Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
In order to understand the significance of urban sprawl in the United States, it is
necessary to compare two big cities, one in the US and one in Europe. Let us take,
for example, the areas of greater Chicago and greater Paris in order to compare cities
of similar size and significance (see Table 7.2).
Indicator
Paris 1968-99
Chicago 1970-2000
Population at the start of the study
period (thousands) (density per km²)
9,602
(590)
7,949
(438)
Population at the end of the study
period (density per km²)
11,500
(706)
9,156
(505)
Annual average population growth rate
(%)
+0.58 %
+0.47 %
Standard distance at the start of the
study period (km)
21.3
32.9
Standard distance at the end of the
study period (km)
24.8
36.2
Urban spread (km)
3.5
3.3
Table 7.2.
Comparison of urban sprawl in Paris and Chicago
(Sources: US census and Instiut national de la statistique et des études économiques (INSEE))
Chicago is dense and compact for an American city. It is, however, much more
spread out than Paris, both in 1970 and in 2000. Standard distance corresponds with
the average distance of the population from the city's barycenter, thereby providing
an unbiased indicator of the population's dispersion. This indicator is useful for
making synchronic comparisons between comparable geographic features or
diachronic comparisons, in which case an increase in the standard distance in a
constant territory would demonstrate increasing population dispersion or, in the case
of a metropolitan area, urban sprawl.
The bigger the city, the further it will expand. There is, therefore, a definite
relationship between urban sprawl and the size of a city. In the case of the 20 largest
US cities, we can establish a growing relationship, statistically evident, for both
1970 and 2000 (see Figure 7.1).
