Worldwide Demographics

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Yuri

Even though I liked for laughing material, I think it’s counterproductive. The large majority of South Americans holding Italian citizenship have no plans to move there. In fact, I’d say the majority hasn’t even bothered to visit Italy.

Most people request citizenship for a “just in case” scenario and the large majority that can request don’t even bother: I myself entertained several times to request either the Spanish or the Portuguese, but I’m too lazy for that. At this point is completely useless anyway.

Many also use it as a second passport to get around US visa restrictions on Argentina and Brazil. I have a few Argentinian friends who have never been to Italy but hold Italian passports.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Many also use it as a second passport to get around US visa restrictions on Argentina and Brazil. I have a few Argentinian friends who have never been to Italy but hold Italian passports.

Racial profiling is massive in the US consulates in Brazil. People who can claim European passports usually have no trouble to get their visas. In fact, it might be even risky as some officer having a bad day might question why do you have an Italian passport if you're coming from Brazil.

Brazil has a very strong passport in any case. We can go virtually anywhere without visa. Thinking of big countries, it's only the US, Canada and Australia (the two latter is only an online thing). China and Japan dropped visa to Brazilians two years ago.

But thinking of people who actually want to move to Europe, than this citizenship is great. You're just a regular EU citizen, can live there, work there as any ordinary citizen.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Yuri

Racial profiling is massive in the US consulates in Brazil. People who can claim European passports usually have no trouble to get their visas. In fact, it might be even risky as some officer having a bad day might question why do you have an Italian passport if you're coming from Brazil.

A number of Argentinians and Brazilians have told me the visa process is/was arduous. When my friend got a tourist visa about a decade ago he said that the process took about 3 months and a required him to go to the consulate for an in-person interview. This was pre-COVID so the process might have since been streamlined. He was eligible for an Italian passport under the old laws, but refused to get one out of principle.

But, in general, as long as the Italian passport is valid they won't really care at the U.S. border. They risk a diplomatic incident with Italy for discriminating against a passport holder if they try to deny entry based on place of origin.

I got a Brazilian tourist visa about 15 years ago and it was sort of a pain in the —. I had to go to the consulate to drop my passport off, then go back a week later to pick it up. I also had to pay a $150 "reciprocity" fee, which at the time was the same amount that the U.S. charged Brazilians to apply for tourist visas.

[Yuri]

Yeah, I took my US visa during Covid time and took like 15 months. The interview per se was very simple to me: she asked where I work and that’s it. It took like 30 seconds. It’s like a Brazilian public office from the past, lots of lines, hundreds and hundreds of people and they do lots of refusals. The one immediately ahead of me, for example.

It’s a humiliating process really and I would hardly ever go through it if my husband wasn’t so insistent. Meanwhile to Europe you just take a plane and that’s it. And we ended up going to Europe once again before going to Chicago, 4 years after the visa.

Said that, the process to require any of those European citizenships are very straightforward as you know from the beginning you won’t be refused, but still it takes years and lots of bureaucracy. Not that simple either.

[SIGSEGV]

I know my dad used his Romanian passport instead of his US passport when he went to a conference in Brazil. I might go to a conference in Buenos Aires next year maybe I'll do similar...

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

I know my dad used his Romanian passport instead of his US passport when he went to a conference in Brazil. I might go to a conference in Buenos Aires next year maybe I'll do similar...

Argentina doesn't require a visa for U.S. passports for short-term tourism. But Brazil did recently reinstate their tourist visa requirement for U.S. passports.

[Yuri]

Enjoying my Sunday with my tables. Decide to do a quest for the world's first megacity. Very entertaining to navigate between different definitions and historical data:

------------------------ 1940 ------ 1930 ------ 1920 ------ Area ------ Growth

New York ----- 10,972,024 -- 10,251,274 --- 8,041,881 --- 4,428 Km² --- +7.0% -- +27.5%
Tokyo --------- 9,543,945 --- 7,028,284 --- 5,022,818 --- 4,610 Km² -- +35.8% -- +39.9%
London -------- 9,350,000 --- 9,076,563 --- 8,189,271 --- 4,337 Km² --- +3.0% -- +10.8%
Paris --------- 6,785,570 --- 6,705,579 --- 5,682,598 -- 12,011 Km² --- +1.2% -- +18.0%
Paris --------- 5,311,053 --- 5,266,888 --- 4,597,889 ----- 762 Km² --- +0.8% -- +14.6%
Shanghai ------ 5,202,140 --- 4,408,248 --- 3,411,182 --- 2,550 Km² -- +18.0% -- +29.2%
Shanghai ------ 4,558,540 --- 3,856,248 --- 2,987,182 --- 1,720 Km² -- +18.2% -- +29.1%
Osaka --------- 5,058,815 --- 3,689,862 --- 2,668,654 --- 1,981 Km² -- +37.1% -- +38.3%
Berlin -------- 4,638,844 --- 4,315,494 --- 4,061,723 --- 1,489 Km² --- +7.5% --- +6.2%
Moscow -------- 4,609,432 --- 2,324,512 ------------------- 875 Km² -- +98.3%
Chicago ------- 4,581,111 --- 4,439,818 --- 3,329,379 --- 5,737 Km² --- +3.2% -- +33.4%
Calcutta ------ 4,218,893 --- 2,624,490 --- 2,381,124 --- 1,160 Km² -- +60.8% -- +10.2%
Calcutta ------ 3,577,156 --- 2,138.814 --- 1,940,358 ----- 685 Km² -- +67.2% -- +10.2%
Ruhr ---------- 4,109,841 ------------------------------- 3,649 Km²
Buenos Aires -- 4,085,000 --- 3,254,000 --- 2,332,000 --- 3,830 Km² -- +25.5% -- +39.5%
Leningrad ----- 3,644,593 --- 1,801,405 ------------------- 600 Km² - +102.3%
Philadelphia -- 2,787,064 --- 2,749,341 --- 2,386,681 --- 2,648 Km² --- +1.4% -- +15.2%
Los Angeles --- 2,785,643 --- 2,208,492 ----- 936,455 -- 10,510 Km² -- +26.1% - +135.8%

Data for London and Calcutta is 1941, 1931 and 1921; for Paris 1936, 1931 and 1921; for Berlin 1939, 1933 and 1925; for the Soviet, 1939 and 1926.

New York is the winner, becoming a megacity by 1928 or so and surpassing London by 1922. Tokyo overtook London by 1939. As metropolitan area was a relatively new concept back in the day, I guess London was widely perceived as the world's largest till the end of WWII as people would probably look at city proper.

I'll try to do another round with more strict definitions, maybe using the Greater London 1,500 km2 as reference. By coincidence, I managed to find a London, New York and Tokyo at around 4,000 km2 and built the rest of the list from them.

[iheartthed]

^Why are Shanghai and Calcutta listed twice?

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

^Why are Shanghai and Calcutta listed twice?

Two different definitions. Same for Paris.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Yuri

Enjoying my Sunday with my tables. Decide to do a quest for the world's first megacity. Very entertaining to navigate between different definitions and historical data:

------------------------ 1940 ------ 1930 ------ 1920 ------ Area ------ Growth

New York ----- 10,972,024 -- 10,251,274 --- 8,041,881 --- 4,428 Km² --- +7.0% -- +27.5%
Tokyo --------- 9,543,945 --- 7,028,284 --- 5,022,818 --- 4,610 Km² -- +35.8% -- +39.9%
London -------- 9,350,000 --- 9,076,563 --- 8,189,271 --- 4,337 Km² --- +3.0% -- +10.8%
Paris --------- 6,785,570 --- 6,705,579 --- 5,682,598 -- 12,011 Km² --- +1.2% -- +18.0%
Paris --------- 5,311,053 --- 5,266,888 --- 4,597,889 ----- 762 Km² --- +0.8% -- +14.6%
Shanghai ------ 5,202,140 --- 4,408,248 --- 3,411,182 --- 2,550 Km² -- +18.0% -- +29.2%
Shanghai ------ 4,558,540 --- 3,856,248 --- 2,987,182 --- 1,720 Km² -- +18.2% -- +29.1%
Osaka --------- 5,058,815 --- 3,689,862 --- 2,668,654 --- 1,981 Km² -- +37.1% -- +38.3%
Berlin -------- 4,638,844 --- 4,315,494 --- 4,061,723 --- 1,489 Km² --- +7.5% --- +6.2%
Moscow -------- 4,609,432 --- 2,324,512 ------------------- 875 Km² -- +98.3%
Chicago ------- 4,581,111 --- 4,439,818 --- 3,329,379 --- 5,737 Km² --- +3.2% -- +33.4%
Calcutta ------ 4,218,893 --- 2,624,490 --- 2,381,124 --- 1,160 Km² -- +60.8% -- +10.2%
Calcutta ------ 3,577,156 --- 2,138.814 --- 1,940,358 ----- 685 Km² -- +67.2% -- +10.2%
Ruhr ---------- 4,109,841 ------------------------------- 3,649 Km²
Buenos Aires -- 4,085,000 --- 3,254,000 --- 2,332,000 --- 3,830 Km² -- +25.5% -- +39.5%
Leningrad ----- 3,644,593 --- 1,801,405 ------------------- 600 Km² - +102.3%
Philadelphia -- 2,787,064 --- 2,749,341 --- 2,386,681 --- 2,648 Km² --- +1.4% -- +15.2%
Los Angeles --- 2,785,643 --- 2,208,492 ----- 936,455 -- 10,510 Km² -- +26.1% - +135.8%

Data for London and Calcutta is 1941, 1931 and 1921; for Paris 1936, 1931 and 1921; for Berlin 1939, 1933 and 1925; for the Soviet, 1939 and 1926.

New York is the winner, becoming a megacity by 1928 or so and surpassing London by 1922. Tokyo overtook London by 1939. As metropolitan area was a relatively new concept back in the day, I guess London was widely perceived as the world's largest till the end of WWII as people would probably look at city proper.

I'll try to do another round with more strict definitions, maybe using the Greater London 1,500 km2 as reference. By coincidence, I managed to find a London, New York and Tokyo at around 4,000 km2 and built the rest of the list from them.

For Paris within 4,396 km². This territory of 4,396 km² reached 10 million inhabitants in 1988.

------------------------ 1940 ------ 1930 ------ 1920 ------ Area ------ Growth

New York ----- 10,972,024 -- 10,251,274 --- 8,041,881 --- 4,428 Km² --- +7.0% -- +27.5%
Tokyo --------- 9,543,945 --- 7,028,284 --- 5,022,818 --- 4,610 Km² -- +35.8% -- +39.9%
London -------- 9,350,000 --- 9,076,563 --- 8,189,271 --- 4,337 Km² --- +3.0% -- +10.8%
Paris --------- 6,484,025 --- 6,397,199 --- 5,388,004 --  4,396 Km² --- +1.4% -- +18.7%
Shanghai ------ 5,202,140 --- 4,408,248 --- 3,411,182 --- 2,550 Km² -- +18.0% -- +29.2%
Shanghai ------ 4,558,540 --- 3,856,248 --- 2,987,182 --- 1,720 Km² -- +18.2% -- +29.1%
Osaka --------- 5,058,815 --- 3,689,862 --- 2,668,654 --- 1,981 Km² -- +37.1% -- +38.3%
Berlin -------- 4,638,844 --- 4,315,494 --- 4,061,723 --- 1,489 Km² --- +7.5% --- +6.2%
Moscow -------- 4,609,432 --- 2,324,512 ------------------- 875 Km² -- +98.3%
Chicago ------- 4,581,111 --- 4,439,818 --- 3,329,379 --- 5,737 Km² --- +3.2% -- +33.4%
Calcutta ------ 4,218,893 --- 2,624,490 --- 2,381,124 --- 1,160 Km² -- +60.8% -- +10.2%
Calcutta ------ 3,577,156 --- 2,138.814 --- 1,940,358 ----- 685 Km² -- +67.2% -- +10.2%
Ruhr ---------- 4,109,841 ------------------------------- 3,649 Km²
Buenos Aires -- 4,085,000 --- 3,254,000 --- 2,332,000 --- 3,830 Km² -- +25.5% -- +39.5%
Leningrad ----- 3,644,593 --- 1,801,405 ------------------- 600 Km² - +102.3%
Philadelphia -- 2,787,064 --- 2,749,341 --- 2,386,681 --- 2,648 Km² --- +1.4% -- +15.2%
Los Angeles --- 2,785,643 --- 2,208,492 ----- 936,455 -- 10,510 Km² -- +26.1% - +135.8%

