Neighbour City Syndrome

The endlessly growing Tokyo and the Saitama effect

Today I want to focus on the effect of modern urbanisation for towns, mid-sized/regional cities, and megacity metropolises. I promise this will be just as interesting as it sounds! I’ve chosen to look at this from the perspective of a neighbouring city to a mega-polis, such as Saitama in Japan (prefecture directly next to Tokyo) and Brooklyn, USA.

We’re all cities

Before we ask, “what is it like to live next to a megacity?'“, let’s ask, “what IS a megacity?”.

The definition of towns and cities differ depending on where you live. Since Japan on average has a higher population density than most countries, they have adjusted what they consider a town. According to the Local Autonomy Law (LAL), a place needs at least 3000 people to be considered urban. This is wildly different to Australia who, in a desperate attempt to have a list of places outside of their East Coast, includes anywhere with 1000 people or more as urban.

The scale blows out even further for nationally defined and recognised “cities”, where Japan requires a population of 50,000, and Australia only needs 10,000. It allows Australia to join the big country table and pretend they’re also trying to keep ‘hundreds of cities’ happy. It also means densely populated Asian countries don’t feel too self-conscious about adding on a ‘few extra cities’ since last year.

It has also meant that for us, there isn’t too big a transition to go from a big city in Australia to a small one in Japan, since they’re basically the same in population density anyway. For this article, we will be discussing towns as the urban areas that aren’t cities (for Japan 3000-50,000), mid sized cities (for Japan 50,000-10 million), and megacities (10 million plus for every country). In Japan’s case, that’s Nagoya, Osaka, and Tokyo.

Photo by Daryan Shamkhali on Unsplash

Golden Child

By itself, a regional city generally functions well with a healthy amount of self-esteem and civic pride. Residents can comfortably compare themselves next to similarly sized places, and feel assured that the grass here is generally as green as the other side. When Shelbyville steals the lemon tree, Springfield can just as easily steal it back.

Likewise, towns function happily next to cities, regardless of size. People can select their preferred mix between dense and sparsely populated locations. While I won’t delve too deep into the towns and cities dynamic, the problems are usually pretty similar: local corruption, ageing infrastructure, or changes in industry causing employment issues. Not always solvable, but they might draw a modicum of comfort that other town/city relationships have the same dynamics.

The story changes for cities next to megacities. Megacities need to earn that prefix through lots of attention and resources. You can think of it like the webgame Agar.io [editor’s note: or Katamari Damacy], where the big cities draw on neighbouring cities near it to grow ever larger. If the big city gets big enough it eventually consumes the small cities near it and adds that population into themselves. When they get big enough, the megacity becomes known by its metropolitan area.

Help, my neighbour is a megacity!

While it might be great for the megacity, the neighbour cities face an identity crisis (Yes, I agree that a continuous growing population in a constrained region creates many challenges too but this post isn’t about that). The allure of a megacity continues to draw citizens from around the country, or even around the world. They offer greater options of employment, education, and healthcare, and still symbolise a brighter future for those who flock to them.

Given the glimmering lights of the megacity, what is the purpose of towns and cities near the megacity?

Do they give in and get engulfed?

Brooklyn, New York could be one example of a neighbour city losing its identity. Nowadays Brooklyn is very clearly New York City and most Brooklynites claim it’s offensive to even suggest they aren’t New Yorkers. Brooklyn was for two centuries proudly a separate city with a separate mayor (and separated by a body of water), but was always being overshadowed by the wealthier New York City. By 1860, 40% of the Brooklyn workforce opted to travel across the harbour to work in the other city, and in 1898 a small majority election (winning by less than 300 votes) led to the city being officially annexed by New York City.

At the time, newspapers would call it “the Great Mistake of 1898.” Brooklyn had lost its voice and became an appendage of New York. Sure, Brooklyn still has its own identity if you ask them. But the lost autonomy over city finances has meant funding usually flows to Manhattan first. Big exhibits, new restaurants, travellers and even infrastructure investment all disproportionately to go to the city.

Brooklyn. Photo by Lerone Pieters on Unsplash

Can anyone escape the megacity?

Many would look at how Brooklyn is a borough of New York and think that’s not too bad. Like any pyramid scheme, once you’re part of the megacity you can’t imagine being apart from it. Well at least for Brooklyn that’s the case.

Staten Island, another borough, keeps trying to secede with ongoing referendums taking place. This isn’t like Brooklyn’s consolidation by a slim margin, but 65% of Staten Island residents voted to leave in 1993 and were blocked by New York State. For most New Yorkers, today’s Staten secessionist efforts are an afterthought. “No one even goes there” is the retort of most New Yorkers.

For the megacity and their residents, consolidation and annexation is a good deal. You gain a larger tax base, and you pay… well the minimum you can get away with. Unfortunately for other neighbouring cities, the giant megacity seems to be the way of the future. Gone is Chessy, Seine-et-Marne, now you’re in Disneyland Paris.

Life Cycle of Cities

The lifestages of cities follows a definable pattern but diverge on the path to megacity.

