McKinsey recently published a report called Digital globalization: The new era of global flows.
The overarching thesis is that we are transitioning to a data-driven global economy:
“Flows of physical goods and finance were the hallmarks of the 20th-century global economy, but today those flows have flattened or declined. Twenty-first-century globalization is increasingly defined by flows of data and information. This phenomenon now underpins virtually all cross-border transactions within traditional flows while simultaneously transmitting a valuable stream of ideas and innovation around the world.”
One of the benefits of this shift is that it has become easier for emerging economies and individuals from all around the world to participate.
Of course, not all countries and cities are participating equally. In their report, McKinsey ranks the top cities according to five global flows. In each case a proxy was used:
“Unfortunately, data on global flows are not available at the city level. However, we have obtained data that serve as proxies for each of our five global flows. Container port volumes approximate goods flows; airport passenger volumes serve as a proxy for goods, service, and people flows; the ranking of cities in the Global Financial Centers Index by the Z/Yen Group provides an indication of financial flows; the number of foreign-born residents in a city measures people flows; and Internet bandwidth approximates data flows.”
Using this methodology, they believe that the world only has 8 truly global cities right now: New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, London, Singapore, Shanghai, Hong Kong, and Dubai. They are the colored cities listed below:

I always take these city rankings with a grain of salt. This stuff is not easy to quantify and a lot depends on the methodology that you use.
For instance, Atlanta sits on the top of “goods, services, and people” because it has the busiest airport in the world according to passenger volume. (It’s the primary hub of Delta Air Lines.) But is that enough to assert that Atlanta is #1? Maybe. Maybe not.
In any case, the report is packed full of information. If you’d like to take a look, click here.
Keeping with yesterday’s theme of urban density, here is a photo by Andy Yeung that I am embedding via his 500px page:
The photo is of Hong Kong and it was taken using a drone. Click here for other photos from his “Urban Jungle” drone series.
If you remember the maps from yesterday, you might remember that Hong Kong had a peak residential density of around 111,100 people per square kilometre (2013).
Above is what that generally looks like.

The following diagrams were taken from LSE’s Urban Age website. I’ve sorted them from lowest to highest peak residential population density. In each case I’ve also included the year of the dataset.
It’s amazing how much these simple extrusion diagrams can tell you about the city. It also shows you that high population densities don’t necessarily need to equate to tall buildings. Barcelona, in particular, stands out for me.
Berlin (Peak residential density: 21,700 people/km2, 2009)

Stockholm (Peak residential density: 24,900 people/km2, 2012)

London (Peak residential density: 27,100 people/km2, 2013)

São Paulo (Peak residential density: 29,380 people/km2, 2009)

Mexico City (Peak residential density: 48,300 people/km2, 2009)

Barcelona (Peak residential density: 56,800 people/km2, 2013)

New York (Peak residential density: 59,150 people/km2, 2012)

Shanghai (Peak residential density: 74,370 people/km2, 2011)

Istanbul (Peak residential density: 77,300 people/km2, 2013)

Hong Kong (Peak residential density: 111,100 people/km2, 2013)

Mumbai (Peak residential density: 121,300 people/km2, 2013)

McKinsey recently published a report called Digital globalization: The new era of global flows.
The overarching thesis is that we are transitioning to a data-driven global economy:
“Flows of physical goods and finance were the hallmarks of the 20th-century global economy, but today those flows have flattened or declined. Twenty-first-century globalization is increasingly defined by flows of data and information. This phenomenon now underpins virtually all cross-border transactions within traditional flows while simultaneously transmitting a valuable stream of ideas and innovation around the world.”
One of the benefits of this shift is that it has become easier for emerging economies and individuals from all around the world to participate.
Of course, not all countries and cities are participating equally. In their report, McKinsey ranks the top cities according to five global flows. In each case a proxy was used:
“Unfortunately, data on global flows are not available at the city level. However, we have obtained data that serve as proxies for each of our five global flows. Container port volumes approximate goods flows; airport passenger volumes serve as a proxy for goods, service, and people flows; the ranking of cities in the Global Financial Centers Index by the Z/Yen Group provides an indication of financial flows; the number of foreign-born residents in a city measures people flows; and Internet bandwidth approximates data flows.”
Using this methodology, they believe that the world only has 8 truly global cities right now: New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, London, Singapore, Shanghai, Hong Kong, and Dubai. They are the colored cities listed below:

I always take these city rankings with a grain of salt. This stuff is not easy to quantify and a lot depends on the methodology that you use.
For instance, Atlanta sits on the top of “goods, services, and people” because it has the busiest airport in the world according to passenger volume. (It’s the primary hub of Delta Air Lines.) But is that enough to assert that Atlanta is #1? Maybe. Maybe not.
In any case, the report is packed full of information. If you’d like to take a look, click here.
Keeping with yesterday’s theme of urban density, here is a photo by Andy Yeung that I am embedding via his 500px page:
The photo is of Hong Kong and it was taken using a drone. Click here for other photos from his “Urban Jungle” drone series.
If you remember the maps from yesterday, you might remember that Hong Kong had a peak residential density of around 111,100 people per square kilometre (2013).
Above is what that generally looks like.

The following diagrams were taken from LSE’s Urban Age website. I’ve sorted them from lowest to highest peak residential population density. In each case I’ve also included the year of the dataset.
It’s amazing how much these simple extrusion diagrams can tell you about the city. It also shows you that high population densities don’t necessarily need to equate to tall buildings. Barcelona, in particular, stands out for me.
Berlin (Peak residential density: 21,700 people/km2, 2009)

Stockholm (Peak residential density: 24,900 people/km2, 2012)

London (Peak residential density: 27,100 people/km2, 2013)

São Paulo (Peak residential density: 29,380 people/km2, 2009)

Mexico City (Peak residential density: 48,300 people/km2, 2009)

Barcelona (Peak residential density: 56,800 people/km2, 2013)

New York (Peak residential density: 59,150 people/km2, 2012)

Shanghai (Peak residential density: 74,370 people/km2, 2011)

Istanbul (Peak residential density: 77,300 people/km2, 2013)

Hong Kong (Peak residential density: 111,100 people/km2, 2013)

Mumbai (Peak residential density: 121,300 people/km2, 2013)

Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog