Rethinking Asian cities and urbanization: four transformations in four decades

Abstract

Asian cities and the processes that have driven their rapid changes are examined under four heads in this paper. Rapid economic transformation has provided the basis on which Asian cities have witnessed breathtaking physical change and fundamental social reorientation in the midst of an information age. Reflections on the role of Asian cities and urbanization are provided in the post-crisis global financial and political realignments.1

Keywords:

• Asian cities
• urbanization
• globalization
• transformations
• reflections
• post-crisis Asian-global adjustments

Introduction

Between 1969 and 2008, the years representing the start and end dates of my teaching career in Asian universities, I was an observer, participant and analyst of the momentous process of rapid and systemic change that swept the Asian region, with cities at the forefront of several transformations that have changed the face of Asia.

This paper is in part a personal scholarly statement on what has transpired in Asian cities in four decades of rapid change, economically, physically, socially and in terms of information generation and transfer. More important, it is also to document the major trends and threads of transformation under four heads, making reference to salient publications on Asian cities, including many of my own.

Economic transformation

As Asia entered the 1970s, it was a tumultuous period of the Cold War, the Vietnam War and the oil crises. By that time Japan had already completed its post-World War II economic miracle from the debris of a defeated nation. It appeared poised for leading the region and the world for further economic growth (Vogel 1986). The newly industrializing countries of Asia, or better known as the Four Little Dragons, namely Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan, were beginning to make their marks on the global economy by pursuing their style of export-oriented manufacturing. The 1980s saw the emergence of the so-called Asian tigers represented by Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam. However, it was the recent rise of China and India that has elevated the prospect of Asia being able to enhance its global significance in the twenty-first century.

In the two decades prior to 1980, Japan, Hong Kong and Taiwan witnessed a 13-, 11-, and 14-fold increase, respectively, in per capita gross national product, as they skillfully tapped the world market (Yeung 1988a, p. 155). Much of the economic growth was city-led, with export processing zones adopted initially as a vehicle to channel a range of consumer goods to the world market under regimes of tax relief (Antione 1984, Kundra 2000). The Asian rush to tap the world market took an active turn when China adopted its open-door policy and economic reforms in 1978 and Vietnam similarly adopted a policy of doi moi in 1986. In South Asia, too, India in 1991 forsook its erstwhile conservative import substitution policy and lowered tariff barriers which had hitherto kept multinationals at bay. This was followed by the globalization of consumption patterns and the explosion of South Asian economies, with a large range of “modern” products ranging from IT services to nuclear warheads (Bradnock and Williams 2002, Lakhera 2008). The entire Asian region has changed in its orientation and complexion, having via their cities connected their economy and their people to the world at large. Asian economies and their people have become more globalized than ever.

As the new global economy began to unfold and integrate Asian cities and economies, a literature began to accumulate on subjects such as global restructuring (Yeung 1995a, 1996a, Lo and Yeung 1996, pp. 17–47), global processes (Bishop et al. 2003), the relationship between globalization and world cities (Yeung 1995b, 1995c, 1995d), changing labour markets (Brocks 2006), minorities and civic society (Hasegawa and Yoshihara, 2008), links between international and local development (Yusuf et al. 2001) and the role of transnational corporations (H. Yeung 1998, 2002).

Much of the global capital that has been driving the Asian growth over the past quarter century has been derived from foreign direct investment (FDI). FDI inflows as a measure of its percentage of the GDP, for the period 1980–1985 came to 18.72% in Singapore and 6.9% in Hong Kong, but only 0.87% in China and 0.14% in India. These percentages for the period 1994–1997 for the four countries in question were, respectively, 27.81, 9.93, 13.24 and 2.46, indicating that both Singapore and Hong Kong continued to depend on substantial FDI inflows, and China and India, especially the former, have vastly increased the importance of FDI inflows to their economy (Lall & Urata, 2003: 3). China's actual utilization of FDI totaled US $78.34 billion in 2007, a big leap from only US $13.06 billion for the period 1978–1982 (Almanac 2008, p. 17). China's ability to attract FDI far outstripped India, as in 2000, China's FDI inflows totaled US $38.39 billion, compared with US $2.32 billion for India (Brooks and Hill 2004, p. 34).

After two decades of being integrated with the global economy, Asian countries have developed rapidly and, consequently, have greatly improved their ability to outsource FDI. Hong Kong has become the second largest source of outward FDI flows in Asia, after Japan. Hong Kong's outward FDI came to US $43.46 billion in 2006, a tremendous improvement on its US $82 million in 1980. China exported US $16.13 billion of FDI in 2006, a far cry from its US $830 million in 1980. The relevant figures for India were US $9.68 billion in 2006, and merely US $4 million in 1980 (Rajan et al. 2008, p. 4). The massive increase of FDI outflows from Asian countries has fully demonstrated the maturity of Asian economies and their growing integration with the global economy. The flow of financial resources has now become circular between Asia and the world, no longer a one-way street.

In most Asian countries, a majority of their GDP has been generated by their cities. The extreme cases can be cited of Bangkok (44%), Dhaka (40.9%) and Seoul (24.1%) (IMF, 2009),2 where their classical primacy in their respective countries prevails not only in population but also in economic importance, as shown in the proportion of GDP they contributed to their respective countries. As countries that have recently opened or reopened to world trade and commerce, China and Vietnam both engineered their economic revival from their cities, as recent studies have chronicled and analyzed their major milestones after their openness (Yeung and Hu 1992, Yeung and Sung 1996, Yeung 2004a, 2007a, 2007b, Yeung et al. 2009).

