re
, lim ite
d p
o litic
a l a
n d
e c o
n o
m ic
in
te g
ra tio
n
D evelopm
ent of Cities •
D e
v e
lo p
m e
n t o
f c o
lo n
ia l c
itie s c
a n
b e
c la
ssifie d
b y
th e
ir fu n
c tio
n –
A gricultural cities
– established am
idst indigenous populations— purpose of
supplying food to region (Cuzco, Bogotá) –
M ining cities
– purpose w
as provision of laborers & supplies to m
ines— topography=densely settled; narrow
, w inding streets (Potosi, Zacatecas,
G uanajuato)
– Industrial cities
– royal m
onopolies or subsidies m ade cities specialize
(Puebla— ceram
ics) –
Com m
ercial cities –
location at key transportation points, like ports (H avana,
Veracruz, Cartagena, Panam a City) or overland (M
endoza, M onterrey) –
also often function as Strategic Cities
(forts protected Spanish flotas) –
A dm
inistrative cities –
often becam e prim
ate cities (M
exico City & Lim
a); secondary adm
inistrative cities doubled as ag, industrial or com m
ercial settlem
ents (Buenos A ires, A
suncion, Santiago, Chile) •
Church/state relationship=adm in capitals also centers of ecclesiastical/education—
m onopolize resources
• C
itie s d
e v
e lo
p e
d id
e n
tifia b
le p
e rso
n a
litie s—
V e
ra c ru
z, M X
(lib e
ra l,
e a
sy -g
o in
g ), X
a la
p a
, M X
(c o
n se
rv a
tiv e
, a d
m in
istra tiv
e )
Colonial City Types Today
C allejon de B
esos, G uanjuato,
M exico: A
n exam ple of m
ining city landscape –
narrow , w
inding streets.
Talavera P ottery, P
uebla, M exico:
P ottery industry –
Industrial city.
D evelopm
ent of U rban Form
• Contrasts in unplanned cities w
ith m edieval urban form
and planned cities w
ith grid pattern –
H eart of city—
plaza m ayor, zocalo
– M
ost prestigious residences near plaza m ayor
• Industries, urbanized indigenous, ejidos on edge of tow
n –
A rchitectural patterns m
odeled on southern Spain— central courtyard
• Portuguese urbanism
differed from Spanish—
rural estates m ore popular
– Picturesque confusion—
no m aster plan
• H
illy, elevated site overlooking A tlantic
• Tw
o-tiered design— low
er (port, m kt, low
er class housing) & upper
(adm in, church, elite housing)
• Linear settlem
ent along coast--polynuclear •
Landscaped public w alk/m
all •
Rural settlem ents—
autonom ous indigenous areas—
tierras de resguardo—
preserved w ay of life
– M
im icked plan of Spanish tow
ns –
H ybridized place nam
es •
San G abriel O
m etoxtla
Com paring U
rban Form s
B arcelona,
S pain
Zocalo, M
exico C ity
S treet m
ap of O
axaca, M exico
M odern U
rban Form •
Spatially & socioeconom
ically distinct land use patterns –
M ix—
old inner city residential elite w
ith CBD –
Spine— new
upper-class com m
ercial &
residential –
Suburban retail m all, or edge city
– Industrial park—
factories/w arehouses
– Periferico—
rapid transit perim eter
road –
3 Concentric zones of landuse •
Zone of m aturity
– Change to vecindades
• Zone of in-situ
accretion •
O uter ring—
squatter settlem ents
V ecindades
U rban D
ensities •
Lo w
p o
p u
latio n
d e
n sity in
th e
re gio
n o
ve rall, b
u t ve
ry h
igh p
o p
u latio
n d
e n
sity in citie
s –
T y
p ic
a l la
rg e
c ity
h a
s 3 0
0 0
-1 0
,0 0
0 /sq
k m
; c o
n tra
st to N
o rth
A
m e
ric a
n c
itie s w
h ic
h h
a v
e a
b o
u t 1
0 0
-8 0
0 /sq
k m
• P
rim acy –
a situ atio
n in
w h
ich o
n e
city in a co
u n
try is m
u ch
large r th
an th
e n