1. Gestation and baby stages. This would be when it first becomes a place where people are gathered. Like a human baby it is difficult to know what it will grow up to be like. Is it big, or small, dangerous, or safe? Environmental factors will shape how it develops but not determine its path.

2. Teen years. It is here that the city starts filling out. During this time frame (Warning: city growth can take longer than humans), the city requires a lot of external feeding and resources. Both domestic and global inflow migration is needed to ensure the city has the necessary skills to survive. At this point, it diverges from a town and the focus of a city is finding migrants and external investment. This is achieved by a lot of self promotion and building “young” spaces like bouldering gyms, pop up galleries and bars. The citizens match this energy and start acting like teens.

   “People need to check out xyz city, its such a great vibe” or “Austin/Denver/Salt Lake City is such a cool place, did you know there are great breweries there…”

3. Early adulthood. By now, decisions made as a baby and teen are beginning to affect the city. Creaky public transport, alcohol problems, or lack of education could all be factors in stopping your city from being a megacity. It is here where the city can’t just rely on outside migration to grow. They need their citizens to want to build lives and families here, so priorities shift to finding schools, hospitals, and retirement villages. Cities can stay in this mode for a few years but the inevitable sands of time means that they will switch to a middle aged city.

   This stage usually separates the boom cities that attract a lot of temporary work migrants and fade after the teen years, from the cities that go on and maintain stability.

4. Middle age. You know when you’re here. Features include congested traffic, urban sprawl, and complaining that things were so much better a decade or two ago. The city is much wealthier, can self sustain, and finally has a real voice nationally. Like middle aged people, they know what their rights are and will demand them loudly.

   By now most of the citizens will claim that the city is overcrowded, dirty, or any host of other problems.

5. Becoming a megacity (not really comparable to human lifecycles). This is the stage that cities can morph into megacities. If the people start deciding that the current space isn’t enough for them, they may side-eye neighbouring locations. The reasons that citizens give for endless growth are usually borne out of competition. Melbourne always wants to be better than Sydney, Osaka against Tokyo, London with Paris, etc.

   In a desperate attempt to keep up with their rivals, they take on more and more citizens, so that they get the national attention and whatever glory that comes with it. When your city starts mentioning a rival city, watch out. It might be on its way to becoming a megacity.

6. (5b?) Old Age and death. Some see this as the only alternative to becoming a megacity. If the city can’t support itself, it’ll continue to deteriorate. People aren’t filling essential roles, kids aren’t staying around, and the city loses its lustre. Once enough people leave the place, it becomes a ghost town, just like a person (assuming ghosts are real).

Just say no to megacity

Going back to Saitama, is it any different?

Saitama is famous across Japan thanks to the residents of Tokyo, who have nicknamed it “Dasaitama” (dasai, ダサい meaning lame or uncool). It has gotten to the point where most residents of Saitama routinely will tell people they’re from Tokyo. With Saitama being so close to Tokyo, many Saitama residents commute to work in the megacity. A double edged sword, to outsiders, its uncool to try to be Tokyo, but for Saitamese, no one even recognises Saitama.

This was the premise of the manga and live action movie Fly Me To Saitama. A comedy where this is taken to the extreme, Saitamese are persecuted for their place of birth. If spotted in Tokyo, they are removed forcibly. The stereotypes are played up where all Saitamese are desperate for the chance to be considered on the same level as Tokyoites. Exaggerated? Yes. Does the movie reflect Tokyo sentiments? Also yes.

The movie highlights the contradictions inherent when living in a megacity. You’re already in an expensive, crowded, and giant city. Those on the outskirts of town barely interact except to work in the same city centre. As a Tokyo resident, it’s no wonder that you don’t want even more people commuting in from outside. Of course you’ll see them as outsiders who are just latching on to the big city life, while avoiding dealing with the actual problems.

If neither Saitama nor Tokyo residents are getting what they want, shouldn’t we just cancel this megacity growth? Fly Me To Saitama suggests Saitamese citizens need more civic pride, even generating a hand signal to represent the city.

Photo by Erik Eastman on Unsplash

Rediscover your Saitama Pride!

It’s cheesy but perhaps this is the only way to stop everything from becoming a megacity. Of course Saitama isn’t as dynamic, global or exciting as Tokyo. It can be though. By cherishing the place you live in, it can become the healthy middle aged city you’ve always dreamed of. Who knows, with a few injections of botox (investment), your city might stay in its youthful 20’s forever.

I know that what I’m advocating, to stay in your slightly dreary middle aged city isn’t for everyone. We’ve taken the conscious step to stay in a smaller Japanese city that is over an hour and a half away from the nearest megacity. As of now, there is a different sort of joy in visiting a new really great restaurant that serves French food, hiking the local trails or attending the smaller acts that pass through our city. I appreciate everyone has a different ideal city size, but maybe for the sake of Saitama survival (and other neighbours to megacities) maybe when it’s possible a decentralised approach is the way to go.

Does life in a megacity appeal to you? Will you choose to go back to the smaller cities? Let me know whether Saitama or Tokyo is right for you in the comments.