Along with globalization, regional cooperation and integration with the global economy have furthered the economic development of Asia by connecting countries/cities within Asia to world markets. Within East Asia, the development of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) since 1967, APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation) since 1989 and the run-up to the China-ASEAN Free Trade Area in 2010 have been facilitating regional integration and cooperation and, in the process, have consolidated Asia's global status as a consequence (Yeung 2006).

Over the past four decades, economic transformation in Asia has been sustained and progressed in what has been characterized as a flying-geese pattern, with Japan leading the way (Yamazawa 1990). Table 1 shows that between 1970 and 2005, the average annual growth rate of the GDP of most countries in Asia has been at double digits or close to them in all its sub-regions with the exception of South Asia. Even countries in South Asia have enjoyed an average of high single digit growth. The fastest sustained economic growth has been accorded to South Korea, Singapore and Saudi Arabia. The rapid economic growth at the country level has been matched by impressive per capita GDP increases in their own currency over the same period.

Table 1. Economic Asia, 1970–2005 (selected).

	GDP current US$ million		Annual growth rate	Per capita GDP local currency
	1970	2005		1990	2005
Asia	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.
East Asia	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.
China	91506.2	2235914.0	9.56%	1632.8	14061.9 Yuan
China, Hong Kong SAR	3797.5	177771.7	11.62%	104996	202928 HK Dollars
Japan	202968.3	4552113.8	9.29%	—	—
Korea	8899.7	791426.6	13.68%	4355	16837 thousand Won
South-central Asia	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.
Bangladesh	8992.7	60277.6	5.59%	9204	27059 Taka
India	61193.7	810151.4	7.66%	6789	32372 Rupees
Pakistan	10027.1	109502.1	7.07%	7801	42613 Rupees
Southeast Asia	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.
Indonesia	9656.7	285868.6	10.16%	1176	12616 thousand Rupiah
Malaysia	4276.7	137953.8	10.43%	6579	19994 Ringgit
Myanmar	—	—	n.a.	3726	167205* Kyats
Singapore	1896.3	119777.7	12.58%	21915	46738 Singapore Dollars
Thailand	7086.5	176419.6	9.62%	39104	109563 Baht
Vietnam	—	52803.9	n.a.	636	10098 thousand Dong
West Asia	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.
Lebanon	—	21558.2	n.a.	—	—
Saudi Arabia	5014.4	315580.1	12.56%	—	—
UAE	—	132999.9	n.a.	—	—
Sources: ADB (2009); World Bank (2009).

Rapid economic growth in Asian countries over the past four decades is, in turn, translated into sustained and rapid increase of the urban population and the level of urbanization in the relevant countries. Between 1970 and 2005, the urban population in Asia more than tripled and the level of urbanization was short of doubling at 39.7% in 2005 (Table 2). The numbers are played out in the sub-regions as well, following the broad pattern of change, with by 2005, the sub-region of East Asia having the largest concentration of urban population of 677.24 million and West Asia having the highest level of urbanization at 65.0%. In that year, Asia had 1.565 billion people living in cities, or exactly half of the world's urban population at 3.15 billion (UN, DESA 2006, p. 9).

Table 2. Urban Asia, 1970–2005 (selected).

	Urban population million		Percentage of population in urban areas %
	1970	2005	1970	2005
Asia	484.70	1565.11	22.7	39.7
East Asia	225.03	677.24	22.8	44.5
China	144.54	530.66	17.4	40.4
China, Hong Kong SAR	3.46	7.06	87.7	100.0
Japan	55.51	84.36	53.2	66.0
Korea	12.99	38.67	40.7	80.8
South-central Asia	158.95	504.04	20.4	30.6
Bangladesh	5.30	39.35	7.6	25.7
India	108.55	325.56	19.8	28.7
Pakistan	14.78	55.14	24.8	34.9
Southeast Asia	61.50	245.90	21.4	44.1
Indonesia	20.58	108.83	17.1	48.1
Malaysia	3.63	17.35	33.5	67.6
Myanmar	6.02	14.70	22.8	30.6
Singapore	2.08	4.33	100.0	100.0
Thailand	7.78	20.35	20.9	32.3
Vietnam	7.85	22.45	18.3	26.4
West Asia	39.22	137.94	44.6	65.0
Lebanon	1.45	3.47	59.5	86.6
Saudi Arabia	2.80	19.12	48.7	81.0
UAE	0.18	3.19	77.7	77.7
Source: UN, DESA (2008).

Closer integration of Asian economies with the world as a consequence of accelerating globalization processes over recent decades has had its pros and cons on the economic and social life of the people. When financial globalization in the last decade of the twentieth century was not tempered by the requisite regulatory mechanisms and safeguards, what began as a devaluation of the Thai Baht on 2 July 1997 quickly spread, with contagion effect, from Thailand to South Korea and Indonesia. Indeed, most Pacific Asian countries excepting China were engulfed in an unprecedented and devastating financial crisis. The Asian financial crisis led most Asian countries edging towards the brink but they managed somehow to slowly recover (Yeung 1998a). Another even more ominous financial crisis, this time global in nature and originating in the United States through the sub-prime meltdown, took Asia by storm in 2008. Signs of recovery in Asia appeared slowly and spottily in 2009 but the whole episode brought home the message of the vulnerability of every country to the shortcomings of the global economy and how Asian countries and cities can be severely and inadvertently affected (Yeung 1998b).

Physical transformation

On the basis of their sound economic development, most Asian countries have over the past four decades undergone the dramatic physical transformation of their cities. From what used to be pedestrian urban entities, many Asian cities have literally thrust themselves into the forefront of an urban renaissance that has come with more heightened roles played by cities in the era of globalization (Knight 1989, Kim et al. 1997, Yeung 1998c, 2000a, 2000b). The process of urban physical change in Asia can be traced through systemic forces emanating from within individual countries/cities and from global production and distribution chains, although these internal and external drivers of change are increasingly intertwined (Yeung 1996a, 2000a).

In the late 1960s, it was fashionable to explain the growth of Asian cities, especially in Southeast Asia, by invoking their growth through a process of urbanization without industrialization, in what T. G. McGee (1967) termed pseudo-urbanization. With the exception of perhaps of Japan, Asian cities were largely about to enter their industrialization phase, with the informal sector being quite prominent in providing employment. Certainly in Southeast Asia, hawkers and vendors played a valuable role in providing vital service and employment opportunities (McGee and Yeung 1977) and low-cost housing provided shelter for the masses (Yeung 1973, 1983, 1985, Yeh and Laquian 1979, Yeung and Wong 2003). The informal sector figured even more prominently in South Asia, since even in the 1990s, as much as 40% of India's urban population lived in informal housing, figures exceeded by Pakistan with 58%, including 22% in katchi abadis, a local name for squatter settlements (Bradnock and Williams 2002, p. 231). Indeed, South Asia had the largest concentration of global poverty, accounting for 43.5% of the world's total, with over 500 million people living on less than a dollar a day even in 2000, according to World Bank data (Bradnock and Williams 2002). South Indian intellectuals have provided a critical reappraisal of “mainstream development” and have provided an empirical and rational exposition of poverty by stressing its characterization and measurement, at the same time, pointing out the flawed approach of policy definition (Sen 1981, 1997). Drawing examples from South Asia, Lipton (1977) propounded his urban bias hypothesis by which he submitted the urban world is underrepresented in that sub-region, although the agricultural sector has remained critically important to the majority of the people in South Asia.

As relatively young nations which had become independent from colonial rule, most countries in South and Southeast Asia had by the early 1970s entered into a phase of rapid urbanization, with cities, particularly large cities being nurtured as symbols of national unity and national identity (Yeung and Lo 1976, p. xx, Yeung 1976, 1978). With poverty being a pervading problem, urban planning was primarily aimed at improving the basic functions and services of the city. Even as late as 1990, I was commissioned by the World Bank to write a “think piece” to address the subject of the access of the urban poor to basic infrastructure services in Asia. The urban poor across Asia were faced with the common problem of not adequately provided for in basic urban services ranging from water supply, housing, sanitation, transport and so on (Yeung 1991). Urban infrastructure development lagged behind economic development in the region even by the mid-1990s (Yeung 1994, Yeung and Han 1997, pp. 15–31). In any event, large, capital and “million” cities in the region were better off in physical infrastructure provisions because of their relative importance in their countries and their competitive advantage (Yeung 1988a, Misra and Misra 1998, Laquian et al. 2007). Yet large cities were confronted with incessant rural-urban migration. It was not surprising that many cities attempted to control their population growth (Yeung 1986, 2002a) and sought ways to improve metropolitan management (Yeung 1995e). As early as 1970, Jakarta attempted to “close” the city by putting in place policies to limit city-bound migration, complemented by a long-standing policy of transmigration to direct movement of population from congested Java to other less populated islands. Seoul instituted tax measures in 1973 to discourage the arrival of new migrants. Since 1958, China effectively sealed off rural-urban migration through a stringent household registration system until its relaxation in 1984 (Chan 2009). Singapore even controlled the entry of vehicles into the central city area to minimize traffic congestion by initiating an Area Licensing Scheme since 1975. In fact, cities became centres of change in Asia, with no shortage of ideas to improve urban growth and management (Dwyer 1972, Yeung 1990).

In terms of the speed and scale of urban change, no country can compare with China in its urban transformation in recent decades. China's urban population of 172 million in 1978 ballooned to 593.8 million in 2007. Within the same period, its level of urbanization leaped from 18% in 1978 to 45% in 2007, at a growth rate of almost 1% per year; the number of cities exploded from 192 in 1978 to 651 in 2007 (NBSC, various years). The number of cities has grown especially rapidly since the country adopted economic reforms in 1978. By 2006, there were 48 “million” cities, accounting for 41.53% of the total non-agricultural urban population in China (Gu et al. 2008, p. 30). While China's urbanization since the onset of economic reforms was driven by rural industrialization and town development, since the mid-1990s, urban spaces have been reproduced through a city-based and land-centred process of urbanization led by large cities (Lin 2007). During this period, the conversion of non-agricultural land to urban use has been widespread and historically intense, although recent measures have kept rural land conversion in check (Ho and Lin 2004, Lin and Ho 2005). In recent studies of urban development and urban space in China, the interplay of power between the state and the market is highlighted, as institutions, laws and regulatory controls are being put in place (McGee et al. 2007, Wu et al. 2007). Without a doubt, Chinese cities have grown the fastest and changed beyond recognition, with many exciting achievements and some wasteful investments (Yeung 2007a). Even the study of China's urbanization has progressed at an impressive pace, with admirable scholarship and tangible results to boot (Gu et al. 2008).

With respect to external forces that have been increasingly impacting on urban change in Asia, the phenomenon had become more prominent from the late 1980s. McGee has expounded the thesis of extended metropolitan region (EMR), drawing attention to the desakota process of interaction between urban and rural areas (Ginsburg et al. 1991). Integrated rural-urban economic growth may stretch anywhere from 50 to 100 km from the city centre. External and international firms seek business opportunities through the new international division of labour, where cheaper land and labour in Asian cities attract supply chains of transnational corporations. This process has been prevalent in Southeast Asia, where mega-urban regions have emerged (McGee and Robinson 1995, Yeung 2007c) and in China, as exemplified in a case study of Kunshan in the Lower Yangtze Delta (Marton 1998).

