So what is London's metropolitan area?

[Docere]

FWIW Wikipedia uses 15.4 million as the primary figure, based on this list of urban agglomerations:

https://citypopulation.de/en/world/agglomerations/

[dimondpark]

If there was a London "CSA" would it probably be the entire Southeast UK region? What about the region Northeast of the capital? Dunno what it's called but how much of that area would be absorbed into a London CSA?

[mhays]

You can get commuter trains to several towns anywhere in the southeast coasts (Channel, bay near the Thames etc.). Some seem borderline doable for a daily commute to a core London station (say <75 minutes). A lot more would work if you're a few stations inland.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

If there was a London "CSA" would it probably be the entire Southeast UK region? What about the region Northeast of the capital? Dunno what it's called but how much of that area would be absorbed into a London CSA?

I doubt there's that much commuting integration in Southeast England.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Docere

FWIW Wikipedia uses 15.4 million as the primary figure, based on this list of urban agglomerations:

https://citypopulation.de/en/world/agglomerations/

Citypopulation.de is a group of German enthousiasts. It's not an official organization. Their so-called "London" figure has always been way off. Usually, people who want to assert that London is bigger than Paris ALWAYS quote citypopulation.de. That's been the traditional one source to "prove" it.

And this illustrates the problem with Wikipedia by the way. One has to understand how Wikipedia words: the goal of Wikipedia is not to publish "true" or rational information, but "information that has a source". You may hold the real, true information about a complex subject, if only you possess that information and it's not published anywhere, you cannot post it on Wikipedia, since this is information that cannot be verified (= that has no source).

On the other hand, if a bogus website publishes some bogus information, then you can post that information on Wikipedia, because it is information that can be verified (= has a source).

That's why Wikipedia often contains stupid or bogus information, just because it's been written somewhere on some internet site. It doesn't matter if that website is accurate or not. That's the major flaw with Wikipedia.

[JManc]

When I worked for a British consulting company, our offices were in Brighton & Hove and we would commute back and forth from London so I would think that area was in London's orbit judging by the qty of commuters.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Take that, UK:

I thought that was London 1 lol

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by JManc

When I worked for a British consulting company, our offices were in Brighton & Hove and we would commute back and forth from London so I would think that area was in London's orbit judging by the qty of commuters.

No, it's the typical absolute vs relative values difference. In absolute terms, they may seem big when you're seated in a train full of people, but in relative terms it's pretty low. At the 2011 census, only 6.6% of the residents in Brighton and Hove who had a job commuted to Greater London. For comparison, in Provins, which is at the same distance from Paris as Brighton, at the 2011 census 18.9% of the residents there who had a job commuted to a similar territory as Greater London (1,572 km²) made up of Paris and suburbs.

[Docere]

The German city population site also includes Baltimore with Washington, Allentown and Trenton with Philadelphia, Providence with Boston, Hamilton with Toronto etc. So a lot of inflated metros.

[Docere]

And Windsor is included with Detroit.

[Docere]

Originally Posted by JManc

When I worked for a British consulting company, our offices were in Brighton & Hove and we would commute back and forth from London so I would think that area was in London's orbit judging by the qty of commuters.

I dunno. The GO Train runs from Toronto to Kitchener for example, and certainly we hear how it's all becoming one metropolitan area or it's all one area now. But only about 5% of the Waterloo Region workforce commutes to the Greater Toronto Area.

[Docere]

This report says that 23% of Slough's workforce commutes to London - 12% in Hillingdon and Hounslow (largely at Heathrow Airport), 11% elsewhere in London.

https://www.slough.gov.uk/downloads/file/918/ltp3-core-strategy

[Docere]

Commuting to Greater London and % of workforce (2011):

Berkshire 42,839 9.6%
Buckinghamshire 39,778 10.3%
Essex 148,924 17.7%
Hertfordshire 117,964 20.7%
Kent 90,127 13%
Surrey 134,199 23.2%

[nito]

Originally Posted by Docere

There doesn't seem to be any agreed upon unit that defines London's metropolitan area.

So what is it? The Function Urban Area? London and the surrounding home counties (and all local authorities within)? Something else?

A metropolitan area measures the level of connectivity to an urban area, or more accurately urban sprawl.

The issue in the context of London is that the Green Belt (London and Home Counties) Act 1938 implemented a hard restriction on urban sprawl which is why the outer layer of London is dominated by interwar (or earlier) housing abruptly abutting agricultural land.

The Metropolitan Green Belt of London covers an area of 5,189km2, enveloping not just swathes of Outer London, but much of the surrounding Home Counties. Not only is there a physical limit of London’s urban area expanding outwards, the Green Belt also stops Home County towns such as High Wycombe from expanding towards London. You can get infill development (demolish an old barn to build 10 homes, etc…) and some local authorities can reallocate the Green Belt to enable development, but there can’t be a net loss. Nor is the Green Belt just focused on London and its hinterland. Oxford and Cambridge, and other British cities have their own Green Belts. There are also National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, etc… that prevent the UK, or at least England merging into one urban mass.

If you go by the strict definition, then London’s metro area will be smaller relative to other metro areas, simply because it didn’t sprawl. Even with the broad growth in and around London, I can’t see the Green Belt being abolished to allow for the various components to merge into one urban area.

Yuri is correct in saying that you could try and fudge or create models that try to bridge that anti-sprawl measure which creates a variety of outcomes, but there will never be an apples to apples comparison.

Originally Posted by Docere

There's been some discussion of Slough joining up with London - not sure what's become of that.

Whilst that gap between London and Slough is just 0.7km at its narrowest point, it has been, and likely will remain for ever as part of the Green Belt.

Originally Posted by mhays

You can get commuter trains to several towns anywhere in the southeast coasts (Channel, bay near the Thames etc.). Some seem borderline doable for a daily commute to a core London station (say <75 minutes). A lot more would work if you're a few stations inland.

London does possess a large rail network with all-day bi-directional service that spans a vast area, but I don’t think that is a measure of the size of London’s metro, more the connectivity of London and its environment.

I created these curious maps before the pandemic (they pre-date the Elizabeth Line, East Side Access, etc…), which show the frequency of direct trains arriving into Central London and Manhattan between 0800-0859 on a weekday.

Originally Posted by Docere

I dunno. The GO Train runs from Toronto to Kitchener for example, and certainly we hear how it's all becoming one metropolitan area or it's all one area now. But only about 5% of the Waterloo Region workforce commutes to the Greater Toronto Area.

I don’t think Brighton is part of a London ‘metro’, but there are six train stations in Brighton & Hove that have a regular all-day bi-directional service to London. 144 (direct) trains depart Brighton & Hove each weekday.