Urban and Regional Report No, 81-12 Public Disclosure Authorized

THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF THE METROPOLITAN OF

By

Yoon Joo Lee* Public Disclosure Authorized June, 1981

This report was prepared under the auspices of the City Study Research Project (RPO 671-47) as City Study Project Paper No. 19. The views reported here are those of the author, and they should not be interpreted as reflecting the views of the World Bank or its affiliated organizations. This report is being circulated to stimulate discussion and comment. Public Disclosure Authorized

Urban and Regional Economics Division Developmei%,t Economics Department Development Policy Staff The World Bank Washington, D.C. 20433 Public Disclosure Authorized TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page. Abstract ......

I. Introduction ......

II. Trends of Population Growth and Structure in Metropolitan Regions ...... 3

III. Spatial Deconcentration of Employment and Establishments ...... 10

IV. Population and Employment Density Functions ...... 15

V. Conclusions . . . 26

Footnotes ...... 27

Annex ...... 29

References ...... 31

Support for the work reported in this paper has been provided by the City Study research project (RPO 671-47) funded by the World Bank. The views and conclusions reported here are those of the author and not of the World Bank or its affiliated organizations. The author would like to thank Gregory K. Ingram for research guidance and supervision and Kyu Sik Lee and other members of the City Study research staff at the World Bank and at Corporacion Centro Regional de Poblacion in Bogota for comments on the work presented here, with particular appreciation to Anna Sant' Anna who organized and supervised the collection of the census data. ABSTRACT

Using the published census data, this paper describes the spatial structure of the eight metropolitan regions of Brazil during

1940-1980. The analysis shows that the experience of these regions is similar to what has been observed in the developed and some other developing countries. The growth of population and employment in these areas has been rapid but its speed has been associated with the size of the . Both population and employment in large metropolitan regions have deconcentrated, while they have concentrated in small regions. Employment is spatially more concentrated than is population. Large establishments in manufacturing tend to be located in the rings. The reverse trend is observed in commerce. I. INTRODUCTION

It is well known that there is a strong relationship between

the world. urbanization and economic development in many countries of services Urbanization increases as the demand shifts to products and income mostly produced in urban areas as the economy gruws and real hand, provides rise. Urbanization in developing countries, on the other resources many benefits to the economy, i.e., efficient allocation of economic and economies of scale which are important components of development.

It is also well known that urbanization in developing countries

by developed is much faster than what has been experienced historically especially countries (Beier et al, 1976). With rapid growth in population, in urban in developing countries, the proportion of population living structure areas has increased remarkably. With rapid urbanization, the Concen- of the cities of these countries is subject to strong pressures.

tration of population places heavy pressures on urban transportation, quality. In water, and sewage systems and deteriorates environmental

addition, urban migrants may be poorer, less educated and more greater likely to be unemployed than the general population, placing by the strain on the already overloaded public services provided schools. government such as social welfare, health services and public adequate To minimize pressures on these infrastructure and provide urban public services in a rapidly developing country, decisions on

policy should be made in a coordinated way focusing on the socio-economic -2-

needs of the urban population. Such an urban policy would establish

a clear priority of various projects such as housing, transportation,

and water and sewage system, given the overall investment resource

constraints. Policy making and long run planning in urban areas

require knowledge of the development of the spatial structure over

time.

This paper investigates the growth and distribution of popula-

tion and employment in the eight metropolitan regions of Brazil: Sao

Paulo, , , , , Salvador,

Fortaleza, and . Specifically it attempts to decide whether the growth and distribution of population and employment of these regions exhibit strong regularieties and deconcentration observed in most developed and other developing countries.

It is hoped that this study could produce important results for the sound formulation of urban policies. From the viewpoint of urban planning, it is important to try to predict the future movement of total population and employment. We could project this by analyzing previous trends.

The main body of this paper is composed of four sections.

Section II discusses the growth and distribution of population and compares them among and within the metropolitan regions. Section III examines the deconcentration of employment and establishment in the manufacturing industry and commerce. Section IV presents estimated population and employment density gradients and compares them among the regions and changes in gradients over time. Section V summarizes the findings of this study. -3-

II. TRENDS OF POPULATION GROWTH AND STRUCTURES IN METROPOLITAN REGIONS

The eight regions being studied in this paper are three metropolitan regions (, Recife, Salvador) located in the north-

east which is generally poor and less developed and five metropolitan regions (Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte, Sao Paulo, Curitiba, Porto

Alegre) in the sourtheast where economic growth has been fast. Except

for Curitiba, all the regions had a population of more than one million

in 1970. These eight regions and Belem were recognized as retropolitan

regions in the in 1967 and were legalized in

1970. These metropolitan regions were created to centralize planning and public service delivery for large urban areas of the country and to provide a revenue sharing system among the municipalities within these

regions. Belem is not studied in this paper due to data problems.

To construct a consistent boundary of a metropolitan region over the time period being studied here (1940-1980 census years), census l/ data for municipalities in each region were used and by going back

to earlier years it was possible to define roughly the same geographic 2/ regions for the previous years as in 1970 (see Table 1 in Annex). To study the spatial structure of the metropolitan regions, each region is divided into two areas: city and ring. City is here defined as the municipality at the core of the region and the rest of the region is defined as ring.

The metropolitan regions are very important in Brazil. The

total population of the eight regions in 1970 is more than twenty three million, roughly one fourth of the total population of the country. -4.

Also, the growth of population in the eight regions has been faster than the nation as a whole. Table 1 shows that between 1940 and 1980, the total population of the eight regions more than quintipled while the nation's population less than tripled. With this rapid growth, the population share of the eight regions to the nation increased from 15.9 percent to 28.9 percent during the same period.

The population growth in the eight regions has been rapid but its magnitude varies among the regions and the time periods observed.

For all regions except for Sao Paulo and Curitiba, the growth rate in the fifties was higher than in any other decades. While large regions like Sao Paula and Rio de Janeiro show higher growth rates in the forties than in the sixties or seventies, smaller regions like Fortaleza,

Salvador and Curitiba show larger growth rates in the sixties and seven- ties. Regions like Recife and Salvador experienced stable growth of population while Curitiba and Belo Horizonte went through wide variation in their growth rates. Close analysis shows that the growth rate is large when the population of the regions ranges from 4000,000-1,500,000. This

growth pattern is consistent with the typical growth pattarn observed

in other countries, i.e., average growth rates decline slightly with

size.

In addition, population growth has not been distributed

evenly within the metropolitan regions. The average growth rate in the

rings of the eight regions is 4.8 percent, while the rate in the cities

is slightly less than 4.0 percent. For the large regions, population

in rings has grown faster than that in the cities. For the small

regions, the reverse trend is observed. Table 1: POPULATION-AND ITS GROWTH RATES IN THE EIGHT METROPOLITAN 'REGIONS AND BRAZIL

(Population in thousands)

Population 9 ... 88 .-Estimated Annual'Growth'Rates Metropolitan .'1980______ual______;rowth-Rates______Regions 1940 1950 1960 1970 1940-50 1950-60 1960-70 19/-80

Sao Paulo 1,568 3,181 4,794 7,751 (8,141) 12,582 7.3 4.2 4.9 4.4 Rio de Janeiro 2,364 3,326 5,093 6,910 (7,149) 9,091 3.5 4.4 3.1 2.4 Porto Alegre 673 906 1,444 1,921 (1,980) 2,784 3.0 4.8 2.9 3.5 n Recife 554 819 1,240 1,750 (1,793) 2,346 4.0 4.2 3.5 2.7 Belo Horizonte 346 494 909 1,578 (1,627) 2,563 3.6 6.3 5.7 4.6 Salvador 424 557 824 1,212 (1,262) 1,888 2.8 4.0 3.9 4.1 Fortaleza 289 393 666 1,022 (1,049) 1,592 3.2 5.4 4.4 4.3 Curitiba 325 394 622 884 ( 930) 1,549 1.9 4.7 3.6 5.2

Total: 6,543 10,072 15,591 23,028 (23,931) 34,395 4.4 4.5 4.0 3.7 Brazil 41,236 51,944 70.992 93,139 -119.061 2.3 3.2 2.8 2.5

Source: Census of Demography, Brazil, 1940-1980. Annual Statistics of Brazil, 1973

1/ The population figures of 1940-70 in this table and other parts of this paper are resident population living in mental private dwelling units. In other words, they exclude population in public institutes such as hospitals, institutes, military units, and etc. The total of this population in the eight metropolitan regions in 1970 was about 3.9 percent of the total resident population in private dwclling units. The population of 1980 and in the parentheses of 1970 are total residentas. The annual population growth rates during 1970-80 are computed using the corresponding figures. -6-

Table 2 shows that the share of population in the cities has been stable in the forties and fifties and has decreased since then.

It also indicates that large regions tend to deconcentrate and small regions tend to concentrate. The two largest regions, Sao Paulo and

Rio de Janeiro have experienced large amounts of deconcentration during the last four decades. The two smallest regions, Fortaleza and Curitiba, went through rapid concentration during 1940-1970 and stabilized since then. While the percent of people living in the city of Sao Paulo decreased from 84.6 in 1940 to 67.5 in 1980, the same figures of Curitiba increased from 43.4 to 66.3. In medium regions like Porto Alegre and

Recife, the share of the city population remained steady. Careful examination of Tables 1 and 2 reveals that population tends to concentrate until the size of the region reaches about one million and remains stable when it ranges from 1 million to 1.5 millions. When the population grows more than 1.5 millions, the region tends to deconcentrate.

Population densities both in the cities and the rings of all metropolitan regions have increased but their magnitudes vary. Although the density in the cities of large regions like Rio de Janeiro and Sao

Paulo has grown at a smaller rate than that in rings, the density in the cities of small regions, Fortaleza and Curitiba for example, has increased faster than that in !the rings. Of the eight regions, Recife experiences the highest densities both iL the city and ring. Curitiba has the lowest densities. In Curitiba, however, the density in the city increased by more than ten times while the density in the ring remained almost at the same level. In Porto Alegre, densities of both city and ring went up by a similar growth rate. (see Table 2 in Annex) Table 2: PERCENT OF POPULATION IN CITIES OF EIGHT METROPOLITAN REGIONS

Metropolitan 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 Regions

67.5 Sao Paulo 84.6 82.0 79.8 72.7 56.0 Rio de Janeiro 74.6 71.5 64.9 59.2 40.4 Porto Alegre 40.4 43.5 44.4 44.3 51.4 Recife 62.9 64.0 64.3 59.4 69.2 'Belo Horizonte 64.0 71.4 76.3 75.8 79.5 Salvador 68.4 74.9 79.6 79.7 82.2 Fortaleza 69.0 68.7 77.3 82.2 66.3 Curitiba 43.4 45.8 58.1 65.5

66.0 62.6 Total 69.4 70.7 69.2

Source: Census of Demography, Brazil, 1940-1970. -8

Table 3 shows the distribution of the general population and migrants living for less than one year in the metropolitan regions.

The share of migrants in cities is higher than that of the general population in the two smallest regions only, Fortaleza and Curitiba.

For the rest of the regions, migrants are more likely to live in rings than the general population and reinforces the overall deconcentration trend. Column 3 of this table shows the share of total migrants out of total population. Slightly less than five percent of the population are migrants and the share of migrants does not seem to have any rela- tionship with the size of cities. -9-

1/ Table 3: DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION AND MIGRANTS, 1970

Percent Residing in City Metropolitan Regions* Total Population Migrants Percent of Migrants 2/

Sao Paulo 72.7 53.2 5.4

Rio de Janeiro 59.2 41.8 4.1

Porto Alegre 44.3 32.0 4.9

Recife 59.4 36.7 4.3

Belo Horizonte 75.8 60.9 5.0

Salvador 79.7 71.1 3.9

Fortaleza 82.2 87.6 4.5

Curitiba 65.5 71.1 5.4

Total 66.0 50.8 4.7

Migrants here are defined as non-native residents living £P less than - one year in the municipios of the metropolitan regions.

21 Percent of non-native residents living for less than one year in the municipios of the metropolitan regions out of total population in that region.

Source: Censu,s of Demography, Brazil, 1970. - 10 -

III. SPATIAL DECONCENTRATION OF EMPLOYMENT AND ESTABLISHMENTS

The previous section discussed the growth and the distribution

of the population in the eight metropolitan regions, with special

emphasis on the concentration - deconcentration of the population over

time. This section is concerned with the redistribution of employment

and establishments of manufacturing and commerce i,i these regions.

The major employment activities are important in analyzing

urban structure. Employment location and population movement affect

each other. While people migrate to cities to respond to the better

job opportunities being offered there and to improve their lives in

changing circumstances, employers follow people to have a better

access to labour market or to serve new population centers. Within

cities, employment is more concentrated toward the center than is housing and most of the land near the city center is used for employ- ment. Given that employment is spatially more concentrated than

population, inward commuting is more common than outward moving. This

travel pattern bears important implication for the planning of public

transport network.

In 1970, more than one third of the total labor force in the

eight metropolitan regions was engaged in manufacturing and about 13 percent was in commerce. The growth of total employment in these indus-

tries, as in the case of population, has been rapid. Growth in commerce, however, has been faster than that in manufacturing. Between 1940 and - 11 -

1970, total employment in commerce almost quadrupled (from 189,00 to

747,000) while the same figure in manufacturing a little more than tripled (from 495,000 to 1,550,000). In addition, the growth in commerce shows small variance among the regions, while the growth in manufacturing has a large variance. As expected, the growth of employment in both industries has a relationship with that of population. Employment in manufacturing and commerce in Sao Paulo and Fortaleza, for example, had grown more than six times during 1940-

1970. Both region§ have experienced higher than average growth rates of population. Rio de Janeiro and Curitiba have experienced a modest growth rate both in employment and population.

Tables 4 and 5 show that, both in manufacturing and commerce, 3/ the aggregate share of employment in the cities of the eight regions has decreased over time. In manufacturing, the employment share of the cities decreased from 81.8 percent in 1940 to 68.0 percent in 1970.

In commerce, it decreased from 89.4 to 82.9 in the forties and stabilized since then. Also, employment in both industries has been spatially more concentrated than population. The speed of deconcentration of employ- ment, however, has been much faster than that of population. In addition, employment in commerce has been spatially more concentrated than that in manufacturing. This observation is consistent with what has been axperienced in the developed and other developing countries (Mills,

1972 and Mills and Song, 1977).

The speed of spatial deconcentration of employment has varied among the metropolitan regions. The large regions have experienced rapid deconcentration while the small regions have remained stable. 1/ Table 4: SPATIAL DECONCENTRATION OF EMPLOYMENT IN MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

.egion Percent Located in Cities

1940 1950 1970

Sao Paulo 97.2 (94.9)2/ 83.8 (84.4) 71.0 (79.6)

Rio de Janeiro 83.2 (68.1) 80.7 (80.8) 75.3 (70.9)

Porto Alegre 55.5 (35.0) 43.6 (21.9) 37.2 (35.6)

Recife 56.3 (67.8) 59.3 (64.1) 62.9 (68.9)

Belo Horizonte 47.8 (68.5) 55.9 (72.9) 52.6 (77.8)

Salvador 77.5 (76.5) 87.9 (70.7) 63.6 (77.3)

Fortaleza 88.9 (67.3) 86.6 (62.9) 86.1 (68.9)

Curitiba 74.9 (60.3) 72.4 (48.0) 73.0 (67.9)

Total 81.8 (73.8) 77.0 (69.5) 68.0 (71.1)

1/ Employment includes all establishments regardless of their size.

The employment data for 1960 were partially published but are not available for this study.

2/ Figures in parentheses are percent of establishments in cities.

Source: Censes of Industry, Brazil, 1940-1970. 1/ Table 5: SPATIAL DECONCENTRATION OF EMPLOYMENT IN COMMERCE

Percent Located in Cities ]Region

1940 1950 1970

Sao Paulo 95.6 (90.7)-2/ 91.1 (85.8) 85.2 (80.2)

Rio de Janeiro 89.0 (79.7) 82.1 (73.1) 76.4 (64.7)

Porto-Alegre 74.1 (54.8) 61.1.(48.8) .67.0 (49.5)

Recife 90.4 (80.1) 78.5 (70.6) 79.5 (64.2)

Belo Horizonte 87.3 (79.6) 86.1 (79.7) 90.8 (84.3)

Salvador 92.6 (82.8) 88.2 (79.0) 90.9 (82.7)

Fortaleza 90.3 (79.6) 87.6 (81.7) 90.9 (83.0)

Curitiba 75.9 (62.0) 70.5 (51.6) 88.3 (73.8)

Total 89.4 (80.5) 82.9 (74.6) 81.4 (71.9)

1/ Employment includes all establishments regardless of their size. The employment data for 1960 were partially published but are not available for this study.

2/ Figures in parentheses are percent of establishments in cities.

Source: Census of Commerce, Brazil, 1940-1970.

...... - -14-

The share of employment in manufacturing in the city of Sao Paulo, the largest region, decreased from 97.2 percent in 1940 to 71.0 pecent in 1970. The same figure of Curitiba, the smallest region, decreased from 74.9 percent to 73.0 percent during the same period.

The tables also show that the share of establishments in manufacturing in the cities of eight regions was stable (73.8 percent in 1940 and 71.1 percent in 1970), while the share in commerce decreased from 80.5 percent in 1940 and 71.9 percent in 1970. The total employment in manufacturing in the eight regions was spatially more concentrated than establishments in 1940 and 1950. In 1970, however, employment was less concentrated than establishments. In commerce, total employment was more concentrated than establishments throughout the period being studied. This observation indicates that larger establishments in manufacturing were located in cities and smaller establishments were in rings during forties and fifties and the trend reversed in the sixties, i.e., larger establishments were located in rings. In commerce, large esta- blishments tended to be located in the cities for all periods. This tendency may be due to externalities. Agglomeration effect in commerce may be more important for larger establishments than for the smaller ones. - 15 -

IV. POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT DENSITY FUNCTIONS

Though the data analyzed in the previous sections can reveal

the broad trend of the growth and redistribution of population and

employment, they are subject to limitations. First of all, the distinc-

tion between the city and the ring does not provide a unique measure of

spatial deconcentration since the percent of the land area included in

the city differs greatly among the metropolitan regions (see Table 1 in

Annex). Second, the boundaries of some cities have changed over time, mainly because the city was subdivided and part of it became municipality

or annexed to another municipality. Though the changes in the boundaries

of these cities have been adjusted, there are still some variations in the

definition over time to the extent that it is not possible to construct

exactly the same boundaries for four decades. Thus, it is desirable to have a measure of deconcentration that does not depend upon the historical or political criteria of the city boundary locations. Third, the city and ring dichotomy yields data aggregated across space. For some purposes, it would be desirable to measure changes in location patterns within the cities and within the rings. Also, the descriptive tables presented in the previous sections do not allow easy and clear cross-regional com- parisons of deconcentration. These limitations can be surmounted by employing the commonly used assumption that population densities decline exponentially with distance from the center. -bx D(x) = Do e where D(x) is density of the population at distance x from the city center, b is the gradient, (i.e., description of how rapidly the density function falls off with distance), and Do is the intercept, (i.e., popu- lation at the city center). - 16 -

The parameters obtained from the function, Do and b, can be used to characterize the distribution of population within the metro- politan regions and provide insights about the urban spatial structure.

The larger b is, the faster density falls with distance, which suggests that b can be used as a measure of deconcentration. In other words, the share of total population within a given distance from the center is uniquely related to b. These density functions are easy to compare both among cities and points in time. It is thus not difficult to study whether there are regularities in the density either by com- paring different cities or different countries at a given time or by observing a city or a country over time.

Two most commonly used methods to estimate the exponential density function are the ordinary least-square and the two-point estimate technique. If data is available on population and distance from the center for a large number of small land areas, census tracts in the U.S. for example, ordinary least-squares regressions can be used. Alterna- tively, since the function is a two-parameter curve, we can estimate the gradient and central density using only information on the popula- tion and the area of the city and the ring. This technique called twp-point estimate was first developed and later modified by Mills (1972), 4/ and evaluated by White (1977). In the absence of the information required for regression estimation, the two-point estimation procedure has an obvious advantage and was adopted for this study.

Table 6 displays how the estimated density gradient and central density vary across the regions and how they change over time. Change

in the density gradient over time shows three different patterns depending - 17 -

Table 6: POPULATION DENSITY GRADIENTS IN EIGHT METROPOLITAN REGIONS 1/

Year 2/egion__2/ Region Parameter- 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980

Sao Paulo Do 5,498 9,792 13,296 16,579 21,641 b 0.1481 0.1386 0.1314 0.1148 0.1022

Rio de Janeiro Do 7,054 8,745 10,289 11,127 12,855 b 0.0963 0.0903 0.0786 0.0695 0.0646

Porto Alegre Do 1,299 1,990 3,291 4,354 5,374 b 0.0981 0.1050 0.1070 0.1067 0.0981

Recife Do 5,910 9,217 14,077 16,503 16,209 b 0.1990 0.2052 0.2061 0.1874 0.1591

Belo Horizonte Do 2,439 4,628 10,356 17,643 22,048 b 0.2102 0.2426 0.2675 0.2650 0.2323

Salvador Do 1,214 2,133 3,950 18,181 28,140 b 0.0810 0.0957 0.1082 0.1941 0.1935

Fortaleza Do 1,896 3,289 7,887 15,058 23,486 b 0.1566 0.1772 0.2112 0.2357 0.2358

Curitiba Do 318 1,094 2,752 5,145 9,244 b 0.0774 0.1320 0.1668 0.1912 0.1935

Average Do 3,204 5,111 8,237 13,074 17,375 b 0.1333 0.1483 0.1596 0.1706 0.1599

1/ Density gradients in this Table and the following tables were calculated using technique described in L. J. White, "How Good Are Two Point Estimates of Urban Density Gradients and Central Densities?," Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 4, No. 3 (July, 1977). -bx in 2/ Parameters from Density = Doe where x is dis ance from center kilometers; Do is central density in persons/km

Source: Census of Demography, Brazil, 1940-1970. - 18 -

on the size of the regions. In large metropolitan regions like Sao

Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, the gradient flattens slowly and in small regions like Fortaleza and Ciritiba, it becomes steeper rapidly. In regions of medium size (Porto Alegre and Belo Horizonte), the value of the gradient remains almost constant. Also the absolute value of the gradient shows a wide variance among the regions: from 0.0646 in Rio de Janeiro in 1980 to 0.2675 in Belo Horizonte in 1960. The central density or the intercept (Do) increases in all metropolitan regions over time and the rate of growth is higher in small regions.

Central density in Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro is high but the gradient is low. In Recife and Belo Horizonte, both the density and gradient are high. It is interesting to note that while the gradient in Sao

Paulo and Rio de Janeiro decreases over time, the central density increases. This observation suggests that the effects of the rapid growth of population have more than offset the effects of the decon- centration. In addition, while the value of gradient shows a pattern of relationship with the size of the regions, central density does not seem to have any association with it. Large regions tend to be associated with low gradient and smaller regions tend to have high gradient.

Comparison of the gradients and densities among the countries 5/ reveals interesting information. The average density gradient of the eight metropolitan regions in Brazil computed for three decades (1950-

1970) is 0.151, which is higher than the average gradient of 0.132 computed for the twelve cities of the United States by Ingram and

Carroll (1981). While the average gradient in Brazil increases from - 19 -

0.148 in 1950 to 0.171 in 1970, the same figure in the U.S. decreases, from

0.153 to 0.113. During the same period, the average central density in the

U.S. also decreases, from -13,504 to 9,670. In Brazil, it increases from

5,111 to 13,074. As observed, the values of the average gradient and the

average density of Brazil in 1970 are much higher than those of the U.S.

However, the density of the eight metropolitan regions of Brazil is much

lower than that of the twelve Korean metropolitan areas estimated by Mills

and Song (1977) or the twelve Indian metropolitan areas computed by Mills

and Tan (1980). 6/

Estimation of the population density gradients has been one of

the popular procedures to describe the shifts in the structures of

cities. The number of previous studies on the population density function

in developed countries are countless and a few studies have been made in

developing countries in recent years. Estimation of density function

for employment, however, is scarce in developed countries and virtually non-existant in developing countries.- One reason for this scarcity is

that employment data are not easily available, especially in developing

countries. This study calculates the employment density function using

the same technique as the one used to estimate population density gradient.

It will provide a useful descriptive summary and an interesting comparison

between the deconcentration of population and that of employment. - 20

Table 7 shows the employment density gradient and the central

density in manufacturing. As in the case of the population density function, the slope of the gradient varies among the zegions depending on the size of the regions. Large regions are associated with flatter gradient than small tegions. The gradient also declines over time in large regions like Sao Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, and Porto Alegre and increases in small regions such as Salvador and Ciritiba. With this opposite movement of the slope, the average density gradient of the

eight regions has remained constant over time, 0.169 in 1940 and 0.161

in 1970. Central density, however, increases in almost all regions.

The density gradient of commerce in Table 8 shows a similar pattern of change over time to manufacturing. While in large regions like Sao

Paulo and Rio de Janeiro the gradient becomes flatter, it becomes

steeper in small regions. Central density in commerce also increases

in most of the cases displayed in the table. The gradient in commerce

has higher value than that in manufacturing for most of the metropolitan

regions. The average gradient of 0.229 in commerce is compared to 0.166

in manufacturing. This observation provides evidence that employment

in commerce in general is more concentrated in the center of the city

than that in manufacturing. The employment density gradient in manu-

facturing is slightly higher than the population density gradient. The

average density gradient in manufacturing is 0.166 and the same figure for population is 0.151. This observation supports the statement made

at the beginning of this section that employment is located closer to

the city center than is population. Also commerce is more concentrated to the center than manufacturing. - 21

Table 7: EMPLOYMENT DENSITY GRADIENTS IN MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

Year Region Parameter 1940 1950 1970

Sao Paulo Do 1,692 1,203 1,801 b 0.2435 0.1452 0.1104

Rio de Janeiro Do 804 986 918 b 0.1176 0.1107 0.0980

Porto Alegre Do 129 131 230 b 0.1323 0.1053 0.0921

Recife Do 325 501 570 b 0.1763 0.1872 0.1990

Belo Horizonte Do 102 141 280 ! b 0.1533 0.1800 0.1683

Salvador Do 60 116 228 b 0.1025 0.1366 0.1404

Fortaleza Do 86 171 445 b 0.2813 0.2633 0.2592

Curitiba Do 41 132 306 b 0.1445 0.2181 0.2206

Average Do 405 423 597 b 0.1689 0.1683 0.1610

1/ The density gradients for 1960 are missing because the employment data for this year are not available.

2/ The figures in 1970 exclude both the employment and the land area of the two municipalities: Jose de Melo, Lagoa Santa.

Souroe: Census of Industry, Brazil, 1940-1970. - 22 -

1/ Table 8: EMPLOYMENT DENSITY GRADIENTS IN COMMERCE

Year Region Parameter 1940 1950 1970

Sao Paulo Do 386 250 1,023 b 0.2191 0.1801 0.1543

Rio de Janeiro Do 490 300 719 b 0.1377 0.1144 0.1000

Porto Alegre Do 118 64 384 b 0.1845 0.1467 01639

Recife Do 432 249 976 b 0.3745 0.2745 0.2811

Belo Horizonte Do 146 171 1,106 b 0.3470 0.3360 0.3861

Salvador Do 110 79 922 b 0.1615 0.1382 0.2613

Fortaleza Do 114 130 590 b 0.2934 0.2712 0.2980

Curitiba Do 17 43 472 b 0.1476 0.2103 0.3148

Average Do 227 161 774 b 0.2332 0.2089 0.2449

1/ The density gradients for 1960 are missing because the employment data for this year are not available.

Source: Census of Commerce, Brazil, 1940-1970. - 23 -

As a comparison, Table 9 displays employment density function paramet2rs for the twelve U.S. cities, estimated using aggregate employ- ment data of all industries.- The absolute magnitudes of the density gradients in the U.S. cities are significantly less than those observed in the eight metropolitan regions of Brazil. Out of the twelve U.S. cities, in only two cities the density gradients are larger than 0.2 (Washington,

D.C. and Denver) and in four of the cities, the parameters are less than

0.1. Compared to this observation, in four of the eight regions of Brazil, the density gradients of commerce in 1970 are higher than 0.2 and no gradient is lower than 0.1. In manufacturing industry, three gradients in 1970 are higher than 0.2 and only two gradients are lower than 0.1. The average gradient of the twelve U.S. cities is 0.1381. The average gradients of manufacturing and commerce in the eight regions are 0.152 and 0.231, respectively. Table 9: EMPLOYMENT DENSITY GRADIENTS OF ALL INDUSTRIES IN TWELVE U. S. CITIES (1970)

City Parameter 1970

New York Do 14,485 b 0.0918

Boston Do 8,250 b 0.1723

Washington, D.C. Do 9,398 b 0.2169

Philadelphia Do 7,246 b 0.1583

Chicago Do 6,524 b 0.0818

Los Angeles Do 2,680 b 0.0534

Houston Do 2,762 b 0.1482

San Diego Do 2,025 b 0.1088

Denver Do 4,072 b 0.2285

Phoenix D8 1,422 b 0.1575

Niami Do 5,838 b 0.1881

San Jose Do 709 b 0.0510

Average Do 5,879 b 0.1400

Note: The high values of the central densities in this table are due to the fact that the density function was estimated using the figures of total employment of all industries. SourceiBronitsky, L., Costello, M., Haaland, C., and Schiff, S., "Urban Data Book", Volume II, U.S. Department of Transportation, Transportation Systems Center, Report No. DOT-TSC-OST-75-45. II, November, 1975. Ingram, Gregory K., and Carroll, Alan, "Spatial Structure of Latin American Cities", Journal of Urban Economics, Vol.9, pp.257-273, 1981. -25 -

V. CONCLUSION

This paper has been concerned with the changing spatial structure of the eight metropolitan regions of Brazil from 1940 to

1980. The rapid growth of population in these regions during the past decades may slow down a little in the next decades. Analysis of the previous experiences shows that the growth rate of population is high when the size of a region ranges from 0.4 to 1.5 million people. In 1980, all the regions have a population of more than 1.5 million.

Cross regional comparison shows that at given times, large metropolitan regions tend to have flatter density functions than small regions . While the large regions experience deconcentration over time, the small ones go through concentration. The trend of deconcentration of population and employment in large regions may continue in the future but the concentration in small regions may decline. The patterns of shift in employment density function and population density function are found to be similar. Regions with steep population density gradient tend to be associated with high employment density gradient. Regions experiencing deconcentration in population also go through spatial deconcentration in employment.

In addition, close examination of the pace of deconcentration and concentration of population and employment suggests that redistribution of population is more rapid than that of employment. . 26 -

A few studies made recently on the developed and the developing countries (Ingram and Carrol, 1981, Mills and Tang, 1978, and Mills and is Song, 1977) show that the distribution of population within cities fairly regular and that deconcentration is observed not only in the developed countries but also in the developing countries. They also show that land use in the cities of Asia and Latin America is more compact of the than that of the cities of North America. In general, the results present study are similar to what have been found in other studies.

However, this does not mean that this general conclusion can be applied

to all of the individual regions. As shown in the tables of the previous sections, there are many exceptions. Various factors affect density patterns in an, urban area: the local characteristics of housing construc-

tion, the mix of various industries, scarcity of land, structure of

transportation system, the rate of growth in real income and population,

and car ownership. Since these factors are different among the cities

and among countries, the pattern of density may also be different. The

shifting of the density gradient discussed in this paper bears signifi-

cant implication to the government planners who need to have a better

perspective on the spatial structure of the metropolitan regions. - 27 -

FOOTNOTES

1. The municipio in Brazil is the smallest government unit comparable

to the county in the U.S. The number of municipios in the nation

totalled 4,362 in 1972, and they showed a great variation in area

and population. The municipio has both executive branch headed by

a mayor (prefeito) and legislative branch called camara de vereadores.

The municipio council legislates on matters of local interest such

as budgeting, local taxes, city plan and it controls the mayor.

For more details, see Area Handbook for Brazil, Thomas E. Weil, et al,

third edition, 1975, p. 229.

2. The boundaries of the metropolitan regions defined in this paper are

slightly larger than the official definitions used for census data.

Since the boundaries of the metropolitan regions are .defined by

the collection of municipalities and the boundaries of some munici-

palities have been changed over time, it is not possible to construct

a consistent and exactly the same boundary for four decades as the

official definition.

3. The employment figures being discussed in this paper includes all

establishments regardless of their size. The Census of Industries for

1960 was published partially and the quality of the published data is

poor. Anyway, the data is not available for this study.

4. The result of the White study is that the properties of the two-

point estimates do depend somewhat on the fraction of the city that

is included in the inter and outer divisions. However, the extent - 28 -

of the bias is not great for the density gradient. He concludes

that, overall, two-point estimates perform about as well as ordinary

least squares.

5. Comparison of the density function among the countries should be

made very carefully, especially when the function was computed using

different estimation technique. In computing the density gradient

for the twelve cities of the U.S., Ingram and Carroll (1981) used

two-point estimate technique, the same method used in this study.

Mills and Tan (1980) estimated the function for Korea and India by

ordinary least square regressions. They also estimated the gradient

for the four regions of Brazil, which are the same regions being studied

in this paper: Sao Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Recife and Belo Horizonte.

The author compared the results of their study of these regions with

those of this study. The variance in the results of the two stiudies

is very low. The author therefore feels that it is reasonably safe

to make comparison among the results obtained by different studies.

6. The twelve Korean metropolitan areas included in the study by Mills and

Song (1977) are Seoul, Busan, Daegu, Gwangju, Incheon, Daejeon, Cheongju,

Andong, Suwon, Cheonan, Gangreung and Samcheonpo. The average density

gradients for these areas for 1966, 1970 and 1973 are 0.701, 0.670

and 0.639, respectively. The twelve Indian metropolitan areas included

in the study by Mills and Tan (1980) are Poona City, Howrah, Hubli,

Gaya, Dhawar, Madras, Bombay, Jamshedpur, Hyderabad (Old City), Secun-

derabad, Bangalore and Bangalore (Civil and Military Section). The

average density.gradients for these areas for 1951 and 1961 are 0.672

and 0.652, respectively. - 29 -

7. Mills (1972) estimated the density function for manufacturing, retailing,

services, and wholesaling employment in 18 metropolitan areas of the U.S.

during 1948-1963. Recently, Kemper and Schmenner (1974) estimated the

density gradients of employment and establishments for manufacturing

industry and ten two-digit manufacturing industries in five U.S. cities

for 1967 and 1971. Pachon (1979) estimated the employment density

function for Bogota, Colombia using the data of Phase Two Household

Survey carried out during 1971-1972.

8. The disaggregated employment data of manufacturing and commerce of

these cities are not readily available. - 30 -

ANNEX

Table 1: LAND AREA OF THE EIGHT METROPOLITAN REGIONS

2 (in km)

Centrj3 City Regions 1940 1950 1960 1970/ Share- 1980

Sao Paulo 8,238 8,241 8,295 8,240 18.1 Center 1,565 1,565 1,565 1,493 Periphery 6,673 6,676 6,730 6,747

Rio de Janeiro 7,856 7,856 7,708 7,708 15.2 Center 1,171 1,171 1,171 1,171 Periphery 6,685 6,685 6,537 6,537

Porto Alegre 20,064 20,075 20,525 18,597 2.7 Center 497 497 497 497 Periphery 19,567 19,578 20,028 18,100

Recife- 2,201 2,201 2,201 2,201 9.5 Center 209 209 209 209 Periphery 1,992 1,992 1,992 1,992

Belo Horizonte 4,732 4,656 4,656 4,561 7.3 Center 335 335 335 335 Periphery 4,397 4,321 4,321 4,226

Salvador 3,147 3,147 3,147 3,403 8.6 Center 857 857 857 294 Periphery 2,290 2,290 2,290 3,109

Fortaleza 3,590 3,590 3,590 3,590 9.4 Center 336 336 336 336 Periphery 3,254 3,254 3,254 3,254

Curitiba 16,409 16,409 16,391 16,710 2.6 Center 1,084 431 431 431 Periphery 15,325 15,978 15,960 16,279

1/ Percent of the land area of the central city in 1970 out of the total metropolitan region. - 31 -

ANNEX

Table 2: POPULATION DENSITY OF EIGHT METROPOLITAN REGIONS

(By Region by Year: Per Square Kilometers)

Region 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980

Sao Paulo 190 317 577 940 1,527 C.C. 847 1,404 2,444 3,776 5,687 Periphery 36 62 143 313 606

Rio de Janeiro 300 423 660 896 1,179 C.C. 1,506 2,030 2,824 3,495 4,350 Periphery 89 141 273 430 612

Porto Alegre 33 45 71 103 150 C.C. 547 793 1,290 1,721 2,265 Periphery 20 26 40 59 92

Recife 251 372 563 794 1,066 C.C. 1,667 2,510 3,814 4,973 5,765 Periphery 103 147 222 356 573

Belo Horizonte 73 106 195 345 562 C.C. 660 1,052 2,069 3,571 5,298 Periphery 28 32 49 90 187

Salvador 134 177 261 356 555 C.C. 338 486 765 3,284 5,106 Periphery 58 61 73 79 124

Fortaleza 80 109 185 284 443 C.C. 536 804 1,532 2,499 3,895 Periphery 33 37 46 55 87

Curitiba 19 24 37 52 93 C.C. 129 418 838 1,343 2,380 Periphery 12 13 16 18 32

Source: Census of Demography, Brazil, 1940-1970. -32-

REFERENCES

Beier, G., Cohen, M., Churchill, A., Renaud, B., "The Task Ahead for the Cities of Developing Countries", World Development 4, pp. 363-409.

Brazil Human Resources Special Report, Document of the World Bank, Report No. 2604-BR, July 13, 1979.

Follain, Jim, Renaud, Bertrand & Lim, Gill, C., Economic Forces Underlying Urban Decentralization Trends: A Structural Model for Density Gradients Applied to Korea. The World Bank, Washington, D.C., August, 1978.

Follain, J.R., Renaud, B., and Lim, G-C, "Economic Forces Underlying Urban Decentralization Trends: A Structural Model for Density Gradients Applied to Korea." World Bank Repring Series: Number 107 (Reprinted from Environment and Planning A, Vol. 11 (1979) pp. 541-51).

Hoover, Edgar M. and Vernon, Raymond, Anatomy of a Metropolis, Anchor Books, 1962.

Ingram, Gregory K. and Carroll, Alan, "Spatial Structure of Latin American Cities", Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 9, pp. 257-273, 1981.

Kain, John F., "The Distribution and Movement of Jobs and Industry," pp. 1-27, in Wilson Ed., Metropolitan Enigma.

Kemper, Peter and Schemenner, Roger, "The Density Gradient for Manufacturing Industry," Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 1, pp. 410-427, 1974.

Mills, Edwin S., Studies in the Structure of the Urban Economy, The Johns Hopkins Press, 1972.

Mills, E.S., Ohta, K., "Urbanization and Urban Problems" in Asia's New Giant - How the Japanese Economy Works. Edited by H. Patrick and H. Rosovsky, 1976 (The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.)

Mills, E.S., Song, B-N., Korea's Urbanization & Urban Problems 1945-1975, Working Paper 7701, Korea Development Institute, September, 1977. Mills, E.S., Tan, J-P., "A Comparison of Urban Population Density Functions in Developed and Developing Countries." Urban Studies, Vol. 17, No.4, pp. 313-321, December, 1980. Pachon, Alvaro, "Urban Structure, Modal Choice, and Auto Ownership in Bogota, 1972," Urban and Regional Economics Department, The World Bank, June 1, 1979.

Renaud, Bertrand, Economic Fluctuations and Speed of Urbanization: The Case of Korea, 1955-1975, The World Bank Staff Working Paper No. 270, November, 1977. - 33 -

White, Lawrence J., "How Good Are Two-Point Estimates of Urban Density 4, Gradients and Central Densities?," Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. No. 3, pp. 292-309, July, 1977.

Weil, Thomas E., et al, Area Handbook for Brazil, Third edition, 1975.

11