Where globalization processes especially favor, world cities or global cities have loomed large in the current phase of globalized economic development. Sassen (1991) has used Tokyo as one of the examples to expound her thesis of global cities, but world cities have been more appealing to scholars and planners in Asia. Either type, they symbolize a level of global reach and integration of Asian cities to global economic, political and cultural processes not previously experienced. The Asian region has its fair share of world cities, with Tokyo, Hong Kong and Singapore having reached the highest level of importance (Beaverstock et al. 1999). Hong Kong has gone one step further in employing the label – world city – to publicize the city since 1999 but the planning took more than a decade in its run-up to the handover in 1997 (Yeung 1997a).

In order to enhance their competitiveness and world fame, many Asian cities have been engaged in a process to make themselves known to the world, strategically targeting at potential investors and visitors. Otherwise known as place-making or place-marketing, Asian cities have favored mega-projects, with funding often coming from international sources, to promote their long-term interests. Kuala Lumpur's city centre and the Petronas Twin Towers, Tokyo's Teleport Town, the commercial and cultural hub at Marina Centre in downtown Singapore, and Shanghai's Pudong New Area are some shining examples (Olds 1995, Yeoh 2005). In addition, Tokyo's and Hong Kong's Disneyland, Osaka's United Studio and Macao's Venetian stand for another kind of attraction and place-making. Still another level of world fame is garnered by some Asian cities hosting global events such as the Olympic Games (Tokyo 1964, Seoul 1996, Beijing 2008), World Exposition (Shanghai 2010) and the World Cup (South Korea and Japan 2002).

In fact, world city formation can be achieved through a deliberate process of purposeful investment, in R&D in a drive towards new technology and knowledge, in infrastructure investment such as building huge and futuristic airports, container ports, intelligent buildings and first rate commercial land uses, and such like (Lo and Yeung 1998, pp. 132–154). Indeed, foreign demands for better services and facilities in Asian cities have converged on local needs to improve infrastructure facilities along many fronts. Within large cities, urban highways and elevated networks are complemented by subways. The outstanding example is China, where at least 15 cities are building subway lines and a dozen more are planning them. The most ambitious construction plans have been made in Guangzhou, which is building the world's largest and most advanced subway system. Construction is going non-stop around the clock in Guangzhou to reach a long-term plan of 500 miles of subways and light rail routes, from the present 71 miles of subway lines (New York Times, 17 March 2009). China's grandiose plans in subway construction and automobile manufacturing go hand in hand, with total sales of automobiles outstripping the United States in the first six months of 2009, at 6.1 million vehicles versus USA's 4.8 million vehicles (Wong 2009). These stand in stark contrast to India, where in Mumbai, its population of 19 million is struggling daily to move about the mega-city without being able to count on a better day. The city has no plans to build any subway system, an understanding based on my field reconnaissance in Mumbai in early 2009.

Along with the physical changes of Asian cities that have been touched upon, they are being suburbanized, motorized, westernized and globalized, especially for cities located in East and Southeast Asia. The convergence with the western model has been observed of urban development in Southeast Asia (Dick and Rimmer 1998), but much of the same has been afoot or already in place in East Asia. For the most obvious physical change of Asian cities, the best indicator is perhaps the competition to vie for the distinction of possessing the tallest building in the world. This race is never ending, as the tallest building fame comes and goes. Of the 10 tallest buildings in the world in 2009, nine were located in Asia. It is noteworthy that six of the 10 tallest buildings are located in cities in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, making it perhaps a mark of Chinese cities.3 As a consequence, the skyline of many Asian cities, notably Hong Kong and Shanghai, is stunningly beautiful.

The physical transformation of Asian cities has largely occurred during the past two decades. The most dramatic of all the urban physical changes can be epitomized by Dubai, of the United Emirates. A picture showing the main thoroughfare of the city in 1990 is completely transformed in another shot taken in 2003. Dubai stands for the most ambitious physical engineering change of any Asian city. It boasts of having the world's largest indoor ski facility, the largest shopping mall, the tallest building, the biggest amusement park and other superlatives. However, even Dubai has not escaped the onslaught of the recent global financial crisis. It was reported by Time magazine (25 May 2009) that property prices in 2009 had declined to 2007 levels and expatriates had been leaving in droves.

Social transformation

Cities exist more than their physical form but they inhabit dreamlike space of past and present, individual and collective memories (Robinson 2000, p. 108). It is people who give meaning to cities entailing associational life, social conviviality, identity and power (Ho and Douglass 2008). However, these were not the immediate concerns of urban life in Asia in the early 1970s when poverty was an overriding challenge for governments and international assistance bodies to tackle. A sample of some of the policy foci and research projects included low-cost housing (Yeung 1973, 1983, 1985), community participation in delivering urban services (Yeung and McGee 1986) and employment and livelihood for the urban poor (Yeung 1988b). The policy focus on the urban poor in Asia persisted through the 1990s and beyond (Yeung 1991, 2001a). The exceptionally rapid economic growth in many Asian countries since 1970, as noted earlier, has markedly reduced the incidence of poverty. Overall for Asia, the official poverty rate was reduced from 32% in 1990 to 22% in 2000 (Kabeer 2006).

Indeed, recent reports have focused on how past efforts have borne fruit in reducing urban poverty in Asia. Real progress has been made to reduce poverty through partnerships working together to improve slums, networking, providing credit for financing micro-enterprises and adopting a programme rather than a project approach. Economic growth has accounted for 60% of poverty reduction in Asia (Hamid and Villareal 2001, pp. 237–239). Complementing these efforts have been major advances made by NGOs (non-governmental organizations) to work in concert with government bodies to improve the livelihood of the urban poor ranging from protecting the environment to meeting basic health needs. NGOs have been exceptionally active in South Asia, notably India and Bangladesh, with the role of women effective in generating positive socio-economic change (Bradnock and Williams 2002). In view of the progress made to reduce poverty, development aid from developed countries itself is being dwarfed significantly by the move towards neo-liberalism which became the hallmark of the 1990s and which left its imprint in all countries in South Asia, especially Nepal and Bangladesh, and across the south (Bradnock and Williams 2002, p. 270). Poverty alleviation in the urban areas in Southeast Asia has been no less impressive, where the work of NGOs also scored high marks (Porio 1997). Some of these NGO activities have been inspired and supported by global transnational movements which have take precedence over indigenous funding and efforts. Urban social movements related to protecting the environment and improving low-cost housing are examples that have enjoyed widespread support.

