A new ranking of the world's largest cities - Do administrative units obscure morphological realities?

Abstract

With 37 million inhabitants, Tokyo is the world's largest city in UN statistics. With this work we call this ranking into question. Usually, global city rankings are based on nationally collected population figures, which rely on administrative units. Sprawling urban growth, however, leads to morphological city extents that may surpass conventional administrative units. In order to detect spatial discrepancies between the physical and the administrative city, we present a methodology for delimiting Morphological Urban Areas (MUAs). We understand MUAs as a territorially contiguous settlement area that can be distinguished from low-density peripheral and rural hinterlands. We design a settlement index composed of three indicators (settlement area, settlement area proportion and density within the settlements) describing a gradient of built-up density from the urban center to the periphery applying a sectoral monocentric city model. We assume that the urban-rural transition can be defined along this gradient. With it, we re-territorialize the conventional administrative units. Our data basis are recent mapping products derived from multi-sensoral Earth observation (EO) data – namely the Global Urban Footprint (GUF) and the GUF Density (GUF-DenS) – providing globally consistent knowledge about settlement locations and densities. For the re-territorialized MUAs we calculate population numbers using WorldPop data. Overall, we cover the 1692 cities with > 300,000 inhabitants on our planet. In our results we compare the consistently re-territorialized MUAs and the administrative units as well as their related population figures. We find the MUA in the Pearl River Delta the largest morphologically contiguous urban agglomeration in the world with a calculated population of 42.6 million. Tokyo, in this new list ranked number 2, loses its top position. In rank-size distributions we present the resulting deviations from previous city rankings. Although many MUAs outperform administrative units by area, we find that, contrary to what we assumed, in most cases MUAs are considerably smaller than administrative units. Only in Europe we find MUAs largely outweighing administrative units in extent.