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

For Paris within 4,396 km². This territory of 4,396 km² reached 10 million inhabitants in 1988.

------------------------ 1940 ------ 1930 ------ 1920 ------ Area ------ Growth

New York ----- 10,972,024 -- 10,251,274 --- 8,041,881 --- 4,428 Km² --- +7.0% -- +27.5%
Tokyo --------- 9,543,945 --- 7,028,284 --- 5,022,818 --- 4,610 Km² -- +35.8% -- +39.9%
London -------- 9,350,000 --- 9,076,563 --- 8,189,271 --- 4,337 Km² --- +3.0% -- +10.8%
Paris --------- 6,484,025 --- 6,397,199 --- 5,388,004 --  4,396 Km² --- +1.4% -- +18.7%
Shanghai ------ 5,202,140 --- 4,408,248 --- 3,411,182 --- 2,550 Km² -- +18.0% -- +29.2%
Shanghai ------ 4,558,540 --- 3,856,248 --- 2,987,182 --- 1,720 Km² -- +18.2% -- +29.1%
Osaka --------- 5,058,815 --- 3,689,862 --- 2,668,654 --- 1,981 Km² -- +37.1% -- +38.3%
Berlin -------- 4,638,844 --- 4,315,494 --- 4,061,723 --- 1,489 Km² --- +7.5% --- +6.2%
Moscow -------- 4,609,432 --- 2,324,512 ------------------- 875 Km² -- +98.3%
Chicago ------- 4,581,111 --- 4,439,818 --- 3,329,379 --- 5,737 Km² --- +3.2% -- +33.4%
Calcutta ------ 4,218,893 --- 2,624,490 --- 2,381,124 --- 1,160 Km² -- +60.8% -- +10.2%
Calcutta ------ 3,577,156 --- 2,138.814 --- 1,940,358 ----- 685 Km² -- +67.2% -- +10.2%
Ruhr ---------- 4,109,841 ------------------------------- 3,649 Km²
Buenos Aires -- 4,085,000 --- 3,254,000 --- 2,332,000 --- 3,830 Km² -- +25.5% -- +39.5%
Leningrad ----- 3,644,593 --- 1,801,405 ------------------- 600 Km² - +102.3%
Philadelphia -- 2,787,064 --- 2,749,341 --- 2,386,681 --- 2,648 Km² --- +1.4% -- +15.2%
Los Angeles --- 2,785,643 --- 2,208,492 ----- 936,455 -- 10,510 Km² -- +26.1% - +135.8%

I have countless versions of all those cities. One of them, for Paris, has 3,115 Km², which is Paris, the three inner departments and the 7 contiguous arrondissements around them. The problem is the definitions changed and I can go back only to 1968 with this definition. I guess I could reconstitute them with commune but it would be a nightmare. I'm not that invested.

It had 8,249,023 inh. in 1968; 10,175,853 in 2015; and 10,393,272 in 2022.

For the 762 Km² Paris (Paris and the 3 inner departments), I can go back till 1881: 2,865,970; 3,777,667 (1901) and 6,862,396 (2022).

[Yuri]

As Brisavoine went into the future with this 4,400 Km², here we have London, New York and Tokyo by my definition.