Over the years the persistence of poverty has been a powerful motive for Asian population to take a key decision to migrate, both within their countries and to other countries. Although seeking better economic opportunities has been commonly identified as the primary motive, many people have also migrated within their countries because of warfare, national social movements and the like. During the past decades, Asia has painfully gone through many wars for different reasons, such as the Vietnam War (1959–1975), the Bangladesh War of Independence (1971), Indonesia's war over Aceh (2001–2004), the Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988) and the First Gulf War (1990–1991). The rustification programme of educated youth, otherwise known as xiafeng, in China involved some 12 million youths going to the countryside for a learning experience and contribution to nation building at the height of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution (1966–1976). Many youths returned to Shanghai and other large cities after the tumultuous period concluded (Ivory and Lavely 1977).

Internal migration in many of the Asian countries mentioned above was sizeable and has had huge social, political and economic significance (Yeung 2002a). In Vietnam and countries within South Asia, post-independence migration has been economically and socially motivated. However, with the Middle East having emerged as a favorite destination with its petrol dollar after the oil crises in the 1970s, international migration from countries in South Asia, the Philippines, South Korea and others has been substantial and sustained. Kerala in India and Sri Lanka are two South Asian regions that have been identified as having their social and cultural landscapes dominated by migration to the Gulf countries of West Asia since the early 1970s. International migration has introduced new styles of consumption, production of novel forms of social differentiation in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan (Osella and Gardner 2004). It has also led to marked social transformation in all countries concerned, in which flows of resources (such as remittances) have gone from centres of capital into their peripheries. In addition, social and power relations have changed in the place of origin, and new consumption tastes and patterns have taken root (Bolaria and Bolaria 1997). The phenomenon of transnational domestic workers has become a familiar landscape in high-income countries and economies such as Hong Kong, Singapore, Taipei and countries in the Middle East (Huang et al. 2005).

With the kind of rapid economic transformation that has occurred in Asia, it is to be expected that society in many countries has been undergoing revolutionary change. Like the ancient “Silk Road” that connected China to the outside world, the new Silk Road is projected to connect Asia to the West. A rapid and transforming change is coming to pass in many Asian cities. A new middle class is said to have emerged in many countries and cities, especially large cities. Although the middle class is a contested concept, Smith (2002) has estimated that India has probably 300 million who can be considered as the middle class, and China has about 110 million, or about 15% of the employed population. Professional middle class youth has been observed to be important in directing social change in Vietnam, especially in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City (King et al. 2009). Similarly, Singapore, Manila, Kuala Lumpur and other cities in Southeast Asia have been transformed in the past decade by the expansion of consumer culture, along with a different urban landscape, by virtue of the “new middle classes” (Clammer 2003, p. 407). The proliferation of posh and large shopping malls in cities ranging from Beijing, Manila, Bangkok to Jakarta is a new social and economic phenomenon of Asian cities (Yeung 2002b, 2002c). A reflection of the how better off Asians are, using ownership of key commodities as indicators, will testify to the vastly changed and rapidly affluent society. In television sets per 1000 people, the figures for 1970 and 2003, respectively, are dramatically improved for China (1, 350), India (0, 83), (Sri Lanka, 0, 117) which started with almost nothing, and substantially improved for Hong Kong (113, 504), South Korea (19, 458) and Japan (337, 795), with the United States (395, 938) used for comparison. Similarly, in ownership of personal computers per 1000 people, the figures for 1988 and 2003, respectively, are impressive for China (0.3, 27.6), India (0.2, 7.2), Sri Lanka (0.2, 13.2), which started almost from zero, and indicative of very rapid change in Hong Kong (25.7, 422), South Korea (11.2, 558) and Japan (41.6, 382.2), which are miles ahead from the previous group of countries, with the United States (184, 658.9) again used for comparison (Mostrous et al. 2006, p. 11). It has been rationalized that Asia has become an indispensable part of a complex global economy, having come of age during a period of explosive globalization and technological change. Asia has become an engine of global economic growth, with a high savings rate and an increasing bias towards consumption. The world needs a new growth engine in the twenty-first century and Asia has the ability to develop a sustainable and consumer-based economic growth model (Brahm 2001, Mostrous et al. 2006).

In the midst of growing affluence in Asia, extreme poverty persists and has become more pronounced in rural areas. Table 3 shows disaggregated data for three largest countries in Asia. In both China and Indonesia, both urban and rural poverty gaps have sharply declined since the early 1990s, a reflection of their very rapid economic transition over the past two decades. The difference is much less marked in India. Asian urbanization has become more economically and socially polarized, as measured by the Gini index. Data for a few selected countries in South Asia show a worsening trend. Between 1991 and 2000, the Gini coefficient as a measure for income inequality in Bangladesh rose from 0.30 to 0.41, Sri Lanka from 0.32 to 0.40 from 1990 to 2002, and Nepal from 0.34 to 0.39 between 1995 and 2003 (Kabeer 2006, p. 64). The sharpest rise in the Gini index was recorded by China, which saw the index rose from 29.2 in 1990 to 35.4 in 2005. The biggest drop in the Gini index occurred in Malaysia, whose index dropped from 43.9 in 1990 to 37.9 in 2005, but the Philippines and Thailand remained stable and high over the said period, with the score in the low 40s in 2005 (ADB 2008, p. 122). In China it has be reported that increasing social inequality has been a cause for growing instability. Social unrest has been more frequent now than a decade ago when society was less affluent (Huang 2008).

