Tokyo is a city of contrasts. It is both hyper-modern and steeped in tradition. It is known for art, architecture, design, and fashion, yet it's also a city that — through its built form — makes the argument that architecture is irrelevant.

While the city certainly has countless examples of remarkable architecture, the vast majority of its buildings are arguably just that — buildings. They are a nondescript part of the urban fabric that give back through their siting, scale, rhythm, and mix of uses rather than their raw architectural qualities. Sometimes you may not even be able to see the building past all the signage.

If you were looking for a city to support the argument that urbanism matters more than architecture, I think Tokyo would be a good place to start.

What Tokyo does so successfully is ground-up urbanism (as opposed to top-down master planning). Flexible permissions, mixed-use zones by default, and an orientation around rail have allowed Tokyo to organically evolve into one of the most livable global cities on the planet.

In fact, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any city of this magnitude that is simultaneously this livable. Which makes me wonder: Are we spending too much time worrying about architecture?

It is common for big cities to have design review processes. These typically consist of a panel of experts who evaluate new development proposals based on their architectural and urban design qualities. The comments that come back might suggest that a long facade be visually "broken up," or that additional stepbacks be introduced in order to mitigate the impact on the street and improve sky views. It's a process that can be lengthy.

But what Tokyo tells us is that, while architecture matters a great deal, it may not be the most important thing to focus on from a city-building standpoint. What matters more is the space and relationship between these buildings, the uses and permissions granted to their occupants, and the overall relationship to transit infrastructure. Here, urbanism is more critical than architecture.

If you buy this argument, then design review panels aren't actually our most pressing priority. Instead, what we should have is a kind of urbanism review panel. But rather than react to new developments, its job would be to go out and proactively identify and fix bad urbanism: this street is too narrow, this street is too wide, OMG what were we thinking here, and so on.

Then, when a new development proposal comes along, this panel would get out of the way and let the market decide what it wants to be. It would trust that it had done its job and laid the right preconditions for good urbanism to emerge.

Sounds weird and unsettling, doesn't it? Except, we might be pleasantly surprised by what it would lead to.

Cover photo by Fred Nassar on Unsplash

It's not always as straightforward as it may seem to measure the size of a city or urban region.

There's the problem of which urban boundary to use. And then once you've landed on that, there's the additional problem of estimating how many people live within it. This can be particularly challenging when it comes to informal settlements, where there isn't reliable population data.

The most common approach is to use the continuous built-up area as the urban agglomeration, as opposed to any sort of "city proper" boundaries. And this is exactly what the United Nations has done in its latest World Urbanization Prospects report.

Here, they have fundamentally revised their measurement methodology by using a new, so-called harmonized geospatial approach. If you'd like to nerd out on the specifics, you can do that here.

But one of the key takeaways is that this new methodology has resulted in a reordering of the world's largest urban agglomerations. At the top is now Jakarta, followed by Dhaka:

Previously, Tokyo was thought to be the world's most populous megacity, but it has dropped down to 3rd in this new report. And by 2050, it is forecasted to drop even further to 7th place:

As we spoke about yesterday, the world's economic center of gravity is rapidly shifting toward Asia. And that shows up in these charts.

I have a strong desire to visit the largest cities in the world. It's fascinating to see how such large urban clusters manage to organize themselves. There are always systems that naturally emerge to make things work, even if it feels chaotic on the surface.

I've only been to 3 cities from the 2025 chart, so I have my work cut out for me.

Cover photo by Rifki Kurniawan on Unsplash

Canadian geographer Mario Polèse's book, The Wealth and Poverty of Regions: Why Cities Matter, is not new. It was originally published in 2010. But it's perhaps a good follow-up to yesterday's post about the untethering of wealth. Here's an excerpt from a review of the book by Jeb Brugmann:

All cities, Polèse explains, share the same basic economic causes and effects. These are economies of localization (i.e., locating activities close together) and of urbanization (i.e., clustering lots of diverse activities together at scale). Polèse shows how these urban economies—usefully distinguished and defined in detail as economies of scale, proximity, diversity and concentration—combine with unique natural features and resource endowments, technology and infrastructure investments, national boundaries and market controls, and historical events to create quintessentially local and unique places. Every time he explains the status of another place—New York, London, Chicago, Paris, Montreal, the northern Mexico border, the North American west coast—he demonstrates again how the source code of geography combines with specific local and historical conditions to create a momentum of wealth or poverty.

The rich may have the means to tax-optimize through physical mobility, but the draw to established urban clusters remains strong, which is why it can be a challenge to stay away from them for more than 183 days. There is a "stickiness" to established cities that is the result of momentum and compounding over centuries.

Still, nothing is guaranteed, and there's only so much that can be done if you're swimming against a global landscape that is shifting away from you. Geography does matter. And today, the world's economic center of gravity is rapidly shifting toward Asia. This is good for some cities and bad for others.

Cover photo by Zhu Hongzhi on Unsplash