London had a first peak in 1961: 9,855,389 declines a lot in 1971 and 1981 and then starts to rebound, reaching 9,432,655 (2001); 10,625,226 (2011) and 11,450,198 (2021). WIthin those borders, it probably crossed the 10 million mark in 2006. Those borders are not neatly, rounded, as I couldn't including nothing from Buckinghamshire because the county is too big. Aside this I managed to include every division that borders Greater London plus densely populated others.

Tokyo is very straightforward: Tokyo and Kanagawa prefectures: 13,126,978 in 1960 and probably crossed the 10 million mark in 1953; 20,554,075 (2000) crossing the 20 million mark in 1994; and 23,284,931 in 2020.

New York is the City, Nassau, Westchester and 5 NJ counties. As London, it declined. First peak in 1970, with 13,658,208; 13,564,597 (2000) and 14,848,198 (2020).

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Yuri

I have countless versions of all those cities. One of them, for Paris, has 3,115 Km², which is Paris, the three inner departments and the 7 contiguous arrondissements around them. The problem is the definitions changed and I can go back only to 1968 with this definition. I guess I could reconstitute them with commune but it would be a nightmare. I'm not that invested.

It had 8,249,023 inh. in 1968; 10,175,853 in 2015; and 10,393,272 in 2022.

For the 762 Km² Paris (Paris and the 3 inner departments), I can go back till 1881: 2,865,970; 3,777,667 (1901) and 6,862,396 (2022).

My 4,396 km² territory is defined at the commune level. 598 communes in total. I have its population figures from 1876 to 2023.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Yuri

As Brisavoine went into the future with this 4,400 Km², here we have London, New York and Tokyo by my definition.

London had a first peak in 1961: 9,855,389 declines a lot in 1971 and 1981 and then starts to rebound, reaching 9,432,655 (2001); 10,625,226 (2011) and 11,450,198 (2021). WIthin those borders, it probably crossed the 10 million mark in 2006. Those borders are not neatly, rounded, as I couldn't including nothing from Buckinghamshire because the county is too big. Aside this I managed to include every division that borders Greater London plus densely populated others.

Tokyo is very straightforward: Tokyo and Kanagawa prefectures: 13,126,978 in 1960 and probably crossed the 10 million mark in 1953; 20,554,075 (2000) crossing the 20 million mark in 1994; and 23,284,931 in 2020.

New York is the City, Nassau, Westchester and 5 NJ counties. As London, it declined. First peak in 1970, with 13,658,208; 13,564,597 (2000) and 14,848,198 (2020).

For the 4,396 km² of Paris the population was 11,624,105 in 2021 (and 11,761,242 in 2023). The population within that territory declined only during WW2. It grew between every census after WW2.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

For the 4,396 km² of Paris the population was 11,624,105 in 2021 (and 11,761,242 in 2023). The population within that territory declined only during WW2. It grew between every census after WW2.

Coincidentally it's where London and Paris have pretty much the same population today (2021). Probably at 4,500 km² London jumps ahead.

This 1970's white flight/urban flight phenomenon is more an US/northern European thing, that's why Paris kept growing. Conversely, Paris hasn't experienced the same urban boom London and New York have since the 1990's.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Yuri

This 1970's white flight/urban flight phenomenon is more an US/northern European thing, that's why Paris kept growing.

It took place in Paris too, but within a more central area. In the central 892 km² (which is the same land area as the city-state of Berlin), the population declined from 7,129,593 at the 1968 census to 6,864,920 at the 1982 census. The peak of 1968 was reached again in 2000. As of 2023: 7,793,109.