Table 3. Rural and urban poverty gap ratios of the three largest countries in Asia and the Pacific.

		Poverty gap ratio		Gini index
		Urban	Rural	Urban	Rural
China	1990	5	27	26	31
	2005	0	6	35	36
India	1993	11	14	34	29
	2004	10	11	38	30
Indonesia	1990	15	16	35	26
	2005	4	5	40	30
Source: ADB (2008, p. 119).

However, positive change in Asian cities has come from the mindset of the people. As an example, liveable cities with an accent on the quality of life have been espoused by academics and planners. Consequently, the planning agenda has built-in concerns about economic, social and environmental sustainability (Girardet 2004, Yeung 2004c, 2009). Smart growth, compact cities and new urbanism have been invoked from experiences in western countries. People have become more conscious of the effects of climate change, possible sea-water level rises and their negative impacts of Asian coastal cities (Yeung 2001b), limits of combustion technologies and the search for renewable energy and so on. Car ownership is still high in some cities, such as Bangkok (255 cars per 100 persons), Tokyo (250) and Seoul (220) versus some cities much better positioned from an environmental standpoint, represented by Hong Kong (55), Mumbai (50) and Guangzhou (45) (UN-HABITAT 2008, p. 178). These concerns about car ownership and energy consumption are embodied in a new concept of harmonious cities that has been advocated by the UN body, underpinned by two guiding thoughts of equity and sustainability and maintaining social and environmental harmony (UN-HABITAT 2008). In fact, at the Fourth World Urban Forum convened in Nanjing in November 2008, harmonious cities provided an overarching theme to connect cities of the world to take stock of the present to chart their common future (Germain 2009).

Informational transformation

One of the distinguishing features of the current phase of globalization from past ones is the fact that it has been driven by new technologies, notably information and communication technologies (ICT). These technologies that until recently were nothing but pipe dreams to many people have been widely adopted and become reality. They have radically changed our lives and the way in which cities function within them and between them. The ease with which people can access, generate, transfer and retrieve information is a new blessing, but it has as well created a digital divide between those who have access to the new technologies and those who have not, often differentiated by economic, educational and locational attributes. In short, Asian cities and their inhabitants are never the same with the advent of the information age.

People in the information age have taken many of the recent ICT inventions and conveniences for granted. Imagine a life now without the computer, the cellular phone, e-mails, digital camera and the like. Yet the Internet's founding can be traced to a message sent on 29 October 1969 from UCLA to Stanford and by 1988, only about 60,000 computers in the world were connected to the Internet (Zittrain 2008, p. 27). The cost of processing information has tremendously cheapened over time. In 1961 a single transistor cost US $10, which is enough to buy almost two million transistors today, which with “rounding to zero” is essentially free of charge. The time-tested Moore's Law accurately predicted that the cost of computer processing would drop by half at least every two years. Indeed, the digital computer and the Internet shrink the price of many forms of work to free (Canon 2009).

Over the past few years, the widespread adoption of ICT technologies has occurred in Asia. By 2007, mobile telephones in developing countries in Asia have cornered over 80% of the total telephone market. In the poorer developing countries in the region, most of the expansion in communications has been via mobile telephone connectivity. For example, the banks in the Philippines allow people to pay, receive and transfer money using a mobile telephone (ADB 2008, p. 123). Between 2003 and 2007, the change in telephone lines per 100 people reached between 20 to 40 for most countries in Asia, with the role of fixed lines further eroded (ADB, p. 124). The increase in the number of Internet users per 100 population has similarly been substantial between 2000 and 2007, ranging, respectively, from China (1.8, 15.8), Hong Kong (27.8, 55.0), Japan (29.9, 73.5), Macao (13.6, 49.5) to South Korea (40.7, 72.2) in East Asia; Indonesia (0.9, 5.6), Malaysia (21.4, 56.5), the Philippines (2.0, 6.0), Singapore (32.4. 60.9), Thailand (3.8, 21.0) to Vietnam (0.3, 20.5) in Southeast Asia; and Bangladesh (0.1, 0.3), India (0.5, 17.1), Pakistan (0.2, 10.7) to Sri Lanka (0.6, 4.0) (ADB, p. 127). Quite clearly, the level of economic development is positively related to the degree of intensity of Internet users. Another source has reported that of the 1 billion users of the Internet service in the world in December 2008, China ranked first with its 179.7 million users, compared with 60 million in Japan.4

In an information society, the strategic importance of cities, especially world cities and global cities, is to become managerial centres for global activities that can be subsumed under three heads: economic competitiveness and productivity, socio-cultural integration and political representation. First, competitiveness does not mean cost-cutting, but rather increasing productivity, which, in turn, is predicated upon connectivity, innovation and institutional flexibility. Connectivity means being linked to circuits of information and communication; innovation invokes the capacity to generate new knowledge based on a capacity to obtain and process strategic information; and institutional flexibility refers to the internal capacity and external autonomy of local institutions in dealing with supra local entities. Secondly, as globalization extends its homogenizing influences, it is incumbent on nation states and cities to strengthen their cultural and historical identity of territories to cohere with their people and add meaning to their lives. Thirdly, city governments faced with the challenge of authority and power that cross-border flows of capital, goods and services inevitably entail, have to seek a revitalized role through the structural crisis by building new networks of cooperation and solidarity (Borja and Castells 1997, Yeung 2001d).

