Nightmare of the monster cities

It is a sweltering afternoon in the year 2000, in the biggest city ever seen on earth. Twenty-eight million people swarm about an 80-mile-wide mass of smoky slums, surrounding high-rise islands of power and wealth. One third of the city’s workforce is unemployed and many of the poor have never seen the city centre. And from the parched countryside a thousand more hungry peasants a day pour into what they think is their city of hope.

That nightmare of the not-too-distant future could be Cairo or Jakarta or any of a dozen other urban monsters. Already Mexico City, Sao Paulo and Changhai are among the largest, most congested cities on earth. Over the next two decades, they – and many others – are expected almost to double in size, generating economic and social problems that will far outstrip all previous experience.

In the mid 20^th century some 700 million people lived in cities. Just 30 years ago the number stood at 1800 million. Today, 54 per cent of the world’s population lives in urban areas, a proportion that is expected to increase to 66 per cent by 2050. Projections show that urbanization combined with the overall growth of the world’s population could add another 2.5 billion people to urban populations by 2050, with close to 90 percent of the increase concentrated in Asia and Africa, according to a United Nations report.

The flood of ‘urbanites’ is engulfing not the richest countries, but the poorest. By the year 2000 an estimated 650 million people will crowd into 60 cities of five million or more – three-quarters of them in the developing world.

In places where rates of natural population increase exceed three per cent annually – meaning much of Africa and Asia – that alone is enough to double a city’s popula­tion within 20 years. But equally powerful are the streams of hopeful immigrants from the countryside. More often than not, even the most appalling urban living conditions are an improvement on whatever these people have left behind.

The problem that confronts urban planners is that there have never been cities of 30 million people, let alone ones dependent on roads, sewers and water supplies barely adequate for urban areas a tenth that size.

In contrast to the great urban industrial booms of the nineteenth and twentieth Centuries, the flood of new arrivals to today’s swelling Third World cities far outstrips the supply of jobs – particularly as modern industries put a premium on technology rather than manpower.

Optimists maintain that runaway urban growth can be stemmed by making rural and small-town life more attractive. Some say that the trend is self-correcting, since conditions will eventually get bad enough to convince people that city life is no im­provement after all. But pessimists see a gloomier correction: epidemics, starvation and revolution. In the end, both sides agree that the world's biggest cities are mush­rooming into the unknown.

According to an international study, up to a population of half a million, a typical city’s employment steadily improves and living conditions remain stable. When the million mark is reached, further improvements in jobs begin to be offset by a decline in the quality of life. Beyond two million inhabitants, only real incomes show a slight rise, with no sizeable improvement in employment conditions and a deterioration of general living conditions in such areas as crime and housing.

Yet some cities still manage to cope. Seoul, riding the crest of South Korea’s economic boom, built a £2,500 million underground railway system that has eased some of the worst traffic problems in the world. Tokyo has cleared up much of its legendary smog. Hong Kong has rehoused 1,3 million people in new high-rise towns which are totally self-contained, down to play­grounds, industrial areas and a railway line into the main business district.

The essence of the larger problem is that every step taken to improve living conditions in the slums only attracts more immigrants. One solution is to ban migration into the cities. Both China and Russia use internal passports or residence permits to try to control urban growth.

Ex.1. Give Russian equivalents for the following:

to swarm about; parched countryside; the not-too-distant future; swelling third world cities; runaway urban growth; to put a premium on technology; riding the crest of South Korea’s economic boom; high-rise towns; to be offset by; to be totally self-contained.

Ex.2. Find in the text the English equivalents for the following:

душный полдень; перенаселенные города; темпы естественного прироста населения; порождать проблемы; превосходить; ужасающие жилищные условия; быть лучше, чем; рабочая сила; тенденция; ухудшение жилищных условий; снизить остроту транспортных проблем; переселить в другие районы; запретить миграцию; внутренние паспорта и регистрация по месту жительства.

Ex.3. Answer the following questions:

1. What idea lies behind the use of such phrases as “a sweltering afternoon”, “smoky slums”, “the parched countryside”?

2. In what connection are the names of Mexico City, Sao Paulo & Changhai mentioned?

3. What do statistics say about the process of urbanization? What countries are most affected by the process?

4. What are the two main causes of urban growth? What problems does this process entail?

5. How do optimists & pessimists approach urban growth?

6. How do different cities cope with their problems?

7. What solutions to restrict inner migration can be offered?