Geography - Mexico City Case Study (Effects of rapid urbanisation in…
Geography - Mexico City Case Study
Advantages & Disadvantages of Top-down approaches
Top-down - Disadvantages
They can take a long time to put into action.
They do not involve local people who may feel alienated.
They may suffer from budget cuts or corruption and so never happen.
Top-down - Advantages
It creates work for people in the city.
It is possible to deal with large-scale issues such as flooding and air pollution, which smaller community-led strategies.
The city government can make sure there is enough money for the project.
There is political power to make sure it happens
Advantages & Disadvantages of Bottom-up approaches
Bottom-up - Disadvantages
Do not have a lot of money, so may not be able to scale up.
Cannot easily deal with big problems like air pollution.
May not have political support
Bottom-up - Advantages
Do not need a lot of people initially - can set up as an example to others.
Do not need a lot of money.
Do not take long to get going.
Small scale so people feel involved and are likely to go on supporting them after the initial interest has faded.
Structure of the city
There is a large CBD which is home to banks, insurance and financial services. This is in addition to government offices and headquarters of large companies. These companies are both Mexican and international (TNCs).
Next to the CBD is the inner city, here there is a mixture of housing. There are some ageing apartment blocks, alongside some high quality modern apartment buildings.
Extending further out the city, the pattern becomes more complex. There is a mixture of industrial areas, luxury housing areas and areas of high density housing. Some of this is in the form of squatter settlements.
This pattern has been created by population growth, housing segregation, income level, industrialisation and developments in transport.
Push and Pull factors of National and International Migration.
Pull Factor: Positive aspects of a place that attracts people towards it,
Push Factor: Negative aspects of a particular place that forces people from it.
Pull factors - Attracting people to Mexico city
The cultural life of the city and its domination services in the country are other attractive.
45% of all the country's industry.
82% of people have access to clean water .
Jobs - New factories, means more people are needed to work.
(Puebla) - Two thirds of people lack proper housing.
(Puebla) - Literacy rate is only 65%
(Puebla) - Only 40% of people have clean water.
(Puebla) - it is a poor region to the east of Mexico City. There are few jobs outside of farming. Framing can e unreliable as crops may fail leaving people with limited income/food.
Rates of natural increase
The main cause of rising natural increase is a fall in the death rate.
Economic investment and growth
Mexico City to migrants from countryside was the growth in jobs opportunities in factories and offices as economic investment was channelled into the city.
Rural to Urban migration
The movement of people to urban areas from rural areas due to better jobs, healthcare and education.
Mexico city has a culture which is a mix of Spanish and indigenous traditions. This extends to food, music, religion and architecture. The city is the most important cultural centre in Mexico. The city is home to a national opera and theatre as well as TV and radio stations which operate across the country and neighbouring countries.
Mexico city has a population of over 21 million and is the largest metropolitan area in the western hemisphere.
It is one of the most important financial centres in the Americas. In 2011, the city had a gross domestic product of US$ 411 billion. This makes it one of the richest urban areas in the world. GDP is the total value of goods and services produced in a year in a particular location.
There is huge inequality across the city, in terms of income, lifestyle, housing, employment and access to services. Spatial inequality is very powerful with some areas of the city being completely different to others.
Mexico City - Quality of life
Mexico City has the best living standards in Mexico.
29% of employees work very long hours compared with an average of 13% in other developing and emerging countries.
Poorer people also have to work longer hours in Mexico City.
This explains the gap between the poorer and richer and the areas in which they live in.
The top 20% of people in Mexico City earn 13 times as much as the bottom 20%.
The average disposable household income per person in 2013 was US $13,085, which is lower then the Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average of US $25,908.
The poorest people live in shanty towns and rubbish dumps.
They are able to get homes in the better parts of the city.
The wealthier people are also those with political power
Arrival from the countryside
People who have recently arrived in Mexico City from the rural areas are usually poor and have to live in slums or shanty towns.
Effects of rapid urbanisation in Mexico City
Air pollution due to lots of traffic
Difficult to police
Cable car reduces air pollution
Dry lake bed amplifies earthquakes
Current infrastructure cannot deal with the waste
60% of people live in informal settlements
4 generations live in the same building, overcrowding
Long commutes to work
Houses built in natural areas of beauty due to high demand
Uses more water than any other city in the world
Lots of sewage and water pollution due to rising population