The adoption of new technological innovations for communication and exchange of information has resulted in the new geographies of Asia. Two sectors have been exploding in their growth and influence. The first is telecommunications infrastructure, notably fiber optic cables, and the second is the expansion of regional electronic media, especially television through satellites (Forbes 1997, p. 21). Fiber optics is the preferred technology despite the challenges associated with laying deep-sea cables. By 1995, 50 telecommunications carriers from 34 countries had invested US $3.5 billion in the expanding web of international optical systems in the region. In the present wired world, the concentration of submarine cables in Asia is increasingly pronounced (Malecki and Wei 2009). A similar rush for satellites is epitomized by Interlsat, the 127-member global consortium, launching the first Pacific satellite in 1996 (Yeung 2001d). With the widespread adoption of technological innovations, a dilemma that has to be addressed in the information age is media ethics in Asia (Iyer 2002). As a consequence, all these developments have greatly advanced the connectivity and quality of life in Asian cities.

The emergence of the informational economy has facilitated the globalization of finance. The operation of stock markets across the world, for example, is computer-dependent and closely linked, to such an extent that the stock market crashes in 1987, 1997 and 2008 were to some extent computer-triggered, certainly with the first two. Even mass political protests witnessed over the past decade in cities such as Taipei, Bangkok and Jakarta have been facilitated by the ease and ready transmission of communication (Yeung 2009). Transnational crime of diverse kinds is a fact of life in the global economy that has affected Asian cities. Drug traffic, illicit traffic of weapons, art treasures, human beings, human organs, radioactive materials and money laundering continue to plague cities in the region. Alarmed by the growing trend of cross-border crime, some Asian countries have made the trafficking of drugs a crime punishable by death (Yeung 2001d).

Recent ICT technological advances have helped people to change their concept of space and distance, even within Asian cities. The region and its cities have suddenly become much smaller, being traversed by information superhighways across cyberspace. The relationship between ICT, space and place has been played out in the spatial impact of the new information technology. The choices people make about ICT technologies capture the potential immensity of social and spatial changes, which can be so huge that Wilson and Corey (2000) have termed information tectonics. Electronic space has emerged in the electronic age, with the need to plan cyber structure and its relationship to social forces. Cyber city entails planning designs and policy choices, where public or private spaces become blurred and may need to be redefined in “web cities” (Aurigi 2005). The best example for an Asian country to plan its future and cities is Malaysia. That country has planned to build its future on an explicit reliance on technological innovations. Malaysia's Vision 2020 is essentially built upon its technological uplift and reaching developed status via ICT policies and investments. The focus is in the new Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) from the Petronas Twin Towers in Kuala Lumpur to the Kuala Lumpur International Airport, with the administrative capital of Putrajaya and the science park of Cyberjaya in between (Bunnell 2004, pp. 351–376). Similarly, Singapore has envisaged its future through ONE, that is one network for everyone, in which internal spatial organization and ICT infrastructure are integrated through technology corridors (Wilson and Corey 2000). The Malaysian and Singapore examples represent a genre of intelligent cities which can inspire other Asian cities about their future.

Reflections on Asian cities and urbanization

Earlier in this paper in Table 2, it is shown that Asia as a whole reached a level of urbanization only of 39.7% in 2005, albeit the existence of sizeable sub-regional variation. In 2007, however, for the first time in human history more people lived in urban settlements in the world, making the twenty-first century the urban century. The implications for future urbanization in Asia are immense. It means, first and foremost, there is considerable room for Asia to urbanize in order to “catch up” with the world average. It will still be a long distance to the urbanization level of 70% or more in developed countries. Indeed, the United Nations estimates that the world's urban population will further increase by 3.2 billion people by 2050 from now. It is further estimated that some 60% of this increase, or 1.9 billion people, will be in Asia (Montgomery et al. 2003, pp. 11–17, Dhakal 2008, p. 7). Of all the Asian countries, China is the only one that has an urbanization policy of increasing its level of population by about 1% per year to 2050 when its urban population will reach 70% or thereabout (China Mayors Association 2003, p. 39, Yeung 2007a). China's is a policy of deliberate urbanization that began with a low base in 1978, when the country opened up, and that would be most challenging for any country to put into practice. In 2008, China's level of urbanization reached approximately 45.7%, with 607 million urban dwellers (Chen 2009).

In an increasingly globalized economy that characterizes most countries in the world, cities continue to play key roles, in particular world cities and global cities. Cities are more than concentration of people and resources. They are hubs of trade, culture, information and industry. They articulate and mediate major functions of the global economy. In Asia, its world cities and global cities have a fair share of their global reach and importance and, if the size of population of cities is taken into consideration as well, Asia would fare even better (Yeung 1996b, 1997b). United Nations source shows that 10 of the 19 largest cities in the world in 2007 were located in Asia, and 5 alone were in the sub-region of South Asia (UN DESA 2008, p. 10). Management of these super large cities is, to say the least, extremely challenging (Laquian 2005), especially in infrastructure provision (Laquian et al. 2007). Managing the orderly transfer of rural population to urban areas has always been a thorny problem for many governments to tackle.

Sustained and high rates of economic growth in China and India over the two decades have raised the prospect of a recentralization of global economic growth to Asia in which their cities will be major propelling agents. The historical pattern of economic growth in India is most revealing. In 1600, when the East India Company was founded, Britain was generating 1.8% of the world's economic output, whereas India was producing 22.5% (Dalrymple 2007). This set of figures, as well as other similar data, unravels the trajectory of global economic growth which, prior to the advent of the Industrial Revolution, was heavily centred in India and China. In addition, Table 4 shows their relative global shares in economic output and population in the twentieth century. In their share of world economic output, both China and India exhibit a pattern of a sharp drop in 1950, reflecting the effects of World War II. However, at century end their relative importance was back to, indeed exceeded, where they were before in 1913. Both China and India had a smaller relative share of world population by century end than the beginning of the century, more markedly in China because of a successful one-child policy adopted since the late 1970s. The record of recent economic growth and reforms in China and India has encouraged many observers to think that the world is perhaps entering another transition with them playing more enhanced global roles (Faber 2002, Tseng and Cowen 2005). Will the recent global economic crisis present opportunities for another turning point?