[Yuri]

New York and London declined in the 1970's even using very broad definitions:

New York (13,442 km²)
1960: 15,779,141
1970: 17,487,589 -- +10.8%
1980: 16,602,894 --- -5.1%
1990: 16,973,803 --- +2.2%
2000: 18,382,196 --- +8.3%
2010: 18,902,388 --- +2.8%
2020: 20,128,957 --- +6.5%

London (12,162 km²)
1960: 12,470,848
1970: 12,758,469 --- +2.3%
1980: 11,938,642 --- -6.4%
1990: 12,433,183 --- +4.1%
2000: 13,233,866 --- +6.4%
2010: 14,694,593 -- +11.0%
2020: 15,876,845 --- +8.0%

They were the first megacities to ever declined. Osaka and Rio de Janeiro joined this club in the 2010's.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Yuri

New York and London declined in the 1970's even using very broad definitions:

Yeah, both the New York and London metro areas experienced population decline in the 1970s. It wasn't just NYC and Greater London.

The Paris metro area declined only during WW2 (and before that probably during the French Revolution, and before that during the Religious Wars between 1572-1595). At its slowest between the 1975 and 1982 censuses, the Paris metro area grew by only +0.35% per year, but it grew. In the 2nd half of the 2010s the Paris metro area also slowed down to nearly the same low growth as between 1975 and 1982, but in the 2020s its growth is accelerating again due to higher international immigration, with +0.52% for the metro area in 2021, and +0.62% in 2022, a growth rate unseen since the early 2000s. I imagine that growth will have been even higher in 2023, 2024, and 2025 due to even higher immigration. We'll know when the censuses are published.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Yuri

There is no "the international definition". There are countless definitions of metro area and that's only one of them.

In urbanized area, for example, both Milan and Naples are way ahead Rome:

Census 2021: Milan 4,994,735; Naples 3,808,383, Rome 3,253,293. And that's not considering some contiguous urbanized area that boost Milan and Naples more than Rome.

https://citypopulation.de/en/italy/urbanareas/

Another proof that citypopulation cannot be trusted for anything other than the population of legally defined administrative areas. They — at statistical areas.

And yes, it's the only international definition we have. Even Brazil's IBGE uses it (they call it arranjos populacionais).

Originally Posted by Yuri

What about Lille agglomeration? Was there a period that it was ahead Lyon?

It depends how you define Lille. The urban region of Lille including Roubaix and Tourcoing was ahead of the urban region of Lyon from the 1890s until 1914, but it wasn't really a city, more like an industrial conurbation. Roubaix and Tourcoing still functioned as independent cities back then, so I don't think anyone would have thought of as Lille being larger than Lyon.

A more narrowly-defined urban territory, like this one of 118 km² (the delineated red territory in the center of each urban territory is the extent of the Medieval walled city before the expansion of the Industrial Revolution) shows that at its peak in 1911 Lille 118 km² had 333,000 inhabitants, whereas Lyon 118 km² had 550,000 inhabitants, so Lille was at 60.5% the population of Lyon.



Note that Lille was closer to Lyon at the 1806 census (first modern and fully accurate French census). Lille 118 km² had 68.3% the population of Lyon 118 km² in 1806, then Lyon grew more than Lille until 1855 (at the 1856 census, Lille 118 km² had only 45.9% the population of Lyon 118 km²), then after 1855 Lille grew more than Lyon until 1911 but never went back to having 68.3% of Lyon's population.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Yuri

New York and London declined in the 1970's even using very broad definitions:

New York (13,442 km²)
1960: 15,779,141
1970: 17,487,589 -- +10.8%
1980: 16,602,894 --- -5.1%
1990: 16,973,803 --- +2.2%
2000: 18,382,196 --- +8.3%
2010: 18,902,388 --- +2.8%
2020: 20,128,957 --- +6.5%

London (12,162 km²)
1960: 12,470,848
1970: 12,758,469 --- +2.3%
1980: 11,938,642 --- -6.4%
1990: 12,433,183 --- +4.1%
2000: 13,233,866 --- +6.4%
2010: 14,694,593 -- +11.0%
2020: 15,876,845 --- +8.0%

They were the first megacities to ever declined. Osaka and Rio de Janeiro joined this club in the 2010's.

There a sharp population drop in many urban areas across Europe and North America starting in the 1960s. According to the Detroit thread it was because of black people, but something tells me that isn't a sufficient explanation for Europe. For many of those urban areas, such as New York, it was the first time in history that they had ever experienced population contractions.