e xt large
st city –
E X
: M e
x ic
o C
ity w
ith 2
5 M
p o
p u
la tio
n c
o m
p a
re d
w ith
G
u a
d a
la ja
ra w
ith 6
M p
o p
u la
tio n
– B
o th
p o
sitiv e
a n
d n
e g
a tiv
e p
o in
ts h a
v e
b e
e n
m a
d e
a b
o u
t p
rim a
c y
• G
row th pole advocates argue that prim
ate cities pull in resources that then “trickle dow
n” to the surrounding areas •
Critics argue that prim acy concentrates resources and pow
er in one place and deprives sm
aller urban areas and rural areas in a country
Low population
density in the region as a w
hole
N ew
Cities •
N e
w c
itie s h
a v
e b
e e
n fo
u n
d e
d in
th e
2 0 th
c e
n tu
ry
– F
ro n
tie r c
itie s a
n d
n e
w c
a p
ita ls
• E
x a
m p
le s:
– B
ra silia
– b
o th
a fro
n tie
r c ity
a n
d n
e w
c a
p ita
l (o r
fo rw
a rd
c a
p ita
l); fo u
n d
e d
a s a
p lo
y to
g e
t p e
o p
le to
m
o v
e in
to th
e in
te rio
r o f B
ra zil
– B
e lm
o p
a n
– n
e w
c a
p ita
l fo u
n d
e d
a fte
r a h
u rric
a n
e
h it B
e lize
C ity
– In
b o
th c
a se
s, p e
o p
le still p
re fe
r th e
o ld
c itie
s a n
d
a re
re lu
c ta
n t to
re lo
c a
te to
th e
se n
e w
c a
p ita
ls
– S
p e
c ia
lize d
c o
m m
e rc
ia l c
itie s
• B
e a
c h
re so
rts— C
a n
c u
n &
H u
a tu
lc o
, M e
x ic
o
– In
fo u
n d
in g
C a
n c u
n , th
e y
lite ra
lly fle
w o
v e
r th e
c o
a st
lo o
k in
g fo
r th e
b e
st p la
c e
to site
a re
so rt a
re a
Forw ard Capital: Brasilia, Brazil
Specialized Com m
erical City: Cancun, M
exico
Population G row
th & Accelerated U
rbanization
• P
o p
u latio
n gre
w e
xp o
n e
n tially fro
m se
co n
d h
alf o f
th e
2 0 th
ce n
tu ry (an
d co
n tin
u e
s to gro
w alth
o u
gh
th e
gro w
th rate
is d e
clin in
g) –
P o
p u
la tio
n g
re w
fro m
1 6
0 M
in 1
9 5
0 to
4 3
0 M
in 1
9 9
0
– U
rb a
n p
o p
u la
tio n
w a
s 5 9
M in
1 9
5 0
a n
d g
re w
to 3
0 6
M
b y
1 9
9 0
• U
rb an
izatio n
w as fu
e le
d b
y ISI – in
ve stm
e n
t w as
ch an
n e
le d
to citie
s, starvin g th
e co
u n
trysid e
o f
re so
u rce
s; artificially lo w
agricu ltu
ral p rice
s ad d
e d
to
th e
in flu
x o f m
igran ts to
citie s
Problem s w
ith Accelerated U rbanization
• U
n co
n tro
lle d
an d
e xp
lo sive
u rb
an gro
w th
acce
n tu
ate d
u rb
an p
ro b
le m
s –
In a
d e
q u
a te
in fra
stru c tu
re (in
c lu
d in
g tra
n sp
o rta
tio n
)
– Im
p o
ssib le
d e
m a
n d
s o n
lim ite
d c
ity b
u d
g e
ts (d ra
w s
m o
n e
y a
w a
y fro
m o
th e
r p a
rts o f sta
te , e
sp e
c ia
lly
p rim
a te
c itie
s)
– D
e stru
c tio
n o
f a ra
b le
la n
d d
u e
to sp
ra w
l
– U
n -/u
n d
e r-e
m p
lo y
m e
n t –
m a
rg in
a lize
d p
o p
u la
tio n
s;
c rim
e b
y im
p o
v e
rish e
d
– O
c c u
p a
tio n
o f u
n su
ita b
le la
n d
fo r d
e n
se u
rb a
n
se ttle
m e
n t (sq
u a
tte rs)
Squatter Settlem ents
• Sq
u atte
r se ttle
m e
n ts (sh
an tyto
w n
s)— p
o o
r, lo w
e r-class
p o
p u
latio n
s e re
ct m ake
sh ift h
o u
sin g o
n lan
d to
w h
ich
th e
y d o
n o
t h o
ld title
– N
o t “
n e
w ,”
b u
t e x p
lo siv
e g
ro w
th sin
c e
W W
2
– D
iffe re
n t re
sp o
n se
s b y
g o
v e
rn m
e n
ts— d
e stru
c tio
n /a
c c e
p ta
n c e
• EX. A
rgentina bulldozed squatter settlem ents before the W
orld Cup w
as played there in the 1970s •
O ther tim
es governm ents actually buy the land for the squatters
– M
isc o
n c e
p tio
n s: th
e y
a re
sp a
tia lly
d iso
rg a
n ize
d sp
a c e
s th a
t a
re so
c ia
lly u
n g
o v
e rn
e d
; e re
c te
d b
y re
c e
n t m
ig ra
n ts;
re sid
e n
ts a re
u n
e m
p lo
y e
d /u
n p
ro d
u c tiv
e w
ith c
rim in
a l
te n
d e
n c ie
s (p o
p u
la r im
a g
e , b
u t so
m e
a re
sim p
ly n
o rm
a l
w o
rk in
g c
la ss n
e ig
h b
o rh
o o
d s)
Squatter Settlem ents
• Types of squatter settlem
ents –
Sp o
n tan
e o
u s –
gro w
o rgan
ically, little b
y little
– P
lan n
e d
– ad
van ce
d site
se le
ctio n
, p re
p aratio
n ,
o rgan
ize d
in vasio
n •
T y
p e
s o f p
la n
n e
rs in v
o lv
e d
in p
la n
n e
d sq
u a
ttin g
– H
igh-level politician – a w
ay to rew ard supporters by “handing
over” a piece of land to them –
Land ow ner –
w ants better price from
land – it can be w
orth m
ore once it’s developed, plus governm ents w
ill often buy it for the squatters
– Professional squatter –
people that m ake their living selling plots
they reserve during a land grab, also often paid for their “assistance”
Squatter Settlem ents: Before &
A fter
A n exam
ple of a tem porary
housing squatter settlem ent
C olonia S
anto D om
ingo, M exico C
ity A
n exam ple of an “form
er” squatter settlem
ent in w hich perm
anent structures have been built and the
neighborhood incorporated into the city
Population & U
rban G eography
Part 3: M igration
M igrations
• Push-pull factors—
reasons for m igration (perceived or real)
– Push factors: econom
ic reasons (lack of em ploym
ent), political reasons (w
ar, persecution), environm ental reasons (destruction, clim
ate change – drought, flood)
– Pull factors: econom
ic (em ploym
ent potential), political (freedom , safety),
environm ental reasons (better quality of life), other reasons (fam
ily already in a location)
• Interregional m
igration includes colonization of frontier areas, but m ostly it’s
rural-to-urban m igration
– Traditionally m
ale, but m ore w
om en are now
m igrating
– Internally displaced persons—
forced from hom
e by conflict or hum an rights
violations— not sam
e status as refugees •
2.8M in Latin A
m erica (m
ost in Colom bia)
• International m
igration— across state borders
– A
m ong Latin A
m erican countries—
A rgentina leads, Venezuela draw
s m
igrants w ith oil jobs, Central A
m ericans to M
exico –
O utside of region—
U S leading recipient; colonial relationships w
ith British, French, D
utch; Spain— recent increases, m
any w om
en; Japan— descendents
of contract laborers returning for econom ic reasons (300,000 Japanese
Brazilians, 20,000 Japanese Peruvians living in Japan)
Interregional &
International
M igrations
M igrations
• Brain drain –
m igration of highly educated, skilled professionals
– Extent difficult to m
easure •
EX. ½ of em
igrants from Colom
bia have over 12 yrs of education •
Represents a “reverse aid program ” –
sending countries devote resources, but other places reap benefits
– U
S im m
igration policies encourage this type of m igration
• Rem
ittances – m
oney sent back hom e by m
igrants –
M igration is a m
ajor source of revenue for sending locations •
Reduction in unem ploym
ent for sending countries •
M oney sent back as rem
ittances from international m
igration w as
m ore than $38B in 2003 in Latin A
m erica
– Significant portion of G
N P in the region –
actually exceeds com
bined flow s of Foreign D
irect Investm ent &
O verseas
D evelopm
ent A id
Rem ittances