Table 4. Share of world output and population (in %).

	Share of gross world product		Share of world population
Year	China	India	China	India
1913	8.9	7.5	26.4	17.0
1950	4.5	4.2	21.1	14.2
1998	11.5	7.7	21.1	16.5
Source: Tseng and Cowen (2005, p. 2, citing Madison 2001).

To generate new global demand to sustain the next phase of growth, it is almost a consensus that this will not come from the United States, Europe and Japan, which still account for more than half of the global economy. Some would even argue that China, almost alone, has the means to lead the global economy out of its doldrums, with India and other Asian countries playing supplementary roles (Moeller 2009). Beyond Asia, there are other countries in the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) grouping, forming a powerful cluster with their large and rapidly growing economies and possible forces for rebalancing global demand. Friedmann (2005) in a recent book has provocatively submitted that the world is flat. Flatness in this sense means more countries are becoming good places to do business – more stable, open and market-oriented. Many Asian cities, especially those along the Pacific coastal region, have truly embraced this concept and have adopted place-making policies, with global networking as one of their objectives. Asian cities are increasingly conscious of their economic competitiveness and business environment and have fared well in global rankings, notably Hong Kong and Singapore (Yeung 1987, 2001c, 2004b, Ni et al. 2009).

If indeed global economic growth will gravitate more towards Asia in the future, what rethinking is appropriate for Asian cities to shoulder their newfound opportunities and responsibilities? Firstly, this means that Asian cities will have to cope with growing populations. Energy consumption at current rates is unsustainable in the long run for many Asian cities. Energy consumption has gone largely to buildings, as exemplified by Seoul (57%), Singapore (54%) and Tokyo (53%); to transport, as in Hong Kong (58%); and to industry, as in Shanghai (80%), Beijing (62%) and Kolkata (56 %) (UN-HABITAT, 2009, p. 122). The search for alternative and recyclable energies has to be intensified, in view of the limited stock of fossil fuels and the growing concern of climate change. This brings to a dilemma of whether to build more roads or subways in large cities, especially in China, although the choice is clearly not one or the other. Secondly, where Asian cities have to articulate with the global economy and have disproportionate access to non-integrated hard and soft infrastructure, they have become ad hoc urban amalgams, spanning multiple political jurisdictions that are often in competition (Oliver 2008, p. 22). Metropolitan governance in the age of globalization is particularly challenging and complex. It calls for inclusive urban planning, with a political commitment to pro-poor development to ameliorate worsening economic and social inequality. Governing a city of cities demands effective leadership, efficient financing and active citizen participation (UN-HABITAT 2009). Finally, haste brings environmental ruin, corruption and other negative side effects in the rush to mount urban infrastructure projects. More than 40 cities in China are in a frenzy to build subways, which total 1,700 km of new urban metro rail expected for completion in 2015 at a cost of 623 billion yuan or US $90.74 billion. The hectic pace of construction has resulted in an alarmingly high accident rate, with deaths, building collapses and economic costs (Toh 2009a) In addition, China's much-vaunted 4 trillion yuan (US $582.1 billion) stimulus package being implemented in 2009 has led to fears of wasted resources and misallocated funds due to shoddy construction and environmental damage (Toh 2009b). In sum, Asian cities have to reflect on where they have fallen short in their current practices and policies and in what directions they should seek changes, innovations and breakthroughs to meet the new urban challenge.

Conclusion

It has been the purpose of this paper to trace the transformation of Asian cities over the past four decades, economically, physical, socially and from the viewpoint of information generation and transfer. It is clear from the foregoing that Asian cities have succeeded in improving themselves by a large margin over this period and, by now, some of them have catapulted themselves to the league of the most culturally dynamic, economically thriving and socially diverse cities in the world. What can be considered as the mission and vision of Asian cities as the future beckons?

This is a critical juncture to ponder over the future of Asian cities as the global financial crisis of 2008 is still fresh in its widespread and devastating impacts. For one thing, the crisis has stalled globalization, but is the globalization process being reshaped or unmade? All attempts to date have stemmed from efforts to reshape the global economy, starting in November 2008 with the Group of Twenty (G-20) consisting of leading industrial and emerging market economies given a mandate to manage global change. This gave greater voice and representation to these economies. When rightly targeted and organized, the G-20 governments can rely on the existing international institutions to transform the crisis into an opportunity for a stronger and more legitimate governance of globalization (Pisani-Ferry and Santos 2009).

At this historic and momentous time when the global financial crisis has shaken the world, Asian countries and their cities have a unique opportunity to reposition themselves in the global economy and vie for greater leadership and responsibility. China and India, along with other Asian countries and cities, have the potential and their strong and deep-rooted civilizations to lead the world to new vistas and horizons of development and prosperity. Only time will tell whether this is a turning point for Asia to re-emerge as leaders of the world and lead the present century to conclude as the Asian century.

Notes

Keynote address presented at the 10th Asian Urbanization Conference held at The University of Hong Kong, 17 Aug 2009.

Sources: http://www.asianewsnet.net/news.php?id=7092&sec=2, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangkok. [Accessed 26 Aug 2009].

Source: www.infoplease.com.com/ipa/A0001338html. World's tallest buildings. [Accessed 9 May 2009].

Source: http://news.sin.com/Singtao. [Accessed 